Pope Francis is visiting the U.S. this week. His views are getting “hands off” coverage in most of the media. This is problematic because I find his economic views disturbing.
While personally, Pope Francis has taken a vow of poverty, he’s been elevated to the top of institution that got rich from just about every means except economic growth, and he’s using that position to criticize societies that got rich from pretty much only economic growth.
I find that ironic and ridiculous, and the lack of public comment upon it … disturbing.
Let me be clear: I have serious doubts that anyone at the top of a wealthy faith can say anything worthwhile about how economic growth did, can, or should work.
FWIW: I’m not Catholic. I live in Utah but I’m not Mormon either. I grew up in a heavily Catholic area, and have many Catholic friends. I have never felt the need to disparage a pope before. Further, I have doubts about the economic insights of all faiths that rely on texts written or set forth prior to the advent of systemic economic growth on this planet around the year 1700.
We’re still awaiting word on why they now say they have a positive on an id number when they couldn’t’ find one before. Or why the whole part does not appear to have floated to the location where it was found.
I get the idea of food deserts – places where people live where it’s tough to get food.
But I also wonder how overblown the idea may be.
So consider this map:
What I see when I look at this is that my county (Iron, in Utah) is shaded as a food desert.
Yeah … right. Better think twice about whether the metric people are using to define a food desert is worthwhile.
Why is it ridiculous to characterize my county as a food desert? Because Utah is surprisingly urban. Almost all the state’s population is concentrated at the western base of a mountain range that runs north to south through the state. My county is no exception. It has a population in 47K. Most of those people live in Cedar City: perhaps 35K of them. We have 2 supermarkets, and a Wal-Mart supercenter.
According to the heading, an urban are is considered a food desert if people don’t live within a mile of a grocery store.
That includes my house, in a very nice and quite large subdivision, which is about 4 minutes (or 2 miles) from each grocery. Here’s a political map of my county. Naively, you might think those are all towns. Not so: Lund, Modena, and Pintura are ghost towns. Beryl Junction is just that. Hamilton’s Fort is a subdivision. Kanarraville, Paragonah, Brian Head, and Newcastle have a few hundred people each. Parowan has several thousand people, but it also is fairly compact, and has a grocery store.
Here’s the satellite view of roughly the same area:
Perhaps we’re a food desert because … we’re a desert! (Note that all those green circles left of center are hay fields).
It shouldn’t be surprising that it’s more than 10 miles to a grocery store for most of this county. But I think it’s an abuse of the statistic to claim that this is a food desert because people who choose to live out on ranches have to drive into town for groceries.
Remember when they found part of a wing on Reunion last month? And the government of Malaysia quickly declared it to be a part of their plane that’s been missing for 18 months?
Not so fast!
Do you also remember that the French inspectors who took the part refused to confirm that it was from the missing plane?
The part is missing its ID tag. This is a big deal because that tag was removed from a protected and undamaged portion of the bigger part.
The part does not match up with the repair record from the plane it’s alleged to have come from.
The part is covered with barnacles that need to live under the water.
Let’s see what that means:
We see no ID tag problems with things like stolen cars: you know, kind of like a “used” car which has had its VIN tag removed.
They check repair records for the same reason they check the dental records of unidentified bodies. So this is kind of like the cops finding a body and noting that its teeth don’t match the dental records of a missing person.
How did the part float to Reunion and wash up on shore if it was below the surface of the water growing barnacles?
Sounds like a fake to me. A premeditated one (thus the removed ID tag), and not really a great one (since they didn’t anticipate the repair record issue), but definitely one that someone put some thought into (who put the wing under the water and left it for a few months to grow barnacles)?
It’s piecemeal results, but the digging estimates that the number of actual women on the site was between 1,500 and 12,000. There were 30 million men with account. That’s 1 woman for between 1500 and 20K men.
AshleyMadison claims that over 5 million women use their service. The Gizmodo report suggests that roughly 999 out of every 1000 of those were fake.
If you walk into someone’s kitchen, shake their garbage bag up and down, and it breaks open onto the floor … you’re responsible for cleaning it up.
If you’re the EPA, and you go into Colorado and take construction equipment to a mine that’s been stable for a century and dump out the contents … you may even get off in the court of public opinion.
It’s big news out here that there’s been a spill of mine waste into Cement Creek (which flows into the Animus River, then into the San Juan, and then the Colorado).
Today there’s news that a geologist warned the EPA publicly not to do what they intended to do (that to TA in Metairie for the tip). The editor of that newspaper confirms that they did publish the letter. Here’s an image of what’s on their website:
Here’s an editorial from yesterday’s issue of The Wall Street Journal:
‘Ghostbusters” has been playing again on cable, so we are reminded that the villain of that movie classic was a bully from the Environmental Protection Agency. He broke the ghost-containment grid and all hell broke loose. So who you gonna call today when the E-men dump three million gallons of toxic slurry down the rivers of the West?
Last week an EPA hazmat team hoped to inspect an abandoned Gold Rush-era mine near Durango, Colorado, and the backhoe digging out the collapsed cave entrance breached a retaining wall. The blowout spilled the contaminated sludge that had accumulated for nearly a century in the mine’s tunnels into a creek …
For 24 hours the EPA failed to warn state and local officials, who learned about the fiasco when they saw their river become yellow curry. The EPA’s initial estimate of the leakage was exposed by the U.S. Geologic Service as three times below the real rate. The agency hasn’t explained the cause of the accident.
Naturally, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, known as the Superfund law, gives EPA clean-up crews immunity from the trial bar when they are negligent. Yet the Durango blowout was entirely avoidable.
In an Aug. 8 “incident report,” the EPA notes that “the intent of the investigation was to create access to the mine, assess on-going water releases from the mine to treat mine water, and assess the feasibility of further mine remediation.” In other words, the mine was plugged, and the EPA was excavating in search of some notional make-work problem to solve. Where were Bill Murray and Harold Ramis when we needed them?
Unfortunately, this isn’t Ghostbusters, and this isn’t a comedy. This is people making things worse so they can get paid to (conceivably) make them better.
There hasn’t been a better example of Bastiat’s broken window fallacy in quite a long time.
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.