Duane Gran’s log of thoughts

Nat Hentoff, a well known Liberal writes a thought-provoking aritcle for the Village Voice concerning Terri Schiavo who is, at present, starving to death. I won’t quote any of the article, as it is so complete and eloquent I feel that it needs to be read in its entirety. I realize that many people are weary of giving any attention to this issue, and it has been politicized beyond belief, but Hentoff’s article is an eye opener for anyone who thinks that Liberalism inherently endorses euthanasia.

On the contrary, suicide, be it assisted or not, is not that controversial for many Liberals. What is controversial is evaluating the worth of another person’s life and terminating it based on hearsay.

Check out the BlogPulse Trend tool to plot word frequency trends on over 9 million blogs. As an example, I plotted against liberal, conservative and moderate. The results are somewhat interesting, as the loud mouths like myself are more common than the level headed moderates.

Also of interest, nearly every search term illustrates a see-saw pattern of spike and fall. I think this is caused by most of the blogging being done on the weekdays. It would be useful if they could normalize the data a little, but I’m having fun with it.

Just a reminder, kids… correlation isn’t causation, so don’t look for magic relationships between peanut butter and guns over there.

A CNN article covers the controversy of a court room where the jury read Bible passages as part of their deliberation. From the article:

Ruling that juries cannot turn to the Bible for advice during deliberations, a divided Colorado Supreme Court threw out the death penalty for a convicted murderer because jurors discussed Bible verses.

This is so absurd that I’m not sure where to start, but I’ll begin with the Death Penalty, which has no place in our society, provided that we actually intend to become civil. The attorneys had every chance to vet the jurors for extenuating bias, but after the fact someone wants to make a stink over jurors looking to the Bible for inspiration.

I have my issues with people who take the Bible literally, but as a person who finds inspiration and instruction within its pages, I take deep offense at the ruling. Yes, we want to have secular law. Yes, we want fairness for all faiths. However, it is neither necessary nor appropriate to banish faith from the calculus of law to achieve those ends.

CONELRAD: Soviet America | The Fear of What Might Have Been

The grim, if now laughable, specter of gulag imprisonment, rationed Russian food and substandard television programming affected the psyches of millions of Americans from the moment the Soviets tested their first A-bomb in 1949 until a tipsy Boris Yeltsin took office in 1991. In between these two momentous events numerous books, films, television programs, albums and “pageants” depicted, warned and worried about what might happen if America was conquered by the Communists.

We know that much of the hoolaboo over the cold war was a farce. The Communists had a small cadre of supporters, but there was never any threat of a revolution in America. It makes me wonder how quaint and ridiculous we will look in fifty years when the terrorism scare, and related propaganda, is laid bare.

CNN.com: Exurb growth challenges U.S. cities

“To check runaway land consumption, we need to provide incentives for development in existing urban and suburban areas, build new development at higher densities and set aside natural areas as off-limits to new development,” said Don Chen, executive director of Smart Growth America, a Washington-based coalition of advocacy organizations.

I live in area that is trying hard to implement smart growth, which means that they have designated an urban ring around the perimeter of the city limits. The result will be retaining 95% of Albemarle County as rural. Without such effort, development blight the landscape. I can only hope that other communities make an effort to do likewise.

Bryan Caplan demonstrates that collectivism is only for the poor in his latest EconLog article:

Before anyone starts collecting welfare, it is more than fair to ask them - for starters - to try to solve their own problem by taking on some roommates. Is it beneath their dignity to live like college students? I think not.

I’ll echo the response of several on his blog already to point out that the poor already do this in droves. While I agree in principal that the poor can economize on cost factors, I think this critique applies just as well to the remaining population, who by and large have an appetite for conspicuous consumption.

The larger question it raises to me is why he thinks that collectivism is just for the poor? Why shouldn’t the affluent lower their standard of living instead? I grow so weary of efforts, even when they are academic in nature, to blame the poor while entirely ignoring the excesses and moral bankruptcy of the elite.

NPR: The Risks of Buying a Home for Zero Down

Forty percent of first-time homebuyers don’t put any money down when they buy their homes. This is a big change from the days when a 20 percent down payment was standard.

