Date:	2011-11-22 11:05
Subject:	A lesson in Economics
Security:	Public
Mood:	annoyed

Haven't posted here in quite some time, but something today bothered me, so I thought I'd jot it down.
It's a lesson in economics.

I've got the day off, so I thought I'd take the Metrolink train down to Los Angeles to see the LA auto Show. It's about 45 miles one way, and taking the train is so much easier than making my way through the Sepulveda pass and hassling with all the traffic.
I overslept and missed the earlier train, but noticed on the schedule that an Amtrak was scheduled to leave @ 10:45 heading down there.
It used to be that you could hop either an Amtrak or Metrolink for the same far. After all, it's the same route, same distance.
I was unpleasantly surprised to learn this was not the case. Round trip to LA from here is $27. Normal fares are $8, but using Amtrak for one leg is.....$19.
Yes, this makes sense. I can take the train down to LA for $27, then spend another $8 or so on the subway. Total transit costs are $35.
Or I can drive down, spend, oh, three gallons of gas for $12, and parking for $10. Total transit costs are $22.
Or..... I can be annoyed by feckless and random pricing, choose not to go at all.
Economic consumption not inserted into the economy?
$16   lost by Amtrak/Metrolink for what I consider to be a reasonable fare.
$8     Lost by LA subway system.
$5     lost by Bagel shop at union station, where I usually stop to pick up a bagel and a drink
$12   Lost by LA convention center/car show for me not buying a ticket
$3     lost by food services at convention center for the drink I'd probably have bought.
$?    Lost by auto manufacturers for a possible car I might have liked and thought "hmm, I should buy           that
~$44 dollars not spent at all. And I'm a pretty cheap bastard. That train will still run. The gas will still be used. I just won't be on it. I also left out the possibility of buying a car, or contributing to the local thievery economy by being mugged.

I'm a fiscal conservative, but transportation is a key to industry and economy. I lived in Japan long enough to see a well functioning mass transit system. And yes, it's subsidized. If you know that there's only so much land: you can subsidize the transport and fuel economy, or you can build more roads and make everyone buy a car. BTW, the road idea is stupid.
For those hardcore fools who state: "Amtrak/subways/whatever should fund themselves, and if they can't, they should fail" Do you really think we DON'T already subsidize the current freeway system above and beyond gas taxes??

Has anyone noticed that putting an exclamation after apple's iStuff makes it look like it's in spanish? iCarumba!

a friend who constantly refers to another person as a brilliant source of inspiration, and you know for a fact that brillian source is a moron?

So, this Percy Jackson and the something or other ( can't be bothered to care) preview commercial comes up on Tv. I'm half paying attention, and find myself wonering why the kid is shouting "pussy!", then I think a bit about it and realize that poor poor Percy must have had a difficult childhood.

Saw the movie "the fall' by the guy who made "the cell"
it seems to be an excuse for the filmmaker to travel

I'm so happy.
Sean, puffy, Pdiddy, diddler, doobie combs' son had his sixteenth birthday.
and he was given a 360K car.

but he donated a 10K check he got to haiti.
That's like me getting 100 bucks for my birthday and donated three dollars.
whoopee!

So.....
I apply for a promotion at my job. I'm not particularly happy with the place, but I relished the idea of being able to apply myself a bit more, and work to produce a concentrated effort with my co-workers, who are an intelligent, hardworking bunch.
I had thought, perhaps, that I might lose out to one coworker, who has a long history here and knows a LOT about the corporate culture and the technologies our system is based upon.
Or, perhaps, to the other coworker, who for the past 6 months has shouldered an incredible burden: learning boatloads of info on his own while two staff members (myself included) were on leave.

I'm invited into my "boss"'s office, where I'm informed that the position goes to....
the new guy who's been here six weeks.

In fact, BOTH new guys, including the temp, were given supervisory positions. And they're so new that my Boss, being of what I would describe as having "Sub-sTandard Utilization of Processing Intellectual Dynamics(S.T.U.P.I.D)" ablities, mixed up their names and gave both of them the same last name in the welcoming speech.

Yes, these two fellows, who have been following us around for six weeks and only absorbing what I believe to be about 1 week of knowledge, are now supervisory to us.

Fuck'em, I say.
If a higher position merits higher responsibility, then I must assume a lower position ( an additional layer has been inserted between myself and the management) merits decreased responsibility. And I really like to eat oatmeal in the morning. For a long time.

Speaking of which, anyone looking for a (up until now) hardworking tech fellow who knows VMWARE and virtual environments, and consistently puts in extra time making sure they work correctly?
And who WANTS to keep learning, rather than doing invoices for his boss who can't seem to figure out how this works, and who considers practical knowledge paramount to "management history on their resume"?
As an added skillset, I DON'T have a degree from an online University in "Life-Coaching".

Jesus Christ, you'd think I worked at the DMV.
Maybe I should take a lesson from Peter Gibbons and start actively not caring.

I signed up for postcrossing, which is an interesting concept
www.postcrossing.com

I'm totally copying and pasting this New York Times Article by Neal Stephenson regarding technology, but it's interesting.
Plus, it makes me sound like a jedi, which is kewl.

In case you wanna go directly:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/17/opinion/17stephenson.html?_r=1


IN the spring of 1977, some friends and I made a 40-mile pilgrimage to the biggest and fanciest movie theater in Iowa so we could watch a new science fiction movie called "Star Wars." Expecting long lines, we got there early, and found the place deserted.

As we sat on the sidewalk waiting for the box office to open, others like us drifted in from the towns, farms and colleges of central Iowa and queued up behind. When the curtain in front of the big Cinerama screen finally parted, the fanfare sounded and the famous opening crawl appeared against a backdrop of stars, there were still some empty seats. "Star Wars" wasn't famous yet. The only people who had heard about it were what are now called geeks.

Twenty-eight years later, the vast corpus of "Star Wars" movies, novels, games and merchandise still has much to say about geeks - and also about a society that loves them, hates them and depends upon them.

In the opening sequence of the new Star Wars movie, "Episode III: Revenge of the Sith," two Jedi knights fight their way through an enemy starship to rescue a hostage. Ever since I saw the movie, I have been annoying friends with a trivia question: "Who is the enemy? What organization owns this vessel?"

We ought to know. In 1977, we all knew who owned the Death Star (the Empire) and who owned the Millennium Falcon (Han Solo). But when I ask my question about the new film, everyone reacts in the same way: with a sudden intake of breath and a sideways dart of the eyes, followed by lengthy cogitation. Some