HunterThinks.com Blog

List of scientists supporting the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming

2008-12-15T10:28:00.003-06:00

Despite overwhelming evidence, there are still some powerful people denying that climate change is the result of human actions--usually called global warming. The nomination of Gov. Sarah Palin, a denier of climate change, for vice president in the 2008 US presidential election is unbelievable to me. What is next? Will we nominate someone who believes witchcraft is real or the world is flat? The US nominated Gov. Palin because there are a few vocal people denying climate change and there are many powerful people who want to believe them.

I recently stumbled across an excellent blog that fights against the lies of the climate change denying fringe. The deniers are well organized and easy to find, and the media gives them undo attention because of it. For example, Wikipedia has a "List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming" with 39 names, but there is no corresponding list of supporting scientists. I aim to correct this imbalance.

I just created the list of scientists supporting the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming on Wikipedia and posted four scientists on the list. With the help of the netizen community, I hope this list will grow to be one of the largest articles on Wikipedia.

Cleaning my digital SLR camera was easy and cheap

2008-12-11T12:55:00.002-06:00

I have a Canon Digital Rebel, and after traveling through the deserts of Egypt the sensor was dirty. In the following picture, notice the many dust spots near the top of the frame.

I found a great website that thoroughly explains how to clean a digital SLR camera, so I decided to try to clean the camera myself. I didn't have much money to spend on my camera, so I decided to make the cleaning wand instead of buying one. The website shows how to make a cleaning wand from a Wendy's plastic knife, and I found a plastic knife at my local grocery store that worked very well.

At my local camera store, I bought Pec*Pad lint-free wipes ($7.50 for 100 wipes) and Eclipse cleaning solution ($8.99 for 2 oz.). Both came with the highest recommendation by the website, and I was impressed with each of them.

The website had an ingenious method for inspecting the sensor for dust, and my camera was even dirtier than I originally thought it was. In the image below, each of the dots is dust.

I used a CO2-cartridge air blaster to blow out the large dust. I used the plastic knife, the cleaning wipe, and the cleaning solution to swab the dust off the sensor. It was relatively easy, and I removed a lot of dust during my first attempt.

I repeated the cleaning, and I managed to remove nearly all of the dust. Overall, I am very happy with how well this process worked, especially because I didn't damage my camera!

Upside down sexism down under

2008-12-05T23:13:00.004-06:00

To succeed in news casting, women must have fuckability—according to newsman John Westacott. This sexist boss also told his news team that "Sheilas do health and consumer stories. You want your blokes, your main guns, doing the real news stories."

For those of us opposed to sexism, 2008 was a difficult year. In addition to the comment above and the sexist accusations swirling around Sen. Hillary Clinton and Gov. Sarah Palin, a scientific study suggested that sexist men make more money for the same work than non-sexist men and women make.

And who can forget John Molony, the mayor of the small town that had a shortage of women? He suggested that the women who lived in his town were happy to be there, and he invited other women to his town no matter what they looked like because "beauty is only skin deep." In 2008, how can a political leader get away with saying that a woman's value is not based on her physical beauty? What a sexist jerk.

Mayor Molony's remark was so offensive that he earned The Golden Ernie—an annual award given for the most sexist remark in Australia, as judged by 400 women at a special dinner. In fact, the mayor beat out John Westacott—the newsman described above who also told one of his female news casters that if she wanted a promotion that she "needed bigger tits."

Mayor "Sexist Pig" Molony's full remarks:

May I suggest if there are five blokes to every girl, we should find out where there are beauty-disadvantaged women and ask them to proceed to Mount Isa. Quite often you will see walking down the street a lass who is not so attractive with a wide smile on her face. Whether it is recollection of something previous or anticipation for the next evening, there is a degree of happiness. Often those who are beauty-disadvantaged are unhappy with their lot. Some, in other places in Australia, need to proceed to Mount Isa where happiness awaits. And, really, beauty is only skin deep. Isn't there a fairy tale about an ugly duckling that evolves into a beautiful swan?

Mayor Molony clearly insulted the women of Mount Isa: he said they were ugly—happy but ugly. What is not so clear is how his remarks were sexist. Sexism comes in three forms: chauvinism, irrationally attributing behavior and qualities to gender, and inappropriate discrimination.