I heard the above quote this morning while listening to NPR. The full audio is well worth a listen, where people express their willingness to take a zero down mortgage. The most common reason is that homes are appreciating quicker than people can save for a down payment. Does that sound strange to anyone?

I follow the housing market fairly closely and I’m leaning toward the conclusion that some form of bubble is occurring in urban areas. See the Chrono-Collapsometer for a well researched look at San Diego’s market, for example. The NPR piece does a good job of warning listeners about the risk of having no equity, but I think people are assuming that home prices will continue their high rate of appreciation. My prediction is that foreclosures will increase, as people are more vulnerable to risk, and those who have cash will snap up the homes at a bargain. This will result in further wealth disparity, which will eventually lead to a Communist revolution. Okay, maybe the last prediction won’t happen, but who knows?

So what is a person to do, when they can’t afford to buy a home? Should they take the zero down mortgage? I personally would only do it if the person was confident that he or she was going to stay in the house for at least five years. Markets will fluctuate, but the trick is not being forced to sell in a downturn. Traditionally, the 20% equity has cushioned people from this concern, so utmost caution is encouraged.

Not but a few years ago I was staunch opponent of any national health care plan for the United States, but today I find myself in favor of it. My intention in sharing this is that it may pave the way for others to come to a similar realization. I realize that both sides can pull out data points that convincingly argue either conclusion, so for the time being, lets just consider the issue pragmatically and consider that most nations in the world have already decided that national health care is a proper function of government.

If the cost of health care wasn’t rising so much quicker than inflation and wages, we wouldn’t be debating this issue. But as it stands, costs are out of control. According to The National Coalition on Health Care:

In 2002, health insurance premiums rose at a rate eight times faster than general inflation; experiencing the largest one-year surge in premiums in more than a decade. In the absence of comprehensive reform, the average annual premium for employer-sponsored family health insurance could reach $14,545.

They include more recent statistics which bear out similar increased rates. While some argue for marketplace solutions, I believe that the marketplace has proven to not be competitive or effective with health care. An article in The New Republic (The Health of the Nations) makes the case that private health care actually undermines the whole endeavor.

The behavior of many of the so-called “not-for-profit” health care facilities is not much different from that of their investor-owned competitors, because they have to survive in the same unforgiving marketplace, which is indifferent to the social values that originally motivated most health care institutions.

The article continues to the following conclusion:

We are a wealthy society, and decency requires that we make equitable arrangements to ensure at least minimally adequate health care for all–a goal that is beyond the scope of market forces.

In the end we may need to make a value judgment to accept waiting lists in order to provide medical care in an equitable fashion. It is probably too soon for American society, where medical care operates on a “one dollar, one vote” system in many ways. It might be disastrous to change the system until we change the attitudes and hearts of society, but I’m not sure. My hope is that this essay might be a beginning of change for some who observe the crisis around us.

EconLog: Health Care Waste

I do not believe that health-care reformers should be taken seriously when they suggest that spending on health care in the United States could be brought down to the levels in other countries simply by eliminating waste. Instead, it is far more likely that bringing down health care spending would require a significant reduction in the quality of health care that Americans receive.

Arnold Kling’s essay is a good lesson for Liberals who may assume that we can nationalize health care and cover the cost gap through efficiency gains alone. He is firmly in the private health care camp, but I believe his analysis sidesteps a significant leakage in private health care.

The leakage I refer to is the cost for the uninsured to forego basic preventative medical procedures. In other words, many health issues are more affordable to prevent than to repair or contain. A few examples from the CDC:

• For the cost of 100 Papanicolaou tests for low-income elderly women, about $5,907 and 3.7 years of life are saved. 
• A mammogram every 2 years for women aged 50–69 costs only about $9,000 per year of life saved. This cost compares favorably with other widely used clinical preventive services. 
• According to one Northern California study, for every $1 spent on the Arthritis Self-Help Program, $3.42 was saved in physician visits and hospital costs. 
• For every $1 spent on preconception care programs for women with diabetes, $1.86 can be saved by preventing birth defects among their offspring. 

These are just a sampling of the benefits that may come from nationalized health care. I have a good deal of respect for Dr. Kling’s scholarship and research on these issues. I consider it likely that he uses a more academic definition of waste, but I feel there is something remiss about omitting mention of preventative care and its associated costs.

