Let's talk about poverty

So I see that John Edwards has finally hopped off the fence and picked a candidate. It seems like he was waiting for a winner to become apparent before making his endorsement. As I laid in bed, suffering through Edward's speech, my ears perked up when he mentioned poverty. The main reason he is supporting Barack Obama is because Obama plans to cut poverty in half within ten years. Those words seemed to echo of Lyndon Johnson's 'Great Society'. Those words sent shudders through my body; not because I favor poverty, but rather I fear the means used to eliminate that poverty. If there is one thing the state can never do, it is eliminate poverty.

Lyndon Johnson had good intentions when he proposed his war on poverty in the 1960s. America saw a great bloating in social programs, aimed at eliminating poverty. Welfare and Medicare are both prime examples of this farcical mission. Until the mid 1990s, Welfare payments were enough for a single mother to subsist. If someone is able to subsist at the teat of the government, then why work? Instead of lifting up someone's lot, the state guaranteed a permanent underclass by paying people simply for being poor.

Whenever I hear of a politician speak about eliminating poverty, I just shake my head. The state replacing a free market in allocating capital is bound for failure. It's what we saw with Welfare, and it most certainly is what we will see with Social Security. These are all bloated programs that are aimed at eliminating poverty. The only way for poverty to truly be reduced is through growth in private business.

The state has tried to hire people for make-work projects (Tennessee Valley Authority) and they've tried paying them for doing nothing (Welfare). Programs that aim to eliminate poverty only end up perpetuating poverty. It's no wonder that the times where we see poverty decrease is through real income rises, due to higher demand for labor. If business is growing, they need more hands to help them grow. The more they grow, the higher wages that business will pay for labor. Business growth will always do more in alleviating poverty than either John Edwards or Barack Obama can ever imagine. I'll just keep my fingers crossed, and hope the next president doesn't repeat the mistakes of FDR or Lyndon Johnson.
Read more...

Red Queen

Since I've been sick these last couple days, sitting still in my bed, my mind has been busy at work while my body refuses. Being sick reminded me of a book I read about a year ago, called Red Queen: Evolution in Human Nature. It's about this constant race that humans have with bacteria and viruses. Our immune systems and viruses are constant adapting to do battle. A virus will evolve constantly until it can find a host. That host must adapt and evolve as well if they hope to beat the virus and return to good health. The author uses Lewis Carroll's character, The Red Queen, as a metaphor for this constant struggle. No matter how fast or long the Red Queen runs, she is always in the same place. It's an effective metaphor because the balance between human and microbes is ever-fragile. Each holding the keys to each other's destruction, yet never quite able to finish the job. This stuff is normally fascinating to me, but being sick gives me a chance to witness the exchange first hand.

My immune system is now struggling to defeat whatever internal infection I have. It could be bacteria or a virus. Either way, something is multiplying exponentially inside me. While the microbe multiplies, my immune system is busy not only trying to defeat the invader but also make copies for later. That microbe will never be able to penetrate again, even though it doesn't do much good. At the rate of reproduction, a virus can easily multiply thousands if not millions in a few days. Each of those viruses are different genetically, each hoping to find a host in which to replicate some more. Inside me, a battle is raging. My immune system will probably win out, but whatever I have will live on many generations. In the end, the microbes will win. They lose so many battes, but in the end they will win the war.

Evolution is always fascinating. Knowing that everything is always changing around us is stunning. We are always changing, but never really going anywhere. Our balance is at best tenous, and anything can happen at any time. It adds value to a world than many take for granted. The more I learn about little things like this, the more insignificant I feel. But it's not a bad insignificance. Even the most famous people of our time will be gone in a few hundred years as generations slowly forget. Being insignificant reminds me that everything continues on, whether anyone's here or not.
Read more...

How the mighty can fall

I know in this blog I've usually stuck to economics and politics. They usually dominate my reading, but I still read sports religiously as well. Growing up in Denver, I've always followed all Colorado sports as well as the national sports scene. As I grow older I look back at a lot of events with a different perspective. As analytical skills grow, you start to see things in sports that you didn't see as a kid. One example I can think of was in 1990, when Buster Douglas knocked out Mike Tyson.

I remember when it happened, everyone was speechless. It was unreal. This bruiser had been knocking people out left and right. He had so much going for him, I'm sure some were ready to put him in the company of Ali, Robinson, Marciano, etc. Then that night in Tokyo, Mike Tyson's Heel was laid bare for all opponents to see. The knockout showed what Tyson's life would be like from then on. He was sent to jail for rape shortly after and the downward spiral continued. Now twice a felon, Tyson lost his last fight to Kevin McBride right here in DC in 2005. How the mighty have fallen.