The most obvious type of sexism is chauvinism—a general belief that one gender is superior to the other gender. A variation is the belief that a gender-specific quality is superior to the gender-specific qualities of the other gender. Freud's ridiculous hypothesis that women have penis envy, for example, is sexist. Or the belief that women are superior to men because they can have babies is also sexist. John Westacott's belief that women should not deliver "real" news stories is another great example. Mayor Molony's statement is not chauvinist, however, because he does not suggest that men are better than women.

The second category of sexism can be a bit more subtle than the first—any irrational link between gender and a specific quality or behavior is sexist. Asserting that women are bad drivers, for example, is sexist because it irrationally connects bad driving with gender—even if one could "prove" that women drive worse than men drive, the bad driving would not be the result of gender. Linking driving to gender is irrational, and sexist. Saying that women generally have higher pitched voices than men, by contrast, is not sexist because women (as a group) do have higher pitched voices than men because of gender differences in humans. Linking gender to that quality is not irrational—and not sexist. (I do not call this sexism category "stereotyping" because some stereotypes are accurate, therefore not sexist.) Mayor Molony did not irrationally link any specific quality to femininity with his statement. In fact, he unlinked physical beauty from gender by suggesting that physical beauty was not important to being a happy woman in Mount Isa. Therefore, his statement did not fall into the second category of sexism.

Mayor Molony did imply that men generally prefer to marry beautiful women, but because of the shortage in Mount Isa, the men would settle for "beauty disadvantaged" women. At first glance, this implication appears sexist: heterosexual men tend to value attractive women more than ugly women. Still, it is not sexist to try to marry the most attractive mate possible. Babies prefer beautiful people. Not just male babies prefer beautiful women—all babies prefer beautiful people of both genders. Employers promote beautiful people. Teachers think beautiful students are more intelligent. Again, this is not about gender: teachers of both genders give higher grades to students of both genders if the students are attractive. There may be many reasons why beauty is preferred by babies, employers, teachers, and spouses, but it is not a sexist view: both genders prefer beautiful people of both genders in most situations. Mayor Molony was not sexist when he observed that beautiful people, not just women, have an easier "lot" in life.

The last category is when people inappropriately discriminate based on gender. Refusing to hire a qualified woman for a construction job simply because of gender is sexist because it is inappropriate to base a hiring decision on gender. Giving directions to the women's restroom (instead of the men's restroom) when a woman asks for directions to "the restroom" is not sexist because it appropriately uses gender to make decisions about how to treat someone. Interestingly, nothing in Mayor Molony's statement fits into this category either.

Yes, Mayor Molony insulted the women of Mount Isa by calling them ugly, but his statement was not sexist. Sexism hurts women as a group, and Mayor Molony insulted a large group of women, so many people naturally thought his remarks were sexist.

Nevertheless, there is a sexist, and ironic, part to Mayor Molony's award: the award itself is unintentionally sexist to women. To see why, imagine that Mayor Molony did not call the Mount Isa's women ugly—instead he said that they were all bad singers and that all bad singers should move to his town and be happy. If he had said women in his town were tone deaf instead of ugly, no one would have called him sexist. In fact, imagine that he said the women in his town were the most beautiful women in the Outback, but they were all terrible singers. Most people would view that as a compliment to the women of Mount Isa.

According to some people, if he calls a group of women ugly, then he is sexist, but if he calls them tone deaf, then he is not sexist. This interpretation is only possible if one believes that physical beauty is an essential quality of femininity. This is the second category of sexism: irrationally linking a specific quality (beauty) to gender. And it is irrational to connect physical beauty to femininity: are old, ugly women lesser women than young, beautiful women? Of course they are not lesser.

Obviously, the Australian women who gave the award to Mayor Molony did not intend to make a sexist statement, but by calling his insult a sexist remark, they unintentionally declared that ugly women are lesser women than beautiful women. Mayor Molony owes the women of Mount Isa an apology for his insult, and the women of Australia owe Mayor Molony an apology for their sexist accusation. Erroneously calling Mayor Molony's remarks sexist makes it harder to fight real sexism, and setting the record straight will undoubtedly help.

'God said she needed to be taken off road'

2008-12-03T11:13:00.000-06:00

While a Texas man was driving behind another car, God told him that "the other vehicle was not driving like a Christian and it was Jesus' will for him to punish the car." So the man smashed into the car at over 100 miles per hour.

"President Bush said to all of us: 'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did."

In all seriousness, why are these two situations not exactly alike? The first man was arrested and forced to have a psychological evaluation. The second man was reelected as President of the United States.

"Bush said to James Robinson: 'I feel like God wants me to run for President. I can't explain it, but I sense my country is going to need me. Something is going to happen... I know it won't be easy on me or my family, but God wants me to do it.'"

