It took me a minute to figure it out, but then it seemed incredibly obvious.
Was it obvious to you?
I’ll put the solution in the first comment.
Those who generally oppose restrictions on economic liberty (like me) tend to think that there’s a looming crisis for Social Security and the sooner it is reformed the better; but the Global Warming issue is probably not a real crisis that warrants drastic changes, and we can deal with any potential problems better later. Those who tend to support economic restrictions take exactly the opposite positions.
Some may say that this shows how we are all a bit dishonest when it comes to evaluating the dangers of potential problems, and the urgency of addressing them immediately, depending on how the “problem” fits into our world view; and I suppose we are to some extent.
Of course, that doesn’t mean that it’s not the case that one side is correct on both of these issues. And, of course, I think that the anti-economic-restrictions side is the correct one.
I may be wrong (but I’m not).
I will always have fond memories of Johnny Carson.
I remember how great it was to stay up late, as a kid, to watch the Tonight Show. He was funny and charming.
I remember many jokes from the Tonight Show, but two that stand out in my mind are:
When doing Carnac The Magnificent (a psychic) he would hold an envelope to his head, say an answer, and then open the envelope to read the question. The one I remember is when the answer was “Catch-22” and the question was “What would the Dodgers do if you hit them 100 pop flies.”
I also remember, when Jaws was first released and many people were frightened of swimming in the ocean, he gave some tips to avoid shark attacks two of which were: “Don’t leave Kansas City” and “Use the buddy system. If a shark attacks, give him your buddy!”
I like Jay Leno, too (I saw him perform in Vegas earlier this month), but Johnny had a different kind of charm and wit that was very special.
I’ve managed to get involved in a debate about the theoretical acceptability of torture (and other possible violations of the non-aggression principle) in the comments of a post over at the hardline libertarian site no-treason.com.
It’s getting tiresome for me, but I thought some of you might be interested.
It’s always unnerving to me to forget things I used to know.
This morning, while shaving, I thought about Gilligan’s Island (for some unknown reason) and decided to go through the actors’ names. I haven’t watched the show in about 30 years or so, but I used to watch it a lot as a kid and knew the theme song and the actors’ names. To determine the order, I decided to replay (in my mind) the relevant portion of the theme song:
| Gilligan: | Bob Denver |
| the skipper too: | Alan Hale Jr. |
| the millionaire: | Jim Backus |
| and his wife: | Natalie Schafer |
| the movie star: | Tina Louise |
| the professor: | Russell Johnson |
| and Mary Ann: | ???? complete blank |
I had forgotten the name of the actress who played Mary Ann! I used to know it. I was sure that I could pick it out of a list; but I couldn’t recall it at will.
That was frustrating. The information was in my brain somewhere but I couldn’t get to it easily. I’m a database guy and I tend to think of this kind of thing as being like indexes getting corrupted. I’m sure that the neural structures used with memories are very different from computer database structures, and there are probably many paths to the data that might still be intact if I could figure out how to use them (a hint, perhaps?).
I’m sure you’ll be relieved to know that I did remember her name (Dawn Wells) within a few minutes.
But, as I say, it’s unnerving to think that I can’t remember things that I used to be able to remember. It makes me feel like a different person than I used to be. I know that this is true, in some sense, but I don’t want to lose what I had.
Perhaps my brain is optimizing and using resources on recently used links as opposed to older ones; but I’m not finding very much comfort in that thought.
This is a great suggestion by Lance Frizzell, a 2nd Lt Medical Platoon Leader
now serving in Iraq.
He proposes that those people who wanted to serve as human shields for Saddam’s assets come to Iraq now and serve as human shields to protect Iraqis who want to vote in the upcoming elections.
I suspect that there won’t be much interest in doing that. And that tells you something about what they really value and what they really oppose.
I really like Penn & Teller.
I’ve seen them perform many times (mostly with my son). I suggest that if you ever get a chance to do so, you should take advantage of it.
Their magic shows are cool. The tricks are great, and their irreverence is fun. They’re willing to defy conventions by explaining and demonstrating how many tricks are done, while preserving the awe of amazing illusions. One interesting gimmick they do is an “honor system” trick in which you can choose whether or not to watch and see how the trick is done. They also play with many other ideas in their shows like animal rights, miracles, symbolism, mysticism, etc.
I also really like their Showtime show: Bullshit!, in which they debunk lots of popular hoaxes.
They are both very talented and amazing entertainers; but Penn is my favorite. I love to listen to his patter. He’s smart and fun to behold. I was also impressed by this interview he did for Reason magazine.
So, I started to read Sock with high expectations…and they were met and exceeded.
It’s not a conventional murder mystery. It’s really an artfully presented set of philosophical observations with a murder mystery going on in the background. It’s quite unconventional. I should say that the gimmick of including lots of pop-culture references (mostly lyrics) in most paragraphs was weird at first, but I began to appreciate it. I don’t want to say too much about the content (it ranges all over the board), but I should note that Penn eloquently expresses his passion for reality, and imagination, and keeping those categories straight.
I had a great time in Vegas. I even managed to gamble quite a bit and wind up slightly ahead!
I also read Penn Jillette’s book: Sock. It was great. I might write more about it later; but for now, I’ll just recommend it.
I’ve got a lot to catch up on. I hope to post again soon.
Posting might be lighter than usual for a while because I’m on vacation in Vegas for a week. I do have occasional access to the Internet (obviously), so it’s still possible (but I doubt I’ll be reading much current stuff that might inspire posts).
I hope you all are having as much fun as I am (but I doubt it).
Rich Tucker has a retirement plan:
I wrote myself an I.O.U.
“Dear Rich: I promise to pay you the sum of $50,000 on Jan. 1, 2018.
(signed) Rich Tucker.”
That piece of paper is now stored in a safe, along with other vital documents (passports, house deed, car title). I’ll do the same thing once a year each year until 2018. This plan should carry me comfortably through 2032.
There. Retirement planned for.
…
See any problems with my scheme? It really seems flawless. After all, I wouldn’t lie to myself. If I’ve vowed to pay myself $50,000, well, I’m going to do it. No matter how hard or long I have to work in 2018 to earn that retirement money.
This is exactly how the U.S. government is preparing for everyone’s retirement. Social Security is the national retirement plan. But, starting in 2018, there’s nothing there but I.O.U.s.
Nice illustration.
A Reasonable Man 