Feed on
  1. If you read the popular progressive literature, you would come to believe that only progressives actually care about other people. It’s a startling observation, no? There’s no reason to try to rebut this aside from its obvious absurdity.
  2. Do most people actually care about other people in the first place? Regarding the progressives, a group with which I used to have much sympathy and continue to be fascinated by, if you examine the disgust and vituperation steaming off of their web pages for anyone who is NOT a progressive, it sure seems hard to believe they care about anyone other than their small group of wonks. Lord forbid anyone utter the word “conservative” or “libertarian” in their presence – the spears and arrows soon come out. And let’s not talk about “the rich?” If a group of folks wanted to champion itself as actually giving a hoot about humanity, it sure is odd to see them treat some portions of humanity as subhuman – if I were into analogies now would be a perfect time, but it would be lost on folks and likely misinterpreted. Let’s just say such treatment is reminiscent of how certain groups of people are claimed to be treated by none other than the progressives. What is particularly odd about the progressives is that their worldview seems to rule out the possibility that there are actually some poor conservatives and libertarians out there, that there are actually some underrepresented conservatives and libertarians out there, and that when blanket statements like, “Conservatives believe …!” (they KNOW this because a ridiculously put together poll says so) they therefore are calling every single conservative and libertarian similar, and not worthy of individual consideration. Strange for a group that supposedly champions the opposite.
    NOTE: this is not a particularly generous assessment and commits the very “group” association of all “progressives” as being the same that I quite abhor. I think grammatically we need to come up with a way to talk about “a prominent theme that is encountered by public representatives of a group of people who like to fancy themselves by a particular name …” but that’s a little cumbersome.
  3. What, exactly, does “working class” mean? I have a funny feeling that I am not included among this group. I wonder if my more progressive colleagues would be honored with the label?
  4. I’d like to start a new movement. It’s the “what, exactly, do you want?” movement. When I hear someone railing against some condition or some supposedly ignorant thought that a group of people hold or propose some policy, I want to see people say exactly what it is that they want. I want to see, for example, what kind of pay distribution they think is OK. I want to see what people are permitted into what occupations and at what levels, and I want to see it in fine detail. I want to see people say exactly who should pay more in taxes, who exactly should be more regulated, on a very detailed basis. So, if you think “the rich” should nonetheless do more, I want you to say how much more, I want you to investigate my current income, my current assets and spending habits and tell me what ought to go. I want to see folks apply every bit of the logic that they apply to broadly defined and fuzzily observed groups down to themselves, and if their ideas are not applied consistently to themselves I’d like to see why they are exempt from it. After all, in the context of the global poor and global inequality, even the most moderate apportioned of Americans is disgustingly rich and part of the “global 1%.” When I hear arguments that the minimum wage should be increased, I want people to go into the small stores and shops that have workers, identify who is underpaid and why they are underpaid, and tell the shop owners that they must pay all of their workers more, and to tell them why this is so, and tell them why as entrepreneurs that they have an extra responsibility to pay people more while the wonks and really serious people get to tap away at their keyboards demanding it all the while not hiring a single person themselves. And more. It will never happen of course.
  5. I am very much in favor of a generous welfare state. I’d change it of course, but I am myself skeptical that the changes I prefer would actually be an improvement on what we have now. I’ve been wrong about a few things in the past too. I would wish, on this labor day, for people to admit they might not know how to do things, and that they have been wrong in the past. I’d like them to mean it. It will never happen of course.
  6. I am very much in favor of a generous welfare state. Among the changes I’d like to see are cultural ones. I would start by inculcating in all people that sure you may be entitled to “help” by some moral philosophy, but that there are conditions upon which your entitlement should be granted, including among them gratitude and a requirement that you actually ASK for the help that you will be getting, and that this is not a one-shot deal. Of course, this will never happen.
  7. Labor Day is every day.

Say the really serious people.

And they continue, “the point is to change it.”

How’s that for reporting the news? Read the piece. Don’t you think they’d get bored parroting the same “points” time and again?

