USNA "Spirit Spot" video

The Army-Navy football game is one of the biggest events of the year at those two service academies. During the game, several short videos (made by cadets or midshipmen) are played on the jumbotron. At Annapolis, if you are involved in making a video played during the game, you get a weekend free or someother privilege.

DRH and KLR have met my cousin, CRB, who is a sophomore at Annapolis. This is his second year having his "spirit spot" video played. Here it is-- he's the fella dressed up in the Army uniform (the main character).

Why the internet was created

Ever wonder what name they would give you if you played soccer for Brazil? Now you can know

Yours truly,

Doao

Breaking News from the Shaking Isles

Just in case you missed it, New Zealand made the NY Times today.

Sound Off Like You Got a Pair

If you haven’t seen this movie, then this will only be moderately funny. If you have seen FMJ, then expect stomach wrenching laughter. PARENTAL ADVISORY: explicit language! Really, this is not appropriate for work viewing, sensitive ears or expecting mothers (or any mothers for that matter).



If you haven’t seen FMJ and you want in on the joke, go here.

Christmas is Coming

Because Christmas is just around the corner, I thought I’d add my contribution to the Christmas cheer by listing my favorite and least favorite Christmas gifts received prior to age 12. It should be noted that this list is written in hindsight. This means that some of the gifts that may have elicited the strongest reactions at the time, but that then failed to live up to expectations (I’m looking at you Masters of the Universe Mutant Slime Pit), will not be included.

Let’s start with the worst of the bunch:

• Sweaters (various years) – Always (ALWAYS) my least favorite gift. Now, clothes in general were rarely a DRH-favorite come the holidays, but it always seemed that sweaters represented the greatest disconnect between what I thought was cool and what my parents thought I needed.
• Gifts From Certain Branch of the DRH Family That Will Go Unnamed (Annual) – every year I was presented with a gift from a certain distant branch of the family that was sure to cause me confusion followed by anger. The confusion began because it always took a really long time to figure out just what, in fact, they had given me. It was always clear that in a futile effort to interest me in science (or crap, not sure which) they limited their Christmas shopping for me to the remainder bin at the local science museum gift shop. Rightly or wrongly, once I discovered that the contraption they gave me was designed to illustrate the conversion of heat or light into energy (which is what they always did), I did not even attempt to hide my scorn. Even at that young age I knew deep down that these gifts were an affront to everything Christmas was about.
• Electric Slide album (1989) – this tape makes the list not because I didn’t want to own the song by Marcia Griffiths that spawned a dance craze; I did. Unfortunately, my parents bought me the wrong tape. I remember clearly the slow, but horrifying realization, as I made it through side 1 that this was not the Electric Slide (boogy, woogy, oogy) song I knew, but some inferior rip off. I was not pleased.
• Leather Jacket (1992) – This is an interesting one because it was actually a gift for my sister (KSHM), not me. Nonetheless, the fallout from this gift was so traumatic that it qualifies for this list. I have no desire to go into all the sordid details of this sad affair, but briefly:

1. October 1, 1992: Beloved sister sets heart on a her jacket for Christmas
2. November 5, 1992: Doting parents buy sister leather jacket for Christmas
3. November 12, 1992: Sister comes to conclusion that leather jackets are lame
4. November 12 – December 25, 1992: Sister fails to tell anyone of this change of heart
5. December 25, 1992: Sister is presented with leather jacket for Christmas
6. December 25, 1992 – March 1994: Crying, anger, and recriminations. Oh, the anger.

• Woman’s basketball (1993) – This one’s pretty straightforward. I wanted a new basketball for Christmas. Whilst shopping for this gift, it struck my father that regulation basketballs seemed a trifle large for a small boy of 12, while a women’s basketball seemed a little more manageable for my elf-like hands. Clearly, my father forgot one of the golden rules of Christmas gifts: no matter how well intentioned boys of 12 never (NEVER) want toys or other products specifically designed for girls.

Ok, that was a little longer than anticipated, so I’ll save the triumphant sequel (Favorite Christmas Gifts up to Age 12) for my next post.

It's been awhile

So I’m back. I know, it’s been a while, but let me tell you: studying 512 hours for a statistics exam that will be scaled so that no one gets lower than a B takes a lot of time out of your day.

First aside: I think a strong case should be made that my case shows Quant and Econ exams to be something of a false victory for testing understanding of topics at GPPI. My approach to studying allows me (usually) to do ok on exams, but that same approach indicates a remarkable lack of understanding of such concepts as opportunity costs, diminishing returns, increasing marginal costs, statistical outliers, the central limit theorem, and many more. So yes, I may get questions right on the exam, but the fact that I am totally incapable of applying any of those concepts to the real world makes you wonder…(about things other than my own mental health that is)

Anyways, there are many things I’d like to discuss, but the first thing I thought worthy of discussion is this post by the ridiculously prolific Joe Posnanski. Joe asks the question on many minds since the recent release of the Mitchell Report: What if Roger Clemens, and not Barry Bonds, had been the first big star strongly linked with steroids? Joe notes common arguments related to race and each player’s personality (rightly questioning the second argument), but chooses to highlight the relative statistical dominance of each player to explain public reaction. I thought this was a very interesting argument, and one that resonated with me.