Take Action: Call For ABC News To Drop Wal-Mart As “Only In America” Sponsor

Wal-Mart’s use of its “Only in America” sponsorship is simply another cynical attempt to deceive customers about Wal-Mart’s responsibility for sending more jobs overseas than any other American corporation and lowering U.S. wages.

My thoughts exactly, but I think Wonkette said it even better:

But it just goes to show you there really is something unique about our country: Only in America could malevolent corporate weasels turn a painfully sappy network morning show into effective propaganda for their evil empire of cheap schlock.

I don’t normally think of Wonkette as a dependable view on political and media issues, but once in a while they surprise me. More often they make me chuckle.

I can’t believe I’m just now stumbling upon this. In it’s honour, I’m creating a new category for humour. God save the Queen!

A message from John Cleese to all Americans

New Scientist: Charity begins at Homo sapiens

These findings suggest that true altruism, far from being a maladaptation, may be the key to our species’ success by providing the social glue that allowed our ancestors to form strong, resilient groups. It is still crucial for social cohesion in today’s very different world. “Something like it had to evolve,” Gintis says.

The article is well worth a read for those who claim that socialist policies are fundamentally against human nature. I believe a more convincing argument can be made that man-made control of production and wealth is against our nature and that socialism is a possible cure. Maybe all state institutions exist to curb some part of our nature, but if so, shouldn’t the state direct our energies toward our natural instinct of altruism?

Undocumented population tops 10 million

The population of undocumented residents in the United States increased by about 23 percent from 8.4 million in the four-year period ending last March, according to the analysis of government data by the Pew Hispanic Center, a private research group.

I firmly believe that immigration is one of the things that make America a great place, but I also believe that people should utilize legal means to repatriate. I’ve noticed a shift in terminology from “illegal alien” to “undocumented worker.” Does this signal a policy shift? I’m not sure exactly what to think about it, but calling someone undocumented smacks of a society where one must “show papers” upon demand. Maybe I’m paranoid, but for some reason the phrase doesn’t sit well with me.

When I first heard about the Terri Schiavo case, it sounded like a basic “right to die issue” to me, but the more I read about it the more disturbed I feel. A few lesser reported facts in the media:

• The family is willing to cover all expenses and indemnify her husband
• While she is severely incapacitated, she isn’t brain dead. She recognizes people who enter the room and it is evident in her glaze that she has some degree of awareness
• The husband’s claim that she should be killed is based on a oft-said statement that she wouldn’t ever want to be on life support.

The last point is significant, because the following poll is being used by the euthanasia advocates and sympathizers:

As you may know, a woman in Florida named Terri Schiavo suffered brain damage and has been on life support for 15 years. Doctors say she has no consciousness and her condition is irreversible. Her parents and her husband disagree on whether or not she should be kept on life support. In cases like this who do you think should have final say, the parents or the spouse?

Parents 25
Spouse 65
Other 2
Neither 2
Unsure 6

If you were in this condition, would you want to be kept alive, or not?

Kept Alive 8
Not Kept Alive 87
Unsure 4

I guarantee that results would have been different if they asked, “If you were in this condition, would you want to be starved to death, or not?” The answer would be markedly different. Those who equate starvation with “not kept alive” are delusional. I believe that a person should be able to refuse medical treatment, but there should be no doubt as to intent. If a person hasn’t codified their intentions in legal writ the state shouldn’t presume to terminate life under any conditions.

I don’t buy it that the state’s hands are clean of murder when they order a feeding tube to be removed. As barbaric as capital punishment may be, we treat our most heinous criminals with more dignity than Schiavo will receive. On March 18th 2005 her feeding tube was removed, by order of the courts. As I write this, she is in the process of an agonizing death. Fortunately, the congress is actively looking at using any legal means necessary to undo this miscarriage of justice.

Paul Graham has written a followup to his essay advising students in high school with some advice for college students. A phrase that jumped out at me:

Another way to figure out which fields are worth studying is to create the dropout graph. For example, I know many people who switched from math to computer science because they found math too hard, and no one who did the opposite. People don’t do hard things gratuitously; no one will work on a harder problem unless it is proportionately (or at least log(n)) more rewarding. So probably math is more worth studying than computer science. By similar comparisons you can make a graph of all the departments in a university. At the bottom you’ll find the subjects with least intellectual content.

