From The Art of Manliness Blog:

During the early days of the internet, the web was heralded as a new kind of forum, a place where the free exchange of ideas would be unrestricted and people could interact and engage with all sorts of opinions and views. Unfortunately, what has happened is that the internet has instead been used to form narrower and narrower communities, smaller and smaller niches of like-minded individuals who enjoy having their preconceived notions confirmed and their egos stroked. (emphasis added)

This last sentence indirectly sums up how I feel about politics today.  More and more people refuse to acknowledge the potential validity of opposing viewpoints, and are unwilling to explore the potential falsity of their own ideas.  Exemplifying this notion is the fact that many people today treat politics like a team sport, voting the entire right side or left side of the ticket without stopping to consider the individual candidates.

No tags

Apparently the trendy thing for consumers to do now is to use cash or debit cards or checks instead of credit cards.  A recent NPR report says that for the first time in a long time, Visa Debit cards surpassed Visa Credit cards.  Supposedly, the rationale for using a debit versus a credit card is that if you don’t have a credit card, you won’t spend money you don’t have, because a debit card won’t let you.

I’ve got to admit I find that very silly.  The only benefit of using a debit card over a credit card is forced spending control.  This can easily be replaced with the slightest bit of willpower or a nagging significant other.

The costs, on the other hand, are somewhat significant.  First, if you use a credit card, you can probably earn 1-3% cashback on all of your purchases.  Thus, you only pay 97-99% of what the suckers using cash/debit/check are paying.  Over time, that really adds up.  Think about buying groceries for a family of four over the course of a year: probably $200 a week at least.  If you get 2% cashback on those purchases, you get $4 per week, or $108 per year.  That’s not bad for just grocery purchases.  Second, if you use a credit card, you can help build your credit, which is always a good thing.  Third, fraud protection on credit cards is better than on debit cards.  Fourth, if you have an emergency, a credit card allows you to buy things that you need.  If you cut up your credit card because you don’t have the self-control to use it, then you put yourself in danger of having no spending power when you need it.  If you try to spend more than you have with debit, you’ll get nasty overdraft fees.  Finally, credit cards allow you to take advantage of the time value of money – you don’t have to empty your bank account with every purchase; rather, you can keep money in your bank account, earning interest, until your credit card bill is due.  I know the time value of money is not super-significant, but it’s better than nothing.

Of course, all of this assumes that you have the willpower to only spend as much as you can pay for every month.  If you pay less than your full balance, then you’ll probably spend more than the benefits of a credit card.  But if you’re already doing that with a debit card, why not just spend as much with a credit card as you would with a debit card?  Is it really that hard not to go crazy with a credit card?

bank, cash, check, credit card, debit, finance, personal finance

Greg Mankiw is looking for a new car for his teenage daugther.  He described the most recent findings of Consumer Reports:

Dead last was Chrysler. CU recommended zero percent of the Chrysler vehicles they tested. That’s right–zero. Second to last was General Motors. CU recommended 17 percent of GM models. By contrast, most other companies had half or more of their models get the thumbs up. Honda was the top ranked brand; CU recommended 95 percent of its models.

Is it any surprise that Chrysler and GM are now in the process of going out of business? From the perspective of the Consumer Reports advice, it looks like their business model was to count on the ignorance of the buying public about the quality of their products. Their bankruptcy should perhaps be viewed as a success of the market system. (emphasis added).

bankruptcy, car, chrysler, consumer reports, gm

I was happy to see that, for the most part, President Obama was received with open arms at Notre Dame’s Commencement over the weekend.  However, the controversy surrounding Obama’s visit has prompted a number of questions, not only about abortion rights but about the value of speech and the value of tolerance.

Speech

Speech is extremely essential to any society.  The right to free speech is one of the most celebrated and long-lasting rights in America.  The First Amendment explicitly prevents the government from abridging our right to free speech.  Additionally, society generally shuns private individuals (who are not obligated to observe the 1st Amendment) who try to censor speech.

