As IF Times

link Deep Layoffs Take Effect In Camden « CBS Philly – News, Sports, Weather, Traffic and the Best of Philadelphia.

When attending university, one of the main tenets of logic taught is the concept of cause and effect.  While that concept can be very fuzzy in the social sciences field, in the realm of hard sciences, where results do matter, this leads to discovery and knowledge.   In fact, one of the foundations of the scientific method is the ability to replicate a result given a set of variables.  At no time in my undistinguished school career did achieving the same dismal result from the same flawed inputs garner me any academic accolades.  Quite the contrary.  If I was expected to achieve result A on an experiment, it behooved me to find variables X, Y, or Z that would lead to the desired outcome.   Continuing to input variables U, V and W would not lead to desired outcome A.  In fact it would lead to the very undesirable outcome of  D, or F.

In the real world, this logic is apparently discarded as soon as the cap and gowns are returned to the rental company.  When you observe the behaviour of people in their everyday lives for example, it is clear that for most, the logic of cause and effect has been discarded as a quaint educational relic, like cursive writing.  In the real world, people somehow lose their ability to reason with any clarity and are easily swayed by those who offer an impossible logic.  The mesmerizing allure of lottery tickets are but one example of mass delusion.  It is in the area of politics however that we find the most delusional behaviour. 

According to the linked article, the City of Camden, New Jersey is now on the verge of having to lay off police and firemen in their bid to stem their budget deficit.   Naturally, this makes headlines because in the “most crime ridden city in America”, this is incongruous.  I know nothing about Camden, New Jersey, but from all accounts of articles relating to this city, it isn’t exactly Disneyland North.  What we do discover is a pattern that seems to appear among  major cities struggling under enormous budget deficits.  That common denominator is that they are all run by governments controlled by the Democratic party.   Coincidences happen of course, like having the only lighter in a bar when Charlize Theron pulls out a cigarette.  More likely however, there is a cause and effect thing happening in the case of big deficits and Democratic governments.  Exhibit A, a list of some of the largest US cities and their accompanying deficits:

Los Angeles, budget shortfall of $408 million

Chicago, budget deficit of $655 million

Philadelphia, greater than $1 billion dollar deficit

San Francisco $380 million dollar budget deficit

Washington DC $688 million dollar deficit

New York city, $4 billion dollar deficit, not to mention an unfunded pension liability of $59 Billion!

Is it purely a coincidence that all of these cities are controlled by Democratic party governments?  I include New York because for decades, until Giuliani, it was a Democratic stronghold.  Even Bloomberg, who now casts himself as an Independent leans convincingly left.  The question is, why do they keep putting Democrats in office?  There’s ample and glaring evidence that those affiliated with the party are incapable of sound fiscal management.  They run on the same platform of Something For Nothing, or SFN (which could also mean Same Fricking Nonsense ) and people continue to believe them.  The price paid for them getting into office however, always seems to be borne by the weary taxpayer.  The fix seems to be predictable; raise taxes or ‘lay off teachers, police and firemen’.  Somehow, excessive entitlements and waste never get laid off.   As this is being written comes news that the city of Berkeley in California wants to make transgender surgical procedures a perk of employment. 

If people want a different result, they’d better stop pursuing the same input.  Maybe try option B.

link Death of 3.5 Million Makes Dismal Economics: Commentary William by Pesek – Bloomberg.

This is a slippery slope.  While I’m sure the author’s intentions are in the right place, it’s debatable whether or not it’s any of our business as to how other nations run their society.  For what it’s worth, I personally think smoking in all forms is a disgusting and filthy habit even without the attendant health risks.  The issue is, why should we care if it is a filthy habit practised in another country.  Many have accused the U.S. of nationbuilding and meddling when it comes to their actions in other parts of the world.

We slide down a long slippery slope when we deign to dictate to other people how to best run their lives because the obvious issue is; what entitles us to provide judgement?  In the West, we are smothered with creeping nannyism wherein the state in varying forms directs our behavior via propaganda or by taxation.  While I certainly don’t want to fall into the tired liberal technique of moral relativism, there are a lot more serious things in the world to worry about than deaths from smoking in China.  The author is of course, probably correct when he offers mortality figures in the millions.  However, let’s also remember that there are over a billion people in China and on a percentage basis of population, the mortality rate may only be nominally higher than the West’s rates.  Someone will have to prove me wrong on this one.  

Imagine if the Chinese commentators made light of the social diseases that afflict western society, such as rampant promiscuity and drug use among its youth.  The glamorization of  anti-social behaviours and lifestyles.  Entertainment which glorifies dumbness and perpetuates liberal stereotypes.  As we all know, practically all ‘lifestyle’ advertisements employ some kind of sexed up imagery in order to hook their customers.  In addition, they often play on the insecurities and perceived inadequacies of people in order to rope them into their particular product.    It can be easily argued that such afflictions may impose as much long term damage to society as smoking.  Smokers in a society eventually die and presumably, the next generation that comes after will be more savvy of the health issues.  Dumbness on the other hand can be bred from one generation to the next and so on like a perpetual virus.

The Chinese have come through a long tortuous and painful path to arrive where they are today and along with the good comes a lot of bad.  It is no exaggeration to say that in many cases, most Chinese were dirt farmers barely a generation ago.  So they smoke.  It’s not good for them.  Neither is drinking.  Or gambling.  If you were brought up in an environment where survival is more a pressing concern than to worry about what Oprah may think of your personal lifestyle, having the odd cigarette is no big deal.  They’re smart, they’ll catch on soon enough.