A long time ago we had a president who was doing a chubby intern.
And some Americans got uptight about it.
And we were told by Europeans everywhere ‘Relax, it’s just sex. He’s the leader of the country, they have mistresses, it happens get over it you uptight prudes.’
So now with Silvio Berlusconi having sex with underage prostitutes and orgies and I don’t know what-all I guess that makes Europe — and Italy in particular — about eighteen times more sophisticated [1] than us hicks in the United States and so-on and so-forth.
Y’all must be so proud.
[1] Sarcasm.
Brian Dunbar, “Sophisticated Europe”, Space for Commerce, by Brian Dunbar, 2011-04-07
April 8, 2011
QotD: the international double standard
April 7, 2011
When to drink a wine
Michael Pinkus tries to answer the inevitable question “When should I drink this wine?”
What I find myself telling people-who-ask sounds like a huge cop-out. I end up turning it around and asking them whether they like their wines fresh and fruity or with a little age on them, edging more towards the dried fruit or foresty floor.
Truth is, most people prefer their wines to have fruit rather than floor, which explains why new world producers, especially those in Chile, Argentina and Australia, do so well, their fruit is fresh, full and mouth-filling, especially at the time when most people drink them. Studies have shown that 90% of all wine is drunk within 24 hours of purchase, and 95% within 48 hours. That means that only 5% of you are lying your wines down for any length of time. That also means that you’re missing out on the best part of wine, its never-ending change-ability.
I trust that most of you have seen the movie Sideways — I seem to stick it into the DVD player (now Blu-ray) every year, it’s like catching up with old friend (granted they seem stuck in a Groundhog Day-like cycle — but until a sequel comes along I’m stuck with them). Anyway, I’m not ruining anything (for those who haven ‘t seen it) when I quote Maya here on the allure, and never-ending change-ability, of wine:
“It’s a living thing.” She begins. “… I like how wine continues to evolve, like if I opened a bottle of wine today it would taste different than if I’d opened it on any other day, because a bottle of wine is actually alive. And it’s constantly evolving and gaining complexity. That is, until it peaks … And then it begins its steady, inevitable decline.”
It’s rare for me to open a bottle of wine within 48 hours of purchase, unless I’m travelling, but I’ve seen this stat quoted frequently. I think it’s sad that so many people are missing out on the (in my opinion) greater pleasure of tasting wines that have been given an opportunity to mature. On the other hand, 90% of the wine that is made today isn’t intended to mature: wine makers respond to economic incentives just as much as everyone else does, and if that kind of wine sells well, that’s what they’ll end up producing.
Comments Off on When to drink a wine
April 3, 2011
QotD: The reason not to anticipate a simpler tax system
But boutique credits are smart politics. First, they appeal to people’s sense that they deserve a break, validate their choices, and reaffirm their sense of self-worth. The Children’s Art Tax Credit goes to good parents, ones who enroll their children in Suzuki violin lessons, not bad parents who spend their money on beer and popcorn. Second, they give people a sense of control. Tax liabilities stop being something outside of an individual’s control. Instead, the plethora of credits available mean that taxes can be reduced through planning and wise choices.
Policies are smart politics for a reason: they appeal to voters. If economists want to have a positive influence on the policy debate, they have to understand voter psychology: why do voters like special tax credits so much? “Smart politics” isn’t a criticism. Sometimes it’s a way of saying “I don’t understand why people like this policy.” At other times, it’s a way of saying, “I understand why this policy appeals to people, but if they were well-informed, they would think otherwise.”
There’s no point in telling politicians that a particular policy is “smart politics, bad economics.” They’ll take it as a compliment, and keep on making the same kind of policy choices.
Frances Woolley, “Economy Lab: Why politicians love boutique tax credits”, Globe and Mail, 2011-04-03
April 2, 2011
QotD: The nature of Harper’s “slap in the face” to Quebec
I labour over this history to place in context the astounding, even outré, comments offered by Canada’s First Separatist, Gilles Duceppe, on hearing of the proposed arrangement — which, I hasten to mention, is merely a $4.2-billion loan guarantee from Ottawa, not some massive outright subsidy. Mr. Duceppe, with a logic that can only belong to a man who gets paid to be a separatist by the government he’s trying to extinguish, called the deal “a direct attack on Quebec.”