Certainly I would argue that the backlash against Barry Bonds is motivated by race and media vendettas, but maybe more than anything else it was a backlash against numbers were simply impossible. People hated the fact that Bonds hit 76 home runs. They hated the fact that he walked more than 200 times in a season. Sure, Clemens had ridiculously good years in a great offensive error, but it’s not like no one’s ever had a sub 2.00 ERA before. It’s not like he won 35 games. I honestly believe that if anyone other than Barry Bonds had been heavily linked with steroids, this would be 1/20 the issue it currently is. Because he is so hated and the records he obliterated so hallowed, people reacted with an anger and sense of self-righteous indignation that has taken on a life of its own.

For Taste AND Effect

Or is it affect? Oh, hell, who knows?

Newsweek has an interesting article on drinking and hangovers. The bottomline is science can't fully explain the hangover. Is that true? Man can go to the moon and harness nuclear energy, but we can't quite figure why we aren't in tip-top shape the morning after poisoning our bodies?!? I've cut out the most interesting bits from the article.

While hangovers have plagued revelers since early hominids kicked back with some date-palm wine, science still doesn't have a good understanding of how your I-love-everybody yuletide cheer turns into such a biological bah-humbug.

The misery begins when blood alcohol levels start to fall. Some experts to believe the hangover is a "kind of mini withdrawal," says Robert Swift, professor of psychiatry and human behavior at Brown University. Because alcohol is a sedative, your body reacts by releasing various neurochemicals to stimulate the brain. These chemicals cause a rapid pulse, nausea, tremors and light and sound sensitivity.

...Which leads to another theory that puts the blame for the hangover on pure physiology. Alcohol is first broken down in the liver into a toxic substance called acetaldehyde. Acetaldehyde is then further broken down into a harmless substance called acetate. At high doses, acetaldehyde causes nausea, vomiting, sweating and other symptoms akin to the hangover.

Congeners, by-products of the distillation and fermentation process, may also play a role in making holiday partiers miserable. Darker-colored liquors such as brandies, bourbon and red wine contain more congeners than lighter colored alcoholic beverages like gin or vodka.

Since alcohol is a diuretic, you'll wake up dehydrated. That dehydration explains some of the symptoms such as headaches and a dry mouth. Alcohol also plays havoc with the body's biorhythms, disturbing sleep patterns, despite it being a sedative.

Oddly, "some people can get a hangover from one or two drinks," Swift says. "And it's usually the moderate or light social drinker who suffers the most." At particular risk, though, are women. Researchers at the University of Missouri, Columbia, found that women experience worse hangovers than men, despite the amount of alcohol consumed.

There are also potential health issues that can be precipitated by a binge--acute pancreatitis, a painful and potentially life-threatening inflammation of the pancreas, or even "holiday heart syndrome," an irregular heart rhythm found in heart-healthy folks who have overindulged. "There's nothing funny, nothing good, about binging," Brewer says.

A couple thoughts:

1. I feel like I could have told you most of this by spring of my freshman year.
2. The article suggests anything over five drinks is a binge. A five-pack?!?! That's ridiculous...they only come in six. Which, of course, is because dolphins swim in pods of six.
3. And a hangover is a "kind of mini withdrawl"...remind me not to try meth.

Selective Freedom

Don Boudreaux has some excellent things to say about the ugliness of paternalism. Telling people how to live their lives is GREAT when you're in the majority (and it's easy to create a false justification), but its hard to stay in the majority for ever. Check out the full article for complete context.

In this sweet land of liberty it is surprising how readily we modern Americans let others rule us. I'm not talking about Americans letting some foreign government rule us. That won't happen anytime soon…I'm talking about being ruled by homegrown politicians who butt their noses into the sizes of our toilets, the amount of salt we consume and countless other provinces of our daily lives.

...

If I assert that I have a right to order my neighbor about for his own good, I thereby also assert that I am better than he is -- that I have more knowledge than he does about his life, or that I occupy a higher social rank that affords me the privilege of dictating his choices. Any such assertion is ethically anathema to a society of free and equal individuals.

NZ's most famous economist

Given that the other contributors to this blog either have an exam today or are in Hawaii, the responsiblity for today's post rests on my shoulders.

Since I have been in the US, more than one person (i.e. two people) have taken the time to discuss with me the contribution of NZ's most notable economist, Bill Phillips. The Phillips curve holds that there is an inverse relationship between inflation and unemployment, which has admittedly been found not to be the case for significant periods of time in many countries. Allegedly, the relationship between inflation and unemployment in Canada more closely resembles a map of Canada than the Phillips Curve.