Here’s a shocker – maybe:

1) People don’t care nearly as much about “inequality” as the wonks do

2) Policy preferred by the world changers actually is counterproductive?

3) Policy preferred by the world changers is relatively impotent?

4) Here’s a real cynical take – maybe politically the world changers do better when there is more inequality?

But I’m not nearly as confident in any of that as are the world changers.

Stuff It

In 2005 Dr. Francine Palma-Long pleaded for the establishment of new government regulations that would limit portion sizes in restaurants by 50% to 67%.

Let’s not at all argue with this sentiment. Americans are getting fat and we need to do something about it – so goes the argument. The argument continues that food corporations are infamous for increasing portion sizes and giving customers more than they need.


But then I just finished listening, actually overhearing a couple of 18-year olds, argue that corporations routinely underpay workers and rip people off (for example notice how a half gallon container of ice cream is now closer to 1.5 quarts).

So … do corporations cause problems by giving folks too much? Or by giving folks too little?

At an unnamed small-research university located in the Great Lakes area:

photo 3

photo 1

photo 2

Not that I would have any direct knowledge, but I am told that this happens at least every two weeks over the course of the year. Good luck solving global warming, world poverty, infrastructure planning, etc.

Just finished reading Mark Goldman’s history of Buffalo called City on the EdgeIt is certainly recommended if you are a history or architecture buff and love Western, NY. The book goes through the glorious and agonizing history of the city, neighborhood by neighborhood. While it doesn’t beat you over the head with the theme, it is evident, as in many writings that involved the evolution of American urban areas, that “white flight” is something that takes some blame for the decline of inner cities.

For the record, my family did not “flee” until well after we all left the nest, here is the home we grew up in (sans bars), and we did not leave until the early 2000s (our youngest was born in 1975).

Every time I hear the narrative about “white flight” leaving and therefore damaging/gutting the inner city, something seems not quite right. Ask yourself, what does such a narrative actually imply? Ever since I became involved in higher education I have been taught that I, being white and male by accident of birth, am among the oppressive class, even if I grew up lower income and comparatively disadvantaged. And as a member of the oppressor class, I contribute to the oppression of all folks who are not like me. Let’s accept that, fine. But what then does this imply about the state of the inner city since the oppressors and exploiters have fled? You would think that intellectuals and the public at large would not bemoan white flight but rather they ought to celebrate it. Wouldn’t it be a fantastic thing to have the folks that are oppressing you just pick up and leave? Or does the narrative surrounding white flight imply that it is easier to exploit and oppress from afar than it is from nearby? Who knows?

There is quite another implication of this narrative, and I am not the first person to make this point. Isn’t the view that “middle-class whites fleeing” is a problem really, really, really paternalistic at best and insulting and demeaning at worst? What this thought is implying is that the Wintercow family is doing great right now, but if a few of my neighbors decide to pick up and leave, and are replaced by a different set of individuals, then my family will fall apart. No need for further commentary on that point.

These points don’t have to be political, I think they merely result from being able to think through the logic of one’s thoughts and ideas. It might even be the case that white flight has indeed ruined the inner city, but if that is the case then I think the narratives about such a thing might have to be adjusted and the causal mechanisms that lead from flight to urban decay ought to be made a bit more clear.

Information Overload

There is no doubt in my mind that Universities are doing themselves and their students a disservice with the amount of information that they slam them with to start their college careers. Many schools. ours included, have nearly an entire week of new student Orientation that is packed from morning to evening with activities and information sessions. Amidst this they are sent survey after survey after survey and asked to take small training after training after training such as an alcohol awareness program and more. It’s not that this stuff is not useful, for the most part it is, but in an age particularly when young people are accustomed to obtaining information in fast and bite-sized chunks, I am convinced nearly all of the orientation effort is going to be completely unnoticed even as students are immersed in it for a week.