If God is a valid excuse for war, then why is it not a valid excuse to ram a car?

Science begets art in science

2008-12-02T16:21:00.001-06:00

An important part of the patent and copyright regime is the idea that science begets science and that art begets art. I previously blogged about how creativity in art leads to more art, and the following video shows how science can lead to more art.

The author of the video is showing how he "mashed up" various technologies--Wii, portable computing, software, video projection, and infrared--to create a sophisticated performance machine, which allows him to expand his artistic performances. Sciences and arts are linked and advancements in one field will lead to advancements in other fields.

The patent and trademark system should promote--not hinder--these advancements. When evaluating the legal regime, the most important question to ask: does it promote innovation or does it stifle innovation by preventing people from building new art and new science?

Roundup of site changes

2008-11-22T00:01:00.000-06:00

I converted my Computer Science GRE study guide from a Word document to a series of blog posts, backdated to November 2004. All requests for the original word document and directory are now redirected to the blog posts.

I fixed a potential redirect problem with the Ethics Exam Study Guide. I originally had "Redirect /studyguide/Ethics/index.html http://www.hunterthinks.com/blogger/2004/12/excelsior-college-ethics-exam-study.html" in my .htaccess file. A request for /studyguide/Ethics/Excelsior_College_Ethics_Exam_Study_Guide.doc would then be redirected to http://www.hunterthinks.com/blogger/2004/12/excelsior-college-ethics-exam-study.htmlExcelsior_College_Ethics_Exam_Study_Guide.doc, which is a bad URI, of course. I added "Redirect /studyguide/Ethics/Excelsior_College_Ethics_Exam_Study_Guide.doc http://www.hunterthinks.com/blogger/2004/12/excelsior-college-ethics-exam-study.html" to the .htaccess. There is probably an easier way to do this, but I have not bothered to learn .htaccess syntax.

Blasphemous anti-rape poster

2008-11-16T18:53:00.002-06:00

This poster was designed for the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. It says in Italian, "Only four percent of women who suffer sexual violence report their assailants."

Politicians in Milan refuse to allow it to be displayed. Not because of the nudity--that is less of a problem in Italy. The politicians think it is blasphemous because of the Christ-like pose and because the poster asks, "Who Pays For Man's Sins?". Do you think it is blasphemous?

In Iran, a politician is facing religious trouble. Esfandiar Rahim Mashaie hosted "a ceremony where women in traditional dress carried in the Koran, Islam's holy book, to music. Media described the ceremony as a 'dance.'" Other politicians say that the dance violated the sanctity of the Koran and that Mashaie should resign for offending Muslims.

Did you have the same reaction to both stories? Even though they are remarkably similar, I think most people have very different reactions.

I have two points here: First, in both incidents, the actions of women were offensive to religious conservatives. (The Italian politicians were not upset by the rape of women--they were upset by the pose of the woman on the poster.) We should speak out against the demonization of women. Second, societies tend to tolerate religious extremism at home while condemning religious extremism abroad. Oppression and hate and not acceptable simply because the speaker claims to be acting in the name of god.

Roundup of site changes

2008-11-15T23:59:00.003-06:00

I converted my Excelsior College Ethics Exam Study Guide Home from its old format (a word doc linked from a page) to four blogger posts. Blogger allows posts to be pre-dated, so I set the publish date to 2004--when I originally posted the content. Converting this content has many advantages, including: consistent site design, page views can show ads, potentially convert traffic into users, and better search engine indexing.

On the Truly News article template, I changed "What can you do?" to "How can you get involved?". Some stories, especially articles about scientific research make more sense with the second question.

Time magazine perpetuates bigotry

2008-11-15T16:04:00.001-06:00

Proposition 8 has passed and removed the right to marry from hundreds of thousands of people. Gay groups and people that believe this is an injustice have created a blacklist of donors to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign. Frank Schubert, the campaign manager for Yes on Proposition 8, is horrified: "It strikes me as quite ironic that a group of people who demand tolerance and who claim to be for civil rights are so willing to be intolerant and trample on other people's civil rights." Alison Stateman, writing in Time magazine, published his quote without challenging the absurdity of Mr. Schubert's claim.

His claim is absurd because it has three major errors. First, Mr. Schubert tries to equate status discrimination with a targeted boycott. Proposition 8 discriminates against gays based on their status (they are gay), and status-based discrimination is almost always a bad thing (Think Jim Crow). Boycotting companies for voluntarily donating money is not the same thing as status-based discrimination because it targets companies based on their actions, not their status (e.g., donating money vs. being a corporation).