What really bothers Mr. Duceppe and other separatists is that they want to retain Quebec’s monopoly on southbound power sales to the United States — something the Lower Churchill project, including its 1,100 km of underwater transmission cables, would threaten. “By financing the Newfoundland project, Stephen Harper has given Quebec a slap right in the face,” the BQ leader declared.
It’s one of the continuing risibilities of the Canadian federation that we cosset and pamper and pay for the separatist faction in the House of Commons, and go along with the pretense that they’re parliamentarians like any other. They are not. They displace the natural balance of the federation. They have a vested interested in seeing the parliament they attend not working. And they leap to any perceived or manufactured imperfection in our system as evidence of dark perfidy or contempt for Quebec. They warp the system. Nowhere do these observations meet with greater validation than these ludicrous comments by Duceppe on the proposed assistance to the Lower Churchill.
Rex Murphy, “Newfoundland’s three-gigawatt insult to Gilles Duceppe”, National Post, 2011-04-02
Comments Off on QotD: The nature of Harper’s “slap in the face” to Quebec
March 28, 2011
QotD: Even heroes wear out their welcome eventually
Fraternization between soldiers and civilian women in the weeks following libertion was intense, and inhibitions in the traditionally prudish Dutch society fell away. The fighting was over, but a new battlefront now loomed. By the summer of 1945, a medical officer in General Hoffmeister’s Fifth Division was confirming a sharp rise in VD rates among the troops. This was despite an efficient campaign to hand out contraceptives and warn the troops about the dangers of unprotected sex. “Perhaps,” noted the officer, “it was because the Dutch and Canadians get along well together.” There were no reports of rape in the area.
However, as the summer passed, popular resentment about the behavior of Canadian soldiers and Dutch girls began to rise, and the sight of their women arm in arm with their occupiers started to grate. “Dutch men were beaten militarily in 1940, sexually in 1945,” observed one Dutch journalist. Popular songs and doggerel reflected a new mood about the Canadians.
[. . .]
A joke hinting at the number of girls who were “getting into trouble” also began to circulate. “In twenty years, when another world war breaks out, it will not be necessary to send a Canadian expeditionary force to the Netherlands. A few ships loaded with uniforms will be enough.”
David Stafford, Endgame, 1945: The missing final chapter of World War II, Little, Brown 2007. pp 451-452.
Comments Off on QotD: Even heroes wear out their welcome eventually
March 27, 2011
March 22, 2011
March 8, 2011
QotD: Don’t look forward to the summer crop of movies
. . . let’s look ahead to what’s on the menu for this year: four adaptations of comic books. One prequel to an adaptation of a comic book. One sequel to a sequel to a movie based on a toy. One sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a movie based on an amusement-park ride. One prequel to a remake. Two sequels to cartoons. One sequel to a comedy. An adaptation of a children’s book. An adaptation of a Saturday-morning cartoon. One sequel with a 4 in the title. Two sequels with a 5 in the title. One sequel that, if it were inclined to use numbers, would have to have a 7 1/2 in the title.1
And no Inception. Now, to be fair, in modern Hollywood, it usually takes two years, not one, for an idea to make its way through the alimentary canal of the system and onto multiplex screens, so we should really be looking at summer 2012 to see the fruit of Nolan’s success. So here’s what’s on tap two summers from now: an adaptation of a comic book. A reboot of an adaptation of a comic book. A sequel to a sequel to an adaptation of a comic book. A sequel to a reboot of an adaptation of a TV show. A sequel to a sequel to a reboot of an adaptation of a comic book. A sequel to a cartoon. A sequel to a sequel to a cartoon. A sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a cartoon. A sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a movie based on a young-adult novel.2 And soon after: Stretch Armstrong. You remember Stretch Armstrong, right? That rubberized doll you could stretch and then stretch again, at least until the sludge inside the doll would dry up and he would become Osteoporosis Armstrong? A toy that offered less narrative interest than bingo?
[. . .]
1. Captain America, Cowboys & Aliens, Green Lantern, and Thor; X-Men: First Class; Transformers 3; Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides; Rise of the Apes; Cars 2 and Kung Fu Panda 2; The Hangover Part II; Winnie the Pooh; The Smurfs in 3D; Spy Kids 4; Fast Five and Final Destination 5; Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2.
