I’m a sucker for choropleths: maps shaded by the incidence of some other variable.
A geographer has mapped out the U.S. based on which swear words people use in their tweets.
Here’s the map for the hot, new, swear word: fuckboy (Urban Dictionary says that’s a synonym for … Justin Bieber). I’d never even heard that one before I saw this image:
Fascinating. To the extent that the movers and shakers of swearing are on the coasts, it seems that this word is going to arrive here in the high desert fairly soon.
Truth be told, I grew up in the suburbs of the blue collar northeast, the baby boomer son of a guy who’d been in the army during World War II. So I grew up with a ton of swearing, and I still swear more than most adults of my social strata.
But now I live in Utah, where swearing for many amounts to saying “My heck”, and “Fudge”. That’s not the majority at all, but there’s a significant plurality that do say those things.
So, going back to more traditional Carlin-esque swear words, here’s what they called the F dash dash dash word in A Christmas Story:
Sure enough, that’s popular where I grew up and I still use it.
Here’s the one that’s currently popular with my whole family: douche:
What’s popular in rural southwestern Utah besides douche? Slut. Crap. And faggot (confirming that for a lot of pop culture, Utah seems to cheerfully adopt things a few decades late, even if they were once regarded as offensive).
FWIW: I have some trouble in class from time to time. When I run up against a political viewpoint that’s incorrect from the standpoint of conventional economics, it’s often useful to call it “bullshit” for shock value. The thing is, in ranching country, it doesn’t have much shock value but it’s still regarded as swearing. Think about that for a minute: it’s still regarded as a swear word yet it doesn’t have much shock value. Odd.
There’s many more where these came from: bastard, whore, slut, pussy, hell, crap, gosh, damn, cunt, motherfucker, faggot, asshole, bitch, and shit.
Suppose there are 2 employers and 4 potential workers.
Does pay 2 people a wage in exchange for their labor,
Does not pay 1 person who works for the other employer, and
Does not pay 1 person who doesn’t work at all.
Does pay 1 person a wage in exchange for their labor,
Does not pay 2 people who work for the other employer, and
Does not pay 1 person who doesn’t work at all.
Who is morally superior, Employer A or Employer B? Most people would say Employer A is morally superior because they employ more people. But it’s a tough call, and arguably neither one is morally superior.
But almost no one would argue that Employer B is morally superior.
That’s actually kind of important, because the cop out commonly used in an exercise like this is that it matters how much the people are paid and how much work they have to do. I don’t think so: why on Earth would you presume that someone is trying to trick you with this example? Simply assume everyone is getting paid the same for the same amount of work. No biggie.
Yet, this is exactly what the typical American is doing when they claim that the minimum wage should be raised. Doesn’t this make the position of most people on the minimum wage immoral?
This is because the typical American doesn’t employ anyone at all. So actually, they’re more like this:
Pays no one an receives no labor in exchange
Does not pay 3 people who work for the other employers, and
Does not pay 1 person who doesn’t work at all.
It’s a no brainer when you actually write it out that way. And do note that this includes people who don’t pay their spouses for doing the dishes, or the kids for mowing the lawn.
Returning to Southwood:
Walmart employs 1.2 million people in the US, more than any other private firm. Why is Walmart any more obligated to pay high wages to 1.2 million people than you or I? Does Walmart's decision to provide jobs for these people automatically obligate them to provide pay above a certain level?
What makes this complicated is that you, these journalists, and I employ zero people (or close enough by comparison), which means we effectively pay 1.2 million people a wage of $0/hour.
Walmart critics embrace two moral standards: in the first, morality requires payment of high wages to 1.2 million people. In the second, morality can be achieved without employing anyone at all--that is, by paying zero wages. Most of us have chosen to live by the second standard, and from our lofty moral position we can criticize Walmart for not meeting the first standard. How convenient!
N.B. Do note that this argument also carries over to other strong moral positions. For example, most people in favor of allowing gays to get married aren’t actually marrying any of them themselves. So what they’re really in favor of if forcing others to do something that they’re not prepared to do themselves. Our moral positions are more reasonable about stuff like “you should cook a couple of burgers for this couple because they’re gay”, which we quickly recognize as problematic.