Second, Mr. Schubert conflates government discrimination with private action. The blacklist was compiled by private people to speak out against hate and discrimination. These private citizens can only do two things: spend money and speak their mind. But when the government discriminates, it has significantly more power. Under the new law, if two gay women have a child together, and the state-recognized mother dies, then the state can take the child away from the other mother--because they are not married. Because the state defines who gets to be a family, then it can take children away from a person that the state does not recognize as a parent. Proposition 8 uses the power of the state to hurt gay people and their families. The blacklist uses the power of private speech and private spending to encourage other people to respect their neighbors.

Third, Mr. Schubert has no understanding of a "right." According to Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld, "When a right is invaded, a duty is violated." If the blacklist really "tramples" on rights, then someone has violated a duty owed to the people on the blacklist. Does Mr. Schubert think that we have a duty to not make lists? Maybe he thinks we have a duty to not criticize other people. Does he think we have a duty to shop at Container Supply Co., and that by boycotting the store, we are violating our duty to shop there? What duty does the blacklist violate? What right is being trampled on? The truth is that the blacklist does not violate any duty and the boycott does not trample on anyone's civil rights. Compare this to Proposition 8. Until Proposition 8 passed, gay people did have the right to marry. Mr. Schubert, through his campaign, destroyed that right for hundreds of thousands of people. It is more accurate to say that Proposition 8 trampled on the civil rights of others.

My strongest criticism, however, is not for Frank Schubert--it is for Alison Stateman (the author of the article), her editor, and Time magazine. Mr. Schubert was the campaign manager for Yes on Proposition 8; I expect him to make ridiculous statements like this one. I expect Time magazine, however, to be staffed with inquisitive and intelligent writers and editors. Ms. Stateman's article ended with Mr. Schubert's quote but she did not challenge the huge errors in his statement. Before publishing his quote, Ms. Stateman and her editor should have asked a simple question: Is Mr. Schubert's assertion true? With only a little intellectual curiosity, any reasonably intelligent person could have exposed at least one of the errors above. Publishing Mr. Schubert's misleading statement without criticizing his errors was irresponsible and lazy.

Is it too much to expect that a venerable magazine such as Time would be skeptical of partisan statements and analyze a potentially-biased statement to make sure that the statement is true?

Business plan

2008-11-07T20:54:00.003-06:00

I have been exploring the idea of turning my website into an income. I have a lot of ideas and a lot of doubts, but I have one idea that I think will be useful: I want to develop my business plan on my website. If I can make money as a "blogger" or "news aggregator", then no one can steal my product because the product is me.

So, this post is my first attempt at publishing my thoughts about my business plan. I am sure many things will change as I get feedback from you.

I think many people are hungry for good information about important issues, but the buffet of news choices is overflowing with high-fat, low-information stories. I want to give people nutritious news put into context so they can quickly and efficiently read the stories that are interesting to them and can improve their lives.

Truly News will provide summaries and links to important news, without the noise, and provide context for each story. The context includes:

Why the story is important

Who are the people and groups in the story

Where is it happening

If necessary, what is happening (e.g., explain what a mortgage backed security is)

What can the reader do?

Multiple channels for delivery increases total audience
Truly News will try to find innovative ways to deliver content to the user. RSS, Facebook applications, and a traditional web site are all easy to achieve. Youtube and cross-posting are other possibilities.

Revenue from click-through ads, branding ads, and affiliate links
Truly News will make money by selling advertising. Branding campaigns for national and international products will be important and click-through ads will be available. Branding and sponsorship on youtube videos will be important also. Many articles are wire-service or covered by multiple outlets and are essentially the same content. I may be able to make money by agreeing to channel traffic to specific websites.

Sharp analysis of intelligent topics without coverage of trivial topics
People will use Truly News because it cuts out the silly news stories about Paris Hilton, it puts stories in context so people can more fully understand the issues affecting us today, and because it will make it convenient for them to read the news. Truly News will not overload the user with too many stories.

Transparency builds loyalty
I will post most of my business plan and changes that I am considering on my website and invite feedback. Someone could copy 95% of my business model, but they cannot copy me. The most important part of the product is my analysis--if my analysis is not original or insightful, then the entire product is valueless. Transparency and dialogue will also create a small sense of community for some users.