The purpose behind this celebrated right is that we recognize that humans are fallible, and that the government is not all-knowing.  We recognize that no single person or group of persons can always be right about everything.  Rather, we recognize that new, unpopular ideas may turn out to be correct.  See Galileo.  Simply because an overwhelming majority of scientists believe that climate change is man-made does not mean that we should censor the dissenters.  A belief of a large crowd can often be wrong, and if we refuse to believe that we could ever be wrong, then we risk severe harm to human civilization.

Additionally, speech is often the vehicle by which people can come to optimal solutions.  Theoretically, when we debate important ideas, and we allow many people to speak, the best ideas will rise to the top as more and more individuals become convinced.  Furthermore, speech can help us strengthen our convictions in our own beliefs.  If we learn the best and most convincing arguments of people that believe differently from us, but we can rationally reject those ideas, then presumably we must reject them because we believe our views are even more convincing.  We could not realize our own views’ strength if we did not compare them to those of others.

Although Notre Dame is not the government, and does not need to obey the 1st Amendment, Notre Dame should have been shunned if it decided to keep Obama away purely because some students do not like his views on one issue.  Keeping him away would be asserting a kind of infallibility in both the school and in the students themselves.  It would encourage students to believe that they do not need to recognize that any beliefs other than their own, and it would encourage students to shelter themselves only with those that believe the same things they do.  It would prevent the students from learning other ideas that could either strengthen their own convictions or change their mind.

Obama was not at Notre Dame to convince Catholics that killing babies was a good idea.  Primarily, he was there to say congratulations for graduation.  As a secondary matter, he was there to respond to the protests at Notre Dame, and say that although perhaps pro-lifers and pro-choicers will never agree on the issue of abortion, they still have to live with one another and be able to speak with one another.  Moreover, if there is ever to be any serious abortion-related legislation, both sides are going to have to work with each other.  If you never speak to the other side, that will never happen, and neither side will ever be able to compromise.

Tolerance

Obama’s visit also raised questions about tolerance in society.  By tolerance I do not mean that Catholics should believe that Obama’s pro-choice view is just as correct as their pro-life view.  Rather, they need to accept him as a human being despite having conflicting views with their religion.  I am a recently-confirmed Catholic.  One of the most important lessons that I learned in the Bible is that Jesus did not only associate with saints, but sinners as well.  Jesus did not fight with other people; he turned the other cheek.  Jesus loved his neighbor, and he loved his enemies.

Catholics who responded to Obama’s visit by handing out hateful pictures of aborted fetuses and calling Obama a murderer did not act the way Jesus wanted people to act.  Instead, they shut their minds and showered Obama with hatred.  The Golden Rule that not only Christians but many persons claim to obey is “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”  Would a Catholic who had an opportunity to speak at a school that was very pro-choice have wanted to be showered with this type of hatred?

Conclusion

Those that are pro-life and pro-choice need to put down their weapons.  First, abortion is not the most important policy issue going on right now in the world.  Both sides are going to have to work together to deal with a number of other important issues.  If they refuse to talk to one another because of abortion, that will be a shame, and more important things will not get done.  Secondly, humans are not infallible.  Assuming that one is all-knowing is extremely foolish and risks a “Galileo situation.”  Finally, Catholics who treat others with hate, even those who are their greatest enemies, are contradicting Jesus’s teachings.  It sounds tacky to say this, but: can’t we all just get along?

abortion, barack obama, catholic, christian, notre dame, president, Religion

I don’t understand how someone could make Mr. Hinchey’s statement, below, with a straight face:

And Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.) vowed to force the White House to accept delivery of a new presidential helicopter Obama says he doesn’t need and doesn’t want. The helicopter program, which cost $835 million this year, supports 800 jobs in Hinchey’s district. “I do think there’s a good chance we can save it,” he said.

I guess “save it” means extract money from the federal government that serves no purpose.  Instead of employing 800 people to do something worthless, why not just pay those 800 people money for doing nothing?  That would be more efficient.

budget, Money, Politics