* The argument I make in class is not my own, but its origin is lost in the mists of my middle-aged mind. It starts with a student complaining about the price of a product, say gasoline. I then ask them at what price they sell gas. The light bulbs start to go off over students heads when they realize that they are the high cost seller complaining about the low cost seller not undercutting them enough.
Saying that such a dialogue was essential to the college’s academic mission, Trescott University president Kevin Abrams confirmed Monday that the school encourages a lively exchange of one idea. “As an institution of higher learning, we recognize that it’s inevitable that certain contentious topics will come up from time to time, and when they do, we want to create an atmosphere where both students and faculty feel comfortable voicing a single homogeneous opinion,” said Abrams, adding that no matter the subject, anyone on campus is always welcome to add their support to the accepted consensus. “Whether it’s a discussion of a national political issue or a concern here on campus, an open forum in which one argument is uniformly reinforced is crucial for maintaining the exceptional learning environment we have cultivated here.” Abrams told reporters that counseling resources were available for any student made uncomfortable by the viewpoint.
My state college in conservative Utah actually does pretty good on this count. Some of the professors? Well, not so much.
Yep. There's nothing like encouraging kids in science like forcing them to do something, and getting their parents involved in something frustrating.
Not to mention arbitrary. I think elementary schools keep a list of winners somewhere, and every family is guaranteed to have a winner at least once. In our family it was the vXgirl who went to regionals with a project about how environment affects fruit ripening. It wasn't bad at all ... but I wonder how much she learned from it.
Without the name, this topic was a big source of jokes at a conference I went to last spring that was tangentially related to the Koch’s … through their financial support that made it easy for a bunch of business academics to get together and talk about what rocks our world for 4 days.
Cool research. A team of 7 researchers, using 3 databases of individuals who are culturally important through history, plotted the migration of those individuals to determine cultural centers.
They visualize this for America:
That really gives meaning to the idea of flyover states. But, pause it and look around a bit. Check out the importance of:
Cincinnati and Louisville in the early to mid 19th century.
How about the Erie Canal being traced out.
The absence of much at all across the Black Belt of the deep South.
San Francisco popping out of nowhere in the 1850’s (before, and everyone forgets about this, not really thriving well after that).
The necklace of cities along the Union Pacific route, through Kansas City, Denver, and Salt Lake City.
The way Salt Lake City and the west coast attract people who bypassed the east coast completely.
The outsized attraction of New Orleans in the early 20th century (as its primacy as a port faded)
The development of the triangle in Texas as oil boomed.
The huge migration to Los Angeles starting in the 1920’s.
And towards the end, the influx of people into Florida.
And for Europe:
During its heydey, notice how the Roman Empire is actually fairly tenuous across the west: everyone’s in Rome in a way they’ve never been in New York.
But as the Empire fades, the centers of western European cultural start popping up before (and during) the barbarian invasions.
The Dark Ages are pretty dark, but there’s clustering across the region we still associate with medieval history: from the Ile de France, arcing northeast towards the low countries, and then back southeast across the central Rhine valley.
In the 12th century, look for Seville and Cordoba popping up under the Moors in Spain. Paris gets brighter at the same time.
Not much going on in northern Italy, until the bright lights come on in the 14th and 15th centuries.
Check out Amsterdam in the 17th century.
I found Vienna quieter than I expected in the 17th and 18th centuries. But look at the lights of Budapest, Prague, and Cracow.
St. Petersburg pops out of nowhere after its founding in the early 18th century.
By 1900, Germany has bright lights … everywhere.
And look at England … whole bunches of people leaving to go to America. Look closely, and you can see some of them coming from Germany in the 1930’s.
You can also see many eastern Europeans heading in the direction of Moscow in the mid 20th century.
With the development of internet technology, work at home jobs are increasing in the market. Also setting up small business online with ones own bank savings can provide excellent work at home opportunities. Apart from savings, banks offer0 credit card to cater to short term finance needs. Partial tax payments like tax credits are also available to promote online businesses. Market now offers several alternatives to traditional credit card debt which are helpful to work at home businesses.