My passion
The final prong, and most important aspect, of this business plan is that it should provide me with an emotional outlet. I see anger, I see hate, I see intolerance, and I see ignorance all around the world. This is my way of standing up to mean people and my way of helping to make the world a better place.

Gov. Palin "needs" clothes, please donate in her name

2008-10-23T21:39:00.005-05:00

Many people are talking about Gov. Sarah Palin's $150,000 shopping spree even though it is completely irrelevant to the serious issues we face today and a sad waste of time. Since people are talking about it anyway, can we at least do something positive?

Sen. John McCain explained the shopping spree by saying, "She needed clothes." While I doubt she "needed" clothes, there are many people in America today that do need help buying clothes. Almost 10% of the American population needed food stamps in July. Sen. McCain, more than 29 million Americans are so poor that they need help buying food.

America can use this silly fascination with Gov. Palin's wardrobe as an opportunity to help some of our neighbors. When George Bush started to attack our freedom to decide what is good for our bodies, Patt Morrison developed an ingenious plan: donate to Planned Parenthood in George Bush's name. So, with a nod to Ms. Morrison, I suggest that everyone immediately donate your extra clothes to charity and ask the charity to send a thank you note to Sen. McCain. Real Simple magazine has a nice list of charities, and you can even donate old bridesmaid dresses.

Sen. McCain, I hope you can find a way to show that you know that Gov. Palin does not "need" more clothes but that millions of working poor Americans do have serious needs. Will you consider matching all of the donations made in your name?

Fear and hate tactics in the presidential campaign

2008-10-23T16:24:00.001-05:00

The 2008 presidential campaign has heated up over William Ayers, terrorism, ACORN, and voter registration fraud. Learn the truth about these topics and see how hate mongering and fear mongering are polarizing our nation.

Version 3: Fear and hate in presidential politics

2008-10-19T15:46:00.002-05:00

Video: Fear and hate in the presidential campaign

2008-10-18T15:13:00.005-05:00

A NEW VERSION IS AVAILABLE.

Fear and hate are overtaking the presidential election. When we all fear terrorists, do we need to create more fear? A fear that Obama is going to blow us up? Do we need more hate? Stop the hate. Stop the fear.

If you know of other examples, leave a comment. I will continue adding clips to this video until the election. Add my site to your RSS, and you will know when I post a new version. www.hunterthinks.com/blogger/atom.xml.

I blog my opinions at www.hunterthinks.com/blogger. I collect important news stories at www.hunterthinks.com.

Links to videos and stories used in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHrExRHZnm0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dnsw1t8Ls1c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0ho6qEhMbs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbgSwO4uqbU
http://www.sacbee.com/812/story/1314854.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/06/mccain-does-nothing-as-cr_n_132366.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ManvViFZ4l4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7v8HSI4-O-s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfzZP3Pwkgo
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1849422,00.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4bsmgQ8ukg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/17/gop-rep-channels-mccarthy_n_135735.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/14/palin-ive-got-nothing-to_n_134632.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvXf9AUHTqM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abLh3b68IHc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFbYLT-03n0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ50oZRVTuw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fbpZXivv-M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHrExRHZnm0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbbcVNOMqSk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws_MhRovj5E

Another collection of fear mongering.

[Asinine] Fark.com blames victim of sexual assault when stranger touches her

2008-10-12T18:00:00.006-05:00

Fark.com collects interesting or strange links and allows people to comment on them. The editors at Fark categorize each link: amusing, ironic, dumbass, interesting, asinine, etc. In honor of their categories, I am placing this post in the category [Asinine].

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 at 5:33 PM, Fark labeled the following link as [Ironic], "Woman who can't stop going out half-naked in public 'furious' after somebody pinches her bum".

The headline, authored (or permitted) by Fark editors, links to an article by OK! magazine about an UK actress who "was in Manchester’s swanky Panacea restaurant and bar when a stranger grabbed her behind."

Yes, the editors at Fark think it is "ironic" that this actress is upset that a stranger touched her sexually.

To remind the editors at Fark, something is ironic if it is "contrary to what was expected or intended". I fail to understand what was ironic in this situation. Do we not expect a "half-naked" woman to be furious when a stranger touches her sexually? Or do the editors think she is supposed to like it? Maybe the editors at Fark mean that when a woman is "half-naked" that she should expect someone to touch her sexually. Or maybe the editors think that a "half-naked" woman intends for a stranger to touch her sexually. I am confused, what happened that was the opposite of what we expected?