By the time Mike Tyson was knocked out in Tokyo, his fall had been well underway. I believe his downfall can be traced back to his trainer's death in late 1985. Cus D'Amato had helped Tyson turn his life around after ending up in Reform School as a teen. D'Amato trained Tyson, and was much like a father figure to Tyson. When D'Amato died, it was right as Tyson was ascending to great stardom. The man who had looked out for Tyson's best interests was gone, and the jackals were free to feast. For four years before the Tokyo fight, Tyson had not been trained to contend. Many sports historians will say, and I agree, that Tyson was still very raw.

The years he was knocking every one out, he only had one strategy: knock the other guy out. For those amateur and early professional years, that worked. For "tomato cans" and "has-beens," Tyson was a formitable force. Most were unable to withstand his early flurries of jabs, hooks, and upper-cuts. For those who could, they were so busy guarding that they were unable to mount any offense. Once he fought someone who could take his early punishment, and punch back, Tyson was in deep trouble.

As Tyson lay on the mat, hardly able to see with one eye almost closed, he must have been so confused. No one had ever been able to box with Tyson. Buster Douglas exposed Tyson's lack of defense, his unpreparedness, and his lax attitude. Tyson's training for that fight had been cursory. He obviously had not prepared for the fight, his trainers were sycophants. Tyson simply had no answer for Douglas' night of near-perfect boxing. Douglas continuously corned Tyson, jabbed precisely, and kept Tyson's flurries ineffective with his long reach. Although Tyson knocked Douglas down early, the whole fight belonged to Douglas. What Buster Douglas showed every Tyson opponent in the future was that Mike Tyson was a one-dimensional fighter. Tyson lacked the training support to teach the young fighter good defense and endurance. Training support that formerly came from Cus D'Amato.


The lesson of this downfall exposes a great truth in sports. Get better or get passed. The "Iron Mike" Tyson era lasted only as long as fighters feared him. He never received the guidance and direction needed to go beyond bully. Tyson never adapted, and he never recovered after that fight. Sports will always amplify an athlete's weakness. Most of the time the obselete athlete leaves the sport forcefully. It is the rarest of athletes, like Michael Jordan, John Elway or Ted Williams, who lose some physical gift, but yet somehow stay great in their sport. Mike Tyson never had what these athletes had, once he was exposed, he was never the same. His fury was usually weathered and Tyson would end up losing, either by knockout, TKO, or a decision. At least his story reveals what can happen to all of us in life when our specialty becomes obselete. Only those who can adapt will succeed, the ones who can't become obselete and sink. As true it is in sport, so too is it in life.
Read more...

To Protect and Delay

I've been meaning to complain about something that I feel does little good: speedtraps. I don't drive very much, but I do take the bus home from work every day. Today traffic was especially horrendous, some may chalk it up to regular DC Metro area traffic, but I saw something else. Three or four police cruisers were pulling over vehicles for assorted offenses; they were writing the tickets as the bus slowly crept by. As I watched those patrol officers doing their job, I had to think: is this necessary? Is it possible that this speed trap, which has all the best intentions, actually making traffic worse? How does one weigh the supposed greater good versus efficiency of traffic? Anyone who knows me knows the answer to that question, especially when the greater good being served is not clear at all.

I believe that those police officers are actually making more traffic simply by being there. Everyone knows that driving behavior changes when the boys in blue are out. Suddenly everyone's hands are at ten and two, their seatbelts are quickly clasped and most importantly, they slow down to or below the speed limit. I'm all for safety, but sudden slowdowns caused by traffic police presence is not for the greater good. What happens is a giant accordion effect, like a catepillar contracting before expanding. Traffic all slows down, and the effect trickles further and further back. Before you know it, the police have caused far more traffic by simply being present than if they were not.

There are other ways to monitor driving behavior, like cameras and sensors. In Germany, the police would put a radar in the back of a beat up van, pulled over on the side of the road snapping pictures and speeds of passing drivers. These unintrusive devices can ensure a steady flow of traffic while satisfying the need to catch speeders. I simply argue that a police officer's presence during an already congested rush hour is more harmful than good. Traffic inevitably slows, making congestion that much worse. Are the few speeders caught worth the headache that the police cause simply by being present?
Read more...