Just think of how you scroll through quickly on some of my longer posts. Just think of how little you absorb from very long e-mails. Maybe you bookmark or save these things for later. Similarly, while knowing where the language lab is, or whether the library is, or what hours the counseling center is open, or what happens on homecoming weekend and such are important, it seems to me that this is all stuff that can be learned on the students’ own. In fact, it is pretty shocking that for college, which used to be  rite of passage into independence, responsibility and real adulthood, that universities treat new students like enfeebled, incapable, waffling children. Their hands are held through almost everything, including the “intimidating” open curriculum we have (more on that under a different pen name somewhere else … ha ha). What I found from getting to know many of these students is that they don’t NEED their hands held, even for those who have been spoonfed for most of their young lives. They are all quite enterprising, energetic and resourceful people – that’s what makes them really fun (and sometimes frustrating) to be around.

I know full well why we do all of this – some of it legal and some of it doctrinal – so I am not even suggesting that any of this could change. However, what needs to be recognized is that universities get one chance to make a first impression on young people., and this seems to be a shockingly enfeebling, boring, and anti-academic impression to be making. Maybe I am wrong – maybe by showing students where the bathrooms are and making them play duck-duck-goose with their fellow hallmates, they get REALLY jazzed up for the schooling that is to begin next week? But man oh man, precious little time is spent on academics during this introduction, precious little effort is spent getting kids excited for their intellectual journeys outside of a few platitudinous speeches, and we let an entire week of students being together on campus go by where they cannot actually discover the culture of the university for themselves – they are carted from meeting to speech to contrived social gathering to a “mandatory” service day and so on. Again, I am not sure I know exactly what to do with 1,300 new students, but if I were running my own university I know it would be different.

I get my new freshmen tomorrow – each gets to meet with me for 15 minutes. Then they have jam packed schedules right until and through registration on Friday. Classes start a week from today.In a world of information overload, Id go simple. I’d spend the entire first week on one or two academic and cultural aspects of the college life and that’s it. I’d leave some websites, brochures and resource packets for each student in their dorms, and I’d make sure all of the upperclassmen were around to provide mentorship and guidance. I’d have academic programming planned to the hilt, with serious and big time lectures and seminars and some other creative exercises planned, but that’s it. The kids are resourceful. They’d figure out what they need and where to go and when things open and close. After all, many of them have and will travel to foreign countries on their own, taken road trips on their own or with friends, and so on, and they managed not only to get by, but to make the experiences awesome. They’re bright adults, let them be that way when they get to college. Yes, yes, yes, I understand all of the legal implications and all of the CYA reasons for the stuff, but I bet that could be trickled to kids slowly throughout their first term, and also legally could be covered through other means. So, just as people are extremely enamored and frustrated that people in the world can starve while people less than 100 miles away are not only well-fed but over-fed, I too am enamored by the fact that we have this awesome chance to set an awesome intellectual and academic tone for our new students, and we fritter it away on Tea and Scones and the Silly Olympics. This is not to say that all of the events are not good, or fun, or put together by really bright and well-meaning people, not at all. In fact I quite love the week of programming. But rather I’m making a meta-point, and many such meta-points could be made.

My family and I attended a swanky golf tournament yesterday (the Barclays, played at the austere Ridgewood Country Club). Needless to say, the place is populated with a slice of folks from the very top of the income distribution with a sprinkling of “regular Joes” tossed in. Two small obsvervations:

  1. I have rarely encountered more rude, self-centered and obnoxious people in any other setting I’ve been in. Crowding around professional athletes like they were the Pope. Budging little children so that swankily clad elites could get a better glimpse at Phil Mickleson, budging through lines of patiently waiting people, peeing off in the trees when there are hundreds of portapotties around the course, and more.
  2. Related, here is what I encountered in the first port-a-potty I entered:



I have been running around with my camera taking pictures of the routine flotsam one encounters, even in the swankiest and richest of places. But folks, if at a swanky golf tournament we can’t get people to behave with a modicum of decency, throwing plastic bottles into the port-a-potty toilets, then you are not going to get anything serious done. I don’t care how good and thoughtful policy is – there needs to be pretty darn dramatic cultural and ethical changes to go along with any economic and political change. Saldy, there is little understanding of how, actually, to get these changes to take place. But at a swanky country club, I see rich dudes pushing kids around and throwing Coke Bottles into toilet bowls … in other words, we’re doomed.