What is "half-naked", anyway? To a conservative Muslim, women must cover themselves so they will be "respected" and not "abused". If a woman had her arms and hair exposed, would a conservative Muslim say that she expects to have a stranger touch her sexually? In 1868 in the US, a woman that revealed any part of her leg was immodest. To that society, a mini-skirt would have been "four-fifths naked." If the fact that she was dressed immodestly is relevant, then it is important to remember that modesty is culturally dependent.

Whether she was "half-naked", however, is irrelevant. Even if the women were walking through Times Square completely naked, no stranger has the right to touch her, especially not sexually. (Please, no one argue that the police have a right to touch her. They do not, at best they might have a privilege, but no one has the right to touch her. The difference is important.)

In common law countries, like the UK, an intentional unconsented touch is a crime: battery. If a naked woman walks through Times Square, and a stranger "grabs her behind", then the stranger battered the woman. It is very simple. The stranger (intentionally) grabbed the woman. She did not consent to the touch. It is a crime. If a "half-naked" woman is touched sexually by a stranger, then it is a crime.

If she was "half-naked", then she must have consented to the sexual touch, right? Wasn't she "asking for it" by dressing that way? I seriously hope that the editors at Fark know that being "half-naked" does not mean that she consented to a stranger touching her sexually. Does anyone really think that this actress consented to a never-ending stream of strangers touching her while she was eating at the restaurant? If a woman is "half-naked" she might be "asking" for you to look at her, but it is absurd to argue that she was asking for a stranger to touch her sexually while she had a beer at the bar.

In the comments section of Fark, some people have argued that even if she did not consent to the sexual touch, that she must have expected it. Is this the irony that the Fark editors were looking for? The "half-naked" actress should have expected a stranger to touch her sexually, and because she got angry when a stranger touched her, that we can call it ironic? I am now really confused: a woman in a restaurant--in England--in 2008--should expect strangers to touch her sexually? Admittedly, I have never been to England, but I still think that most women expect that they will not be sexually assaulted in public.

I have a few more expectations. I expect that most people know the basics of law: touching people sexually without their permission is a crime. I expect that most people do not blame the victim. I expect that an editor knows the definition of "ironic."

Is it ironic that I expected these things, and that an "editor" at Fark is now blaming the victim and calling the sexual assault ironic?

Closing Gaza border makes Hamas stronger

2008-10-08T13:51:00.000-05:00

Israel and Egypt have closed all borders with the Gaza strip because Hamas controls Gaza. Smugglers have dug hundreds of tunnels under the border to bring in food, fuel, supplies, and weapons.

Hamas, as the only government in the Gaza strip, has started to regulate the tunnels. Forty-five workers have died in the tunnels this year, so Hamas has demanded that tunnel operators improve working conditions to reduce the number of deaths. Specifically, Hamas insist that employers now pay "diyeh" to the killed workers family. If the tunnel operators have to pay for each death, then they will naturally implement some new safety measures to avoid some deaths.

Imagine you are a Palestinian stuck in the Gaza strip. Israel has closed the borders and cut off your access to affordable food and your access to good jobs in Israel. Israel says they are doing this because Hamas is launching attacks from Gaza and Israel will reopen the borders if Hamas is pushed from power.

Maybe this makes you upset with Hamas. You start to think about ways to get Hamas out of power. While you are thinking about this, you look for a job. You find one working as a smuggler. Then Hamas makes your job safer by regulating your employer. Hamas even connects your tunnel to the electric grid so you can have electric lights while you work. Will you want to destroy Hamas now? No, because they just made you safer. They just did things that directly benefit you. Your anger will turn towards Israel. You will blame them for your problems, not Hamas.

Hamas is winning in Gaza because it is providing services that the people want. In this case, they are providing electricity and they are regulating employers to improve working conditions. Hamas gets stronger every day that the borders are closed.

The only way to win the West Bank or in Gaza is to provide better services, better jobs, and better security than Hamas can provide.

Countrywide Mortgages implements plan to save homes

2008-10-06T08:35:00.001-05:00

Countrywide mortgage will modify mortgages so people will not lose their home.

The mortgage aid includes revising customers' payments so they don't exceed 34 percent of income. Other options include reducing interest rates and adjusting principal so that borrowers don't wind up actually losing equity under some payment plans.

This is not exactly what I was proposing, but it is very close. I proposed 35%, for example.

Gay marriage: separate but equal?

2008-10-05T09:44:00.001-05:00

Both of the VP candidates said they opposed "gay" marriage. (This term suggests that "gay" marriage is different than "straight" marriage.) Biden went so far as to say that he supported civil unions and other rights (i.e. hospital visitation) for gay couples that are equivalent to the rights of couples that have different genitalia.