In general I agree. I majored in Computer Science and I can’t tell you how many times I almost stepped down to Management Information Systems like some of my peers. At times I even threatened to switch to Sociology. That aside, I disagree with Paul that these other fields have less intellectual content.

The programs you write in classes differ in three critical ways from the ones you’ll write in the real world: they’re small; you get to start from scratch; and the problem is usually artificial and predetermined. In the real world, programs are bigger, tend to involve existing code, and often require you to figure out what the problem is before you can solve it.

I couldn’t have said it better. During college I was building up my own business. It was comical in a way, to attend my classes where the professor talked about requirements gathering and testing, and I was aggravated because I actually had some real stuff to get done. My studies were compromised because of this, and to this day I feel conflicted about the priorities I had in college, but I think hacking a real problem was ultimately good for me.

Paul didn’t mention internships in his essay, but I think they are invaluable if a student, like most, plans to work in the private sector. They really set you apart from the crowd, which is paradoxically one of the most valuable things a person can do when attaining a level of qualification from college.

Yesterday I sent possibly my thousandth email, where I told the recipient that “x is attached” to the message and I blithely sent the email, forgetting to actually attach the file. Until we have an unsend feature, so that we can remove the digital foot from our mouths, I propose an interim solution:

It would be nice if email programs would scan the content of an outgoing message for the word “attach” and pop up a little reminder before sending if there was no file attachment in the message. This would be brain-dead easy to program and it would make my life a little easier.

Check out the CWA See-n-Say for a good edutainment experience. Before I saw the light, I think I said nearly all the crony lines depicted on the page.

Senate votes for ANWR oil drilling

Amid the backdrop of soaring oil and gasoline prices, a sharply divided Senate on Wednesday voted to open the ecologically rich Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling, delivering a major energy policy win for President Bush.

We have better options, but our society chose instead to gut the environment for profit, all for 1.5 years of oil. Pathetic.

Last night I watched the movie Good Bye Lenin! The story depicts life in East Germany around the events of the collapse of communism. The plot entails a son who tries to shield his devoutly socialist mother, who has just awoke from a coma after the wall came down. He goes to great length to fabricate an appearance that nothing has changed, when in fact the world had turned upside down while she was sleeping. It is really quite hilarious at times, and also serious as it portrays the social upheaval of 1989.

I think the movie tends toward nostalgia for the DDR, but it also portrays the violence and propaganda of the era. It also accurately shows the excesses of the West. The most compelling message of the movie for me was the full shelves of products after the collapse, but few had money to purchase them. Of course, in the DDR you had money, but few things to buy.

I recommend the movie for history buffs and persons of any political stripe. The musical score was particularly impressive.

The Shadow of Bolivar

For a little background information on Hugo Chavez, the President of Venezuela:

In the aftermath of the failed coup of ‘92, Chavez became a popular symbol of resistance to the old political system, particularly among the country’s poor. After his release from prison in 1994 he set about building a broad political movement, bringing together other parties of the left such as MAS, Patria Para Todos, and the Communist Party, as well as his own party the Movement of the Fifth Republic. This movement set out an agenda broadly defined as Bolivarian - inspired by Bolivar’s vision of a democratic society with real rights for all its citizens.

Why is this on my radar? Namely because Chavez has been threatening to not sell oil to the United States and the response from the Bush administration is to contain him. The rhetoric by the administration is that he is trying to subvert the stability of Latin America.

But of course, we wouldn’t know anything about that, would we? A more modern case in point is the School of the Americas. From the previous link:

Initially established in Panama in 1946, it was kicked out of that country in 1984 under the terms of the Panama Canal Treaty. Former Panamanian President, Jorge Illueca, stated that the School of the Americas was the “biggest base for destabilization in Latin America.” The SOA, frequently dubbed the “School of Assassins,” has left a trail of blood and suffering in every country where its graduates have returned.

Chavez may not be perfect, but in the spirit of Che Guevara he sees a united Latin America that shouldn’t be ruled by the elite. If this viewpoint is contrary to the Bush administration then it says more about us than him. We need to dismantle the SOA (renamed Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation) before we assume any moral high ground on this issue.