Directive 9-286


Come on, given ‘em just a little more time, then milk and honey will flow.


Wonkblog: It’s going to take a lot more money to fill the NIH funding gap.

  • Wintercow: hold your breath, but if government is going to be spending money, the NIH is probably a pretty good place to do it. And yes, some of the grant approval process is messed up and the agency is as subject to public choice issues as any … but
  • Wintercow: even doubling the budget means a total of a mere $60 billion. And our government, at all levels, spends $6 trillion. Without a tirade today, let’s just remind folks that if they want windmills subsidized, if they want expanded health insurance payments for the middle class, if they want universities to be subsidized, if they want all of their zillions of little pet ideas funded that “people have a right to” then this is what you get.
  • Wintercow: I no longer take seriously any idea, argument or article about government that does not recognize the above, and also that doesn’t propose what to spend less on to get what is deemed to be so important.

Noticed: without naming names, at a University I am familiar with, you would be simply astounded at the man-hours and money that are chugged away at things that provide not only no educational value, but no ancillary value. And these are all hard-working, sincere people.

Question: when we examine federal and state and local government employment and spending, has anyone seen a reliable estimate of how much is spent and employed “privately” for compliance and in related operations? For example, at our private university we have a Title IX coordinator and a staff of people that do all kinds of compliance work with other rules.

Alex Tabarrok: Ferguson and the Debtor’s prison, a MUST read. Given time, he could extend that idea to more than just the criminal justice system.

TNR: Ivy League schools are over-rated.

  • Wintercow: while there is certainly something to that point, I think the generalization ends up weakening the argument.
  • Wintercow: I’ve both attended and taught at a particular Ivy League school, and without saying much about the admissions process, if you had a motivated kid, there is nothing that is not available to them at these schools – including a great ability to think critically. The points made above, I think, are endemic of a larger problem and not unique to Ivy League schools
  • Wintercow: heresy, I know, but at this moment and the landscape I see, I would NOT pay for my kids (much more than I am already paying for their grammar schooling) to attend either Ivy League schools or the types that I currently teach at. I am not sure I would want them to attend any college at all – right now the plan is to give them whatever money we have stashed away for college and have them do with it what they please when they become college age.

Here is a view of Basin Mountain, from Pyramid Peak:


That cone behind is Mount Marcy, off to the right (North) you can see the nice side of Saddleback (the other side is quite cliffy). I won’t bore you with the rest.


Obama and Ferguson

I don’t agree with Ezra Klein’s take on the President’s lack of action (public) on the ongoings in Ferguson.

It’s not surprising that I disagree of course, but here is the main reason why. He assumes that only the “left” wants a rousing speech and show of leadership. Man if that sentiment is not representative of the toxicity of popular media today then I don’t know what is. I sure as heck am not a modern liberal and I am EAGERLY hoping for the President to seize this moment and get us moving in the right direction. I am sure millions of non-leftists agree with me here. But EVERYTHING has to be a political calculation. Really?

Furthermore, if you take the typical media impression of the President and his polarizing nature seriously, then I find it extremely difficult to accept Klein’s argument that the President is being timid because he doesn’t want to create even more polarization. Seriously? Since when does it seem like that has been a motivating factor? And since when is that the interpretation for the President’s actions?

I’ve said it before here at TUW that while I may not be a fan of the President’s politics and economic imagination, I had extremely optimistic expectations for his potential to improve race relations and especially to do great things particularly for the black community and inner city America.

As far as what happened and is happening in Ferguson? It’s sad on so many levels but again I really am not competent to say much about it.

Older Posts »