So, Biden supports equal rights for boys that like to kiss boys, but wants to have separate legal structures for people that happen to love someone of the same gender.

If this sounds familiar to you, that's because we tried this system before. Blacks were not allowed to enjoy the same legal status as whites, but the ever-so-kind white folks said that blacks could have equivalent schools and rights. How well did that plan work?

Marriage has at least two components: one spiritual and one legal. The government should not be involved in defining marriage in religion. But, the government should not deny rights to a group of people simply because some religions think that gay people are icky.

Marriage, in the legal sense, is about property rights, contractual rights, inheritance rights, and parental rights. Discrimination based on sexual activity is absurd: it says that some mothers are better than other mothers simply based on the gender of the people they love.

Please, someone tell me: if a man loves a man, why does that mean he is a worse father?

Words of the day: oxymoron and maverick

2008-10-03T11:19:00.000-05:00

Two vocabulary words for you today: oxymoron and maverick.

Oxymoron: a combination of contradictory words

Maverick: an independent individual who does not go along with a group

Can you form a sentence that shows you understand these two new vocabulary words?

Sarah Palin can: She is part of a team of mavericks.

Video: Mortgage financial crisis and a real solution

2008-09-30T12:41:00.004-05:00

Part 1: The problem

Part 2: The solution

The current financial crisis is the result of bad mortgages and illiquid mortgage-backed securities. These videos explain what is happening, why many people are worried about widespread bankruptcies, why the Wall street bailout will not fix the problem, and what the real solution is.

Outline:

Foreclosures have increased dramatically in the last few years
1. Some homeowners have monthly payments > 35% of their income
2. Some homeowners have ticking-time-bomb mortgages: huge balloon payments or adjustable interest rates that will make their mortgage unaffordable
3. Predatory lending also contributed to homeowners getting into mortgages they could not afford
The unexpectedly large rise in foreclosures combined with the misleading or fraudulent mortgage documents and ratings means that no one knows the value of mortgage backed securities (MBS)
No one wants to take the risk of buying the MBS, so some banks have run out of cash and failed
Many people are worried that if enough banks fail, then it will set off a chain reaction of bankruptcies--mortgage banks, investment banks, insurance companies, lending banks, and government lenders--each bankruptcy knocking over another institutions in an out-of-control spiral.
The government solution was/is to stop the chain reaction by purchasing the MBS from institutions. This will have two effects.
1. The direct effect is to infuse cash into a specific bank, allowing it to continue operating.
2. The indirect effect is to raise the mark-to-market value of MBS, increasing the asset values of banks, and allowing them to write more loans, generate more cash, and continue operating
The government solution might stop the chain reaction, but it does not solve the underlying problems: bad mortgages and illiquid MBS
A better solution is to fix the bad mortgages, which would make it possible to determine the value of the MBS, and then they would be liquid again.
How to turn bad mortgages into good mortgages:
1. Prevent foreclosure if the homeowner is paying 35% of their income (35% of their income at the time of the loan or now, whichever is greater)
2. Allow homeowners to force a restructure the loans. Go to court to change the monthly payment to 35% of their income. Interest rate is Freddie Mac 30-yr plus 1%. This gives them an OK rate, and if they can get a better rate on the market, then they will do it.
3. Sample audit the existing mortgages to determine the extent of the fraud and the bad mortgages to determine what the real value of the MBS are
4. Probably do not lower the principle because that makes it harder to calculate the value of the MBS
5. Make it easier for homeowners to sue for fraud. If the homeowner wins, then the mortgage bank has to pay attorney fees
6. Make it easier for buyers of MBS to sue the sellers of MBS for fraud
There are other possible plans to turn bad mortgages into good mortgages

Myth: lower tax rates always leads to a strong economy

2008-09-26T21:04:00.003-05:00

John McCain claimed during the debates that lower tax rates lead to stronger economies. This is not true.

A report from the GAO includes a short list of high tax rate and low tax rate countries--p. 21. Comparing tax rates to the fifteen largest economies shows that tax rates are not correlated to strong economies: only China has a low tax rate.