2. The Avengers; Spider-Man (3D); Men in Black 3 (3D); Star Trek untitled; Batman 3; Monsters, Inc. 2; Madagascar 3; Ice Age: Continental Drift in 3D; The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn, Part 2.
Mark Harris, “The Day the Movies Died”, GQ, 2011-02
Comments Off on QotD: Don’t look forward to the summer crop of movies
March 7, 2011
QotD: Mercantilism
You actually had a short, but interesting chapter in your book explaining why you think our trade balance with China is mostly irrelevant. Could you give people a short, but sweet synopsis of that argument?
Adam Smith was the first to point this out in the Wealth of Nations. The common wisdom at the time, mercantilism was the name it went by, was that the way a nation got rich was by exporting things. In return for the exports they’d get gold. And Smith’s going, I’m paraphrasing broadly here, “You can’t eat gold, you can’t kiss gold, and gold won’t keep you warm at night. Gold is just gold.”
He said the exports, that’s real stuff, and you’re giving it away in favor of gold. He said imports are the good thing. Imports are when you’re getting something you like. You’re getting French wine. You’re getting American tobacco. You’re getting furs from Russia, getting whatever they were getting back in those days. He said exports are the way you pay for those imports. So imports are Christmas morning. Exports are January’s Visa bill.
People getting so upset because everything seems to be made in China — I understand it on the level of the jobs have moved overseas. I think it’s probably an important thing to remember that if the jobs hadn’t moved overseas, they probably would have just gone away. So, it’s not like the Japanese have all of our car making jobs.
John Hawkins, “The P.J. O’Rourke Interview”, Grendel Report, 2010-10-11
Comments Off on QotD: Mercantilism
March 2, 2011
QotD: Humour
A German I know will on occasion tell you his father died in the concentration camps. He waits for the concerned and properly sympathetic faces and then adds that he got drunk and fell out of a watchtower. Europeans find that boorish, faintly crass and rather tasteless; the English love it. It’s a proper joke, and a German doing it is double bubble. The surprise is that neither the Europeans or the English realize that it’s not a joke at all, his father really did fall out of a watch tower and it’s poignant and sad because his son never knew him, never met his dad.
A.A. Gill, The Angry Island: Hunting the English, p. 112.
Comments Off on QotD: Humour
February 27, 2011
QotD: Big government and big unions
The Times managed to get the salient feature of the story entirely wrong. They were not an “anti-government” mob, but a government mob, a mob of “public servants” objecting to austerity measures that would end, for example, the tradition of 14 monthly paychecks per annum. You read that right: the Greek public sector cannot be bound by anything so humdrum as temporal reality. So, when it was mooted that the “workers” might henceforth receive a mere 12 monthly paychecks per annum, they rioted. Their hapless victims — a man and two women — were a trio of clerks trapped in a bank when the mob set it alight and then obstructed emergency crews attempting to rescue them.
You don’t have to go to Athens to find “public servants” happy to take it out on the public. In Madison, politicized doctors provide fake sick notes for politicized teachers to skip class. In New York’s Christmas snowstorm, Sanitation Department plough drivers are unable to clear the streets, with fatal consequences for some residents. On the other hand, they did manage to clear the snow from outside the Staten Island home of Sanitation Dept head honcho John Doherty, while leaving all surrounding streets pristinely clogged. Three hundred Sanitation Department workers have salaries of over $100,000 per year. In retirement, you get a pension of 66 grand per annum plus excellent health benefits, all inflation proofed.
That’s what “collective bargaining” is about: It enables unions rather than citizens to set the price of government. It is, thus, a direct assault on republican democracy, and it needs to be destroyed. Unlovely as they are, the Greek rioters and the snarling thugs of Madison are the logical end point of the advanced social democratic state: not an oppressed underclass, but a spoiled overclass, rioting in defense of its privileges and insisting on more subsidy, more benefits, more featherbedding, more government.
Mark Steyn, “States of the Unions”, SteynOnline, 2011-02-26
Comments Off on QotD: Big government and big unions
February 19, 2011
QotD: “Would Shakespeare Have Survived Today’s Copyright Laws?”
Turow, along with Authors Guild executive director Paul Aiken and Authors Guild board member (and apparent Shakespeare expert) James Shapiro, have an op-ed piece in the NY Times that a whole bunch of you have been sending in, in which they assert that Shakespeare might not have been able to survive the web era, because of all of this “piracy.” The argument is quite a bit stretched, but see if you can follow me: because playwrights had physical scarcity, in that they could keep people out of the playhouses unless people paid to enter, it allowed playwrighting to flourish. They call this a “cultural paywall.” Then there’s some sort of bizarre leap about how copyright is really the same thing. It’s not. And, then it leaps to something about how stricter copyright laws are, ipso facto, better. The evidence for this? Shhhh, don’t bother the Authors Guild bosses with logic! And, of course, the inevitable punchline is the idea that Shakespeare wouldn’t have survived in this online era with all this piracy and stuff.
Of course, it’s difficult to think of a worse example than Shakespeare for this argument (and sort of bizarre that Shapiro would sign off on an op-ed that so thoroughly misrepresents Shakespeare). Of course, as most of you know, an awful lot of Shakespeare’s works are copies (sometimes directly) of earlier works. Sometimes they’re derivative, but other times, he copied wholesale from others. So the bigger question might not be if Shakespeare could survive all the file sharing going on today, but whether or not he’d be able to produce any of his classic works, since they’d all be tied up in lawsuits over copyright infringement.
Mike Masnick, “Would Shakespeare Have Survived Today’s Copyright Laws?”, Techdirt, 2011-02-18
February 18, 2011
QotD: Drink an imported beer and make Mother Gaia cry
According to PricewaterhouseCoopers partner and renewables specialist Michael Timar:
“If someone saves money from having cavity wall insulation put into their house, but then spends it on something which produces carbon emissions in its manufacturing, or takes an extra journey, then the environmental benefit is lost.
“You have to think about what the effect is all the way down the chain — that if you use less, you might actually end up consuming more.”
Mr Timar warned that people who had saved £100 by cutting their energy bills could use the cash to fund extra leisure activities, such as drinking imported alcoholic beverages in bars — or electronic gadgets, which are often shipped from overseas.
This is beautiful:
It has been calculated by environmental experts that one single bottle of imported beer uses 900g of CO2 — wiping out two-thirds of the annual carbon savings made by replacing all light bulbs in an average home with energy-saving models.
Drink two and you’re in credit.
Tim Blair, “Tim Blair Blog: DON’T DO ANYTHING”, Daily Telegraph, 2011-02-18
Comments Off on QotD: Drink an imported beer and make Mother Gaia cry
February 17, 2011
February 16, 2011
QotD: For dictators, storm troopers are not a luxury
A major reason for the inability of the recently deposed Egyptian dictatorship to suppress anti-government demonstrations was the lack of a large, loyal and reliable security force. Not having such a force handy was unthinkable for any security conscious dictator. For example, in Iraq, Saddam Hussein had his Republican Guard, a force that was filled with well paid, well armed men who were, above all, loyal to Saddam. All other successful dictatorships have similar forces. Russia had the KGB, which not only employed spies, but also several divisions of troops trained and equipped to deal with rebellions by the population, or the armed forces. Iran has a similar force, the Revolutionary Guard, that serves a similar role as the old KGB. During World War II, Adolf Hitler had the SS, Gestapo and his private army, the Waffen SS, all of which kept Germany fighting until the very end.
Former Egyptian ruler Hosni Mubarak got lazy and greedy by filling his “regime maintenance” forces with conscripts (as troops) and recent college graduates (as officers). Theses security forces, like the 325,000 paramilitary police in the Central Security Services (belonging to the Interior Ministry, nor the Defense Ministry), were more loyal to the people than to the small group of corrupt politicians running the country. Things had gotten so bad that the small secret police force had taken to hiring criminal gangs to harass or intimidate visible opponents of the government. These thugs fled if faced with serious opposition. And that’s what they got during February, 2011.
“Murphy’s Law: Storm Troopers Are Not A Luxury”, Strategy Page, 2011-02-16
Comments Off on QotD: For dictators, storm troopers are not a luxury
