Long Straight Highway - Latest Comments

Re: Write what you know

Ryan Houle — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 14:59:39 -0000

My opinion on this is to take what you aspire to first and foremost, and secondly, weave in what you know to give it a foundation for real people to latch on to and empathize with. And, obviously, my success speaks for itself...

Re: The tragedy of macroeconomics

Shane Hoversten — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 13:15:12 -0000

One more thing on the health metaphor:

It may or may not be tough to say what caused your grandfather's heart attack. But what we can certainly say is that, for instance, it probably wasn't eating cholesterol and saturated fat, despite what 90% of doctors would have you believe. How do we know this? Because other populations, who eat absurd quantities of those things, have great heart health. It's not possible to make causal attributions with correlational data, but even this (relatively) weak evidence is enough to definitively refute the "saturated fat = universally bad" people, who somehow continue to dominate the mainstream cardiological universe. If you can blankly refute a claim, and yet the claim persists, that is a special kind of systemic dementia.

Anyway, I didn't mean to imply that complex systems that are amenable to scientific investigation are magically rendered simple; just that you can at least move definitively forward via the scientific method. The further you are from being able to a) measure accurately and b) perturb a system in the form of experimentation, the further you are from actually knowing anything substantial about it.

Re: The tragedy of macroeconomics

Nagasaki — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 12:32:29 -0000

Most of the disagreements with questions like, "What caused the Great Depression?" aren't as black and white as you infer. Similarly, what caused the finanical panacea of 2008? The disagreement among real economists, seperated as much as possible from political motives, would be more a function of what percentage each cause had contributed. I do understand that the existance of debate means the facts cannot be concrete as some scientific measures offer.

The math behind govt stimulus spending is fairly clear in macro-econ. I'm not convinced that the politics and subterfuge around butter in your diet are any different really than the politics behind trying to convince the world that austerity is stimulatory. What caused my grandfather's heart attack? Was it stress induced, diet, genetics? What causes Percy Harvin's migraines? These seem like complicated health questions not because we lack rigorous scientific methodology, but rather the sheer number of potential factors at work.

I'm not sure how to answer your challenge. "Non-trivial" seems subjective but if you dig into macro-econ textbooks there are plenty of mathmatical equations that are acceptable among the field. How to calculate measurements such as GDP, inflation, etc come to mind as non-trivial mathmaticially driven contributions. The calculations behind govt or central bank responses are also pretty clear, but I think often the problem is given the scope of economic challenges it's hard to administer the right dosage of response if you don't have perfect data in real-time. So then how useful is the math? I don't know. To me it would be like a Dr. trying to prescribe antiobotics without ever being able to know the patient's weight within 20 lbs.

I don't even really intend to correct you. I agree that economics seem to be more useful in explaining what has happened than predicting the future, and it really is "history with equations." Well, unless you're attempting to explain Austrian economics which uses no mathmatics. Really. So in that case it seems "history with theories" would be more suitable.

Re: The tragedy of macroeconomics

Shane Hoversten — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 11:33:44 -0000

It seems to me that it's difficult to know cause-effect in _any_ circumstance. IE: what caused the great depression? Or: is it better for the economy to save all your money, or to spend all of it? The answers to big questions tend to be superficial or just kick the can down the road. And even when they posit something particular, you can't actually test it. That standard of evidence and proof would be laughable in any other field besides English or History. In fact, macro econ would seem to be more aptly named "history, with equations."

Although I'm willing to be corrected. What, in your mind, is a non-trivial 'scientific' finding of macro econ? I don't think the austerity stuff qualifies, based on what I've seen.I also don't think the metaphor with health holds. There is certainly a lot of contention in the field (for instance, is butter good or bad?) But that's mostly political. There is, at base, a body of empirical research that tests the appropriate questions in a rigorous scientific manner, which has produced concrete and repeatable findings. It so happens that the health/nutrition field is terminally polluted by both lobbying groups and years of conventional wisdom, so findings that counter the orthodoxy take a long time to get any traction. But at least there are findings, and they are repeatable, and they're pretty straightforward for those with ears to hear.

Re: The tragedy of macroeconomics

Nagasaki — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:14:57 -0000

I don't think macroecon is as obscure as Shane implies. It's true that an economy has so many moving parts it's difficult to know the cause-effect relationship in every circumstance, at least when compared to scientific case studies with controlled environments. What I think obscures macroecon is political motivation to disprove or prove ideology. Austerity is a perfect example because the majority of real-world economists agree it will slow growth. The Austrian flavor is a far less tested, textbook theory that can only enter the discussion because economies are complicated enough it's possible to find situations where austerity didn't slow economic growth. Then with a little handwaving it isn't hard to appeal to the crowds, who have zero understanding but simply like the message. But as the author notes, when you did into the details of situations where austerity seemed to work, you find a different set of circumstances so in reality I don't believe it's that unclear. I agree that the armies of economists constantly making predictions is mostly worthless.

If you think about other fields, I'm not even so sure that macroeconomists argue any more than other experts. Just get into a discussion on butter with your heart doctor. The only difference is politicians are constantly distorting economics to fit into an ideology, so I think the disagreements are more noticeable than disagreements in cholesterol theories or brain science.

Re: The tragedy of macroeconomics

Ryan Houle — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 09:12:01 -0000

It would be nice if the austerity proponents could at least point to some stronger historical evidence of it working in a first world nation before taking everyone off of what could be a very large cliff. It seems to me, layman that I am, that the austerity proponents are also big time believers in the confidence fairy, in fact, austerity seems 100% reliant on the existence of the confidence fairy. And that's not the most convincing foundation for an argument, at least to me.

Re: Some thoughts on inequality

Ryan Houle — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 21:48:55 -0000

I agree with you that in the race between education and technology their might not be any other way but crazy gaps if we let it runs its course naturally, but, why must we let it run its course naturally? Is there a good argument as to why we shouldn't try to level off the peaks and valleys - at least temporarily?

Even in cases where business chasing low tax rates isn't bullshit [in states like VA and NC], what happens is businesses move to red states for lower taxes->skilled workers move there->skilled workers don't want to live in a trailer park hell hole->they start voting for more government services and all of sudden, like magic, you've got a purple or blue state. You can run but you can't hide from civilization.

Re: Burned Notice

Wesley K — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:44:51 -0000

Congrats Monica! Nicole and I have recently discovered another fantastically good guilty pleasure: Breaking Bad. Very engrossing!

Re: Burned Notice

Rajan K. — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 20:29:07 -0000

Congratulations, Monica! Also, I've watched Burn Notice. I generally feel about it the same way that you do, though I mostly like the parts where he addresses the viewer in infodumps, though I think that's because it reminds me of Chuck P.

Re: Burned Notice

RosieY — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:27:33 -0000

Also, please tell Monica I said congratulations!

Re: Burned Notice

RosieY — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:27:14 -0000

We're supposed to feel guilty about indulging in entertainment devoid of any intellectual/cultural/enrichment value.

Re: Harry Potter redux

Shane Hoversten — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:06:32 -0000

I think this a response to the general modern Western attitude towards children and reality, in which everything is sanitized and nobody should be pressured to achieve anything in particular. Do your best! We're all okay! Which was itself probably a reaction to something; and I guess I'd rather they wrote everyman heroes than works in which everybody is the lost Prince of Narnia or whatever. I guess the happy middle can be hard to find -- maybe those things don't sell.

Re: Harry Potter redux

RosieY — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:16:28 -0000

I've noticed a trend of reluctant, flawed, everyman "heroes" in contemporary YA fantasy. I find it frustrating for the reasons you mentioned. It's like, "Stop whining already and just kick some ass!"

Re: WWCHD?

DDB — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 18:52:08 -0000

Yeah, should have been THTC. I watched plenty of good shows when I lived with The Creeper. Very few shows have followed me to my new place. I'm lucky in that it takes a large effort for me to sit down and watch TV.

Re: Sometime in the next few weeks

Mt. Regnier — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 09:17:30 -0000

I once had grand plans of getting my life back. I gave up those plans about 5 years ago. Its not so bad once you admit defeat and just give up.

Re: WWCHD?

Shane Hoversten — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 22:31:01 -0000

THTM? The Hot Tamale ??

Re: WWCHD?

DDB — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 22:22:08 -0000

It's an entertaining enough show. I haven't watched it since I lived at THTM.

Re: Sometime in the next few weeks

DDB — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 21:39:01 -0000

And it will be the greatest Christmas gift ever!

Re: Messes

An Owomoyela — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 22:15:30 -0000

I think it's because it's visual noise. Things caught in your peripheral vision try to attract your attention, like when someone's cell goes off or if you're in a place with a lot of background conversation.

This is my theory, anyway. A month late.

Re: Request for translations

Rachelle — Mon, 08 Aug 2011 16:43:19 -0000

I hope you watched the "original" Swedish version and not the one that had really weird edits to the subtitles. You have to look for the words "Theatrical Version" or something similar in the description. I own it so lmk if you would like to borrow it.

As for my suggestion, I don't know if it really applies because it's an American book and an American movie, but somehow, and I still can't explain how, Cohen Brother's No Country For Old Men PERFECTLY captures the mood of (translates, if you will) Cormac McCarthy's book. It's slow and plodding but intriging, and expansive but exclusive, all at the same time. I watch it over and over just to feel it, if you know what I mean.

Re: Messes

Shane Hoversten — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 17:55:21 -0000

This is what I want to know, though. There's the old stereotype of the anal-expulsive who's got his shit scattered everywhere in his office, in all these piles, and who gets enraged if someone cleans it up for him, ala "I have a system, and you've ruined it!" The thing is, I _am_ that old stereotype. In the midst of my chaos, I _do_ know where stuff is. But I still hate it. I'd rather it were clean, even though I can function, organizationally-speaking, in the chaos.

So I wonder if the people in the above-mentioned cliche really aren't bothered by the clutter, or if they have simply become functional and invested in their clutter? Having met a number of those types (and, as I said, being one myself) I can verify that in my experience they've always been the latter.

Re: Messes

douglaslucas — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:09:24 -0000

Dunno, but it's important to remember some people don't perceive messes as bothersome clutter (as you and I do), but rather as their reassuring nest of personal effects.

Re: Request for translations

Janie — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 01:03:35 -0000

I almost forgot my least favorite adaptation; American Idiot, album, musical and now movie...I'm annoyed.

Did anybody see the Frankenstein with Johnny Lee Miller? I was having a conversation yesterday about how all of the Frankenstein adaptations are horrid but that is one adaptation of the story I am curious about.

Re: Request for translations

Janie — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:54:57 -0000

Oh I just thought of another one. Casey at Bat. (I know you are looking for cool and interesting ones but some of the Casey at Bat and Mudville spinoffs are um...unique?)

Re: Request for translations

Carol — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 22:30:03 -0000

ETA Hoffman's short story 'The Sandman' (1816) is an interesting one. I've read a couple of different English translations from the original German text, and found subtle differences that affected the story's meaning, making illusion/delusion seem more metaphorical in one, and more real in the other. Over the years, this story has been adapted into a ballet, an opera, a film, an updated retelling, and some of it's characters have been used by writers such as Neil Gaiman & Kim Newman and Alan Moore.