World's largest economies
1 United States
2 Japan--High effective tax rate
3 Germany--High effective tax rate
4 China--Low effective tax rate
5 United Kingdom
6 France--High effective tax rate
7 Italy--High effective tax rate
8 Spain
9 Canada--High effective tax rate
10 Brazil--High effective tax rate
11 Russia
12 India
13 South Korea
14 Australia
15 Mexico--High effective tax rate

If higher taxes support worker education, universal health care, and infrastructure, then it leads to a strong economy. Why are Germany and Japan, with higher tax rates than the US, doing so well? They spend the money wisely. Taxes are not the issue. If low taxes lead to a less healthy and less productive workforce, then the lower taxes will hurt the economy.

Jon Stewart: Bush Bailout Speech Just Like Iraq Speech (VIDEO)

2008-09-26T10:45:00.000-05:00

The bailout is unfair to taxpayers

2008-09-20T20:23:00.000-05:00

Allegedly, the goal of the bailout is to buy bad mortgages from banks. The homeowner will still have to pay off the mortgage though. Why not just give the money directly to the homeowners? That would have the same effect for the bank, but it would benefit the homeowners, too.

How to fix the financial crisis

2008-09-19T11:55:00.001-05:00

The financial markets are in crisis. Banks, especially investment banks, are failing. The federal government is proposing to buy all of the bad decisions from the financial sector at a cost of "hundreds of billions of dollars" to you. Banks and governments have faced this same problem in the past, and they have responded with the same solution: give more money to the banks. Why are we surprised that we have a crisis when we keep giving money to the system that produces the crisis?

Yes, we need a strong economy, but giving more money to the institutions that created this crisis is not the solution. To have a strong and growing economy, we need strong, innovative, productive companies. Which plan will produce the best companies? A) The government's proposal: have taxpayers spend hundreds of billions of dollars to reinforce weak companies that made terrible decisions. Or, B) reinforce the workers that form companies by providing better education, better job training, and a fair salary? Asked differently, do we create a strong economy by starting with weak companies and giving them tax dollars, or do we make a strong economy by investing in an effective workforce that will work to create strong companies?

The first problem with the proposed solution is that it gives money to the people that created this problem so that they can continue the problem. To make strong companies, we need to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in the workforce. Invest in education and training at all levels. Fifteen percent of adults do not have a high school diploma! Research and innovation is moving to Europe and Asia. Research in the US is largely conducted by foreign students. Education of the workforce is the key to fixing this current crisis and avoiding it in the future. We also need to stop the needless drug war. It creates a permanent underclass of unemployable convicts and it does not affect drug abuse: the people we convict for smoking marijuana are a drag on the economy. Three percent of the US population is in jail, on probation, or on parole, and it hurts the economy to have so many workers in jail because some people think they should drink alcohol instead of smoking pot.

The second problem with the proposed solution is that it concentrates even more wealth than is currently concentrated. Some people believe that since the corporations and richest Americans own all of the money, if they go bankrupt, no one will have money. If that is true, do we fix this wealth-concentration problem by taking more money from the taxpayers and concentrating more money with the wealthy? That is absurd. The solution is to end the unfair concentration of money. Increase the minimum wage, apply overtime laws to everyone, allow more legal immigration, and bring the illegal immigrants into the regulated workforce.

The third problem with the proposed solution is that it ignores another role of government: tackling collective action problems by providing infrastructure. We need a better railroad system. We need better mass transportation. We need less subsidies for the oil industry and a real solution for climate change. Just like we work together to protect all Americans from foreign invaders, fires, and criminals, we need to work together to protect Americans from viruses and bacteria by providing health care to all Americans.

The current crisis is not new. The current financial system has produced this crisis multiple times. Each time the crisis happens, we have given more money to the institutions that created the crisis. Break the cycle: give money to train workers, end the unfair concentration of wealth, and invest in infrastructure.

About Hunter Hogan

2008-09-14T14:17:00.003-05:00

I started this website in early 2001 to share my views on minimalist web design. With the notable exception of Google, minimalism never became popular, and when I grew tired of swimming against the tide, I stopped writing about it.

In the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq, I felt that by not actively opposing the war that I was tacitly supporting the war. Writing about the war, the political process, and history crystallized my interests in philosophy, political science, and law. I originally wrote "articles", but it was too time consuming to maintain. Blogging is much easier, and I use Blogger for all new content. Unfortunately, the new content fractures the information architecture of the website, and I am not inclined to convert the old content merely to fix the hierarchy.

In May 2008, I graduated from Chicago-Kent College of Law. Before law school, I worked as a teacher, web designer, stock trader, interior decorator, and professional card player.

While in law school, I launched Chicago-Kent's Legal Blog. Despite being a blog, most of the posts tend to be academic. Legal nerds might rejoice, while all others will be bored.