Nevertheless, Bin Bernanke and others still consider that the Phillips curve is still useful for policymakers.

I think the debate on the merits of the Phillips curve says something about the relationship between economic theory and empirics. Some empirical studies claim to disprove economic theories, but unlike the natural sciences, economic theory cannot be disproved by the observance of results that are inconsistent with theory. Particualrly in the field of macroeconomics, other factors may be driving particular results and the thoery may be generally valid but not in the presence of the other factors.

I have also found that many web sites refer to NZ's most famous economist as either British or Australian. Britain is in the northern hemisphere, and Australia is a continent that was originally settled by convicts (that is not a slur, but rather a fact). In contrast, New Zealand is a small nation to the east of Australia, and is also referred to as "the shaky isles" (a reference to the geographical outline of the country) or the land of the long whte cloud.

Christmas Present Ideas for KLR

Quant III exam

I expect to see this on the Quant III final:

A survey of 120 students at St. Lawrence University, a small liberal arts college in northern New York, found that students who have never pulled an all-nighter have average GPAs of 3.1, compared to 2.9 for those who have. The study, by assistant professor of psychology Pamela Thacher, is to be included in the January issue of Behavioral Sleep Medicine.

"It's not a big difference, but it's pretty striking," Thacher said. "I am primarily a sleep researcher and I know nobody thinks clearly at 4 in the morning. You think you do, but you can't."

(1)That is a HUGE difference.
(2)This tells us absolutely NOTHING about the effect of all-nighters.
(3)This sleep research might consider pursuing other interests.

The Virtues of the Welfare State

Europe's unemployment rate, at 8.5 percent, is almost twice that of the United States. The European gross domestic product per capita at $29,400, versus $43,500 in the United States. In fact, the chief economist at one of Europe's leading governmental institutions has said, "At current trends, with demographics the way they are, the average U.S. citizen will be twice as rich as a Frenchman or a German in 20 years."

One reason Europeans have fewer jobs and are less wealthy than U.S. citizens is the burden of all the social welfare programs. A recent Wall Street Journal article on the Swedish disability program noted that Swedes are the healthiest people in the world – and yet the country has the world's highest rate of disability.

The problem is so widespread that the same article reported: "In Europe, roughly 20 percent of the working-age population – or 60 million people -- depend on various government benefits... compared to 13 percent in the United States."

The experience of Europe tells us mandated programs result in fewer jobs, declining families and eroding work ethics. The free market approach may not satisfy politicians' need to say they solved a problem. Rather, it works quietly, over time, creating multiple solutions, with some working better than others. Over time, the bad ones are rejected and the good ones are free to further evolve.

I think this article reaches the right conclusions, but the evidence is not as solid as the author might think. For starters, the U.S. and all of Europe is a little bit apples and a bushel of oranges. She also leads us to believe a paid family leave program in New Jersey will be the straw the breaks the camel. I agree the proposed program would lead NJ down the wrong path, but it is just one step—not the giant leap presented here.

I also reject her definition of work ethic. Work ethic stems from an inherent desire and satisfaction gained from working. What social programs erode is incentive based on the return to work. I would distinguish between the two. But relative to Europe, the U.S. has an abundance of both.

(HT: Cafe Hayek)

Marginal Tax Rates

CBO via Greg Mankiw provides some informative numbers. My question is: Do people not understand this or is "tax breaks for the wealthy" intentional demogoguery? Surely not all liberals are that bush league. And probably some Republicans are just dumb enough to really think "larger" cuts are going to the rich.

Piracy = good for sales?

Radiohead has tried out a novel approach to producing and distributing music in the Internet age. As I understand it, the jury is still out on whether or not their payday will ultimately be as impressive as if they had published their new album through a standard label. At least the way they have done it saves them from losing out huge portions of revenues to publicity and distribution costs (and the music industry is none too pleased about losing a cut). These they have gotten for free. And I understand that on average they are getting about five pounds per download.

Radiohead's unconventional approach fits the stereotype of their slightly hipster-tending fan base. It seems to me, though, that this model might work for them strictly because it's a novelty. I doubt that the next band to try this out will receive the same positive publicity, or the same largesse from loyal fans. My skepticism stems from the failure of the model for Stephen King, who abandoned his online distribution scheme when it failed to bring in sufficient donations.

Now there is an independent film that appears to have found success via publicity on sites linking to illegal downloads of the film ("The Man From Earth"). Again, I feel like this is working because it's the first of a phenomenon. I don't think it'll catch on, but I could be wrong.

I know DRH has looked into this a lot more than I have. What do you think the actual potential is for this to be a successful method of distributing arts media?

Read more >> Options >>