What I’m reading

The Blind Assassin by Margaret Atwood. It’s told from the view point of an old (or, as we now have to say older) woman, whose sister committed suicide, leaving behind a controversial novel (also called The Blind Assassin) that became a bestseller (maybe not really hers, but I haven’t finished the book yet) . I got it for Christmas, but have only just managed to start on it – very good so far.

The only other thing of Atwood’s I’ve read was The Handmaid’s Tale. I enjoyed it, but was miffed by the various literary types who raved about it when they would scorn to mention, say, Ursula Le Guin. That reaction goes in spades for Doris Lessing’s ventures into SF. Writing this, it strikes me that the inner novel The Blind Assassin also has an SF theme.

Most “economists” aren’t

I’ve always thought that an economist is someone who understands opportunity cost. If there is one thing a first-year undergraduate economics course should teach, it’s an understanding of this concept. So it’s alarming to discover that most members of a sample drawn from participants in the profession’s most important conference are not, at least by my definition, economists.

Via Harry Clarke, I found this paper by Ferraro and Taylor (guest registration or subscription required). Ferraro and Taylor presented their volunteer subjects with this question.

Please circle the best answer to the following question:

‘You won a free ticket to see an Eric Clapton concert (which has no resale value). Bob Dylan is performing on the same night and is your next-best alternative. Tickets to see Dylan cost $40. On any given day, you would be willing to pay up to $50 to see Dylan. Assume there are no other costs of seeing either performer. Based on this information, what is the opportunity cost of seeing Eric Clapton?

(a) $0
(b) $10
(c) $40
(d) $50.

Take some time to think before looking over the fold
Read More »

Mudslide in the Phillipines

The latest news from the mudslide in the Phillipines is grim. There have been no more people rescued from the village of Guinsaugon, even though students and teachers in the local school survived the intial slide and sent text messages calling for help. The Australian government is giving $1 million for relief and rescue.

In general, the world is pretty good about responding to disasters of this kind. But it’s worth remembering that the huge death toll associated with these disasters is often the result of the poverty of those affected, and that it is in our collective power to end extreme poverty once and for all. Simple improvements in health care and agrlculture would save millions of lives every year.

We should be pressing the government to maintain, every day of the year, the generosity it shows on occasions like this, and doing our individual best to help as well.

Theme competition

I finally got around to checking out the podcasting feature in iTunes today (I know I’m way behind the times, but I’m a texty kind of guy). It’s pretty kewl.

By coincidence, I also got an email today from Nicholas Gruen about a Theme Competition for The National Interest. The idea is to get an open-source theme that will allow podcasting of the show, by avoiding copyright problems with the existing theme.

Salvage?

My wife forwarded this sequence of photos that are doing the rounds, headed “Irish Salvage”.

No doubt eagle-eyed Irish readers will be able to point out that the truck is of a make used exclusively in the UK, or that the superscript on the manifest is of a type not found in the Irish localisation of MS Word.

Update: As expected, too good to be true. The second spill is faked. Still, it’s pretty funny.
Read More »

Weekend reflections

Weekend Reflections is on again. Please comment on any topic of interest (civilised discussion and no coarse language, please). Feel free to put in contributions more lengthy than for the Monday Message Board or standard comments.

The Washminster system

Peter Shergold, head of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet has stated what has long been apparent. The Westminster system, under which ministers are responsible for wrongdoing by their departments, is dead in Australia. Shergold says, in relation to incidents like the AWB scandal, that ministers should resign only if they ordered public servants to breach the law or “or if a minister had their attention drawn to matters and then took no action”.

Although Shergold apparently went on to deny this, it’s obvious that the current setup, in which ministers are screened by staff appointed on a basis of personal loyalty, ensures that ministers need never have their attention drawn to anything likely to compromise their position. Such information can always be communicated to a private secretary or similar staff member, who will judge what the minister needs to know and, more importantly, what the minister needs not to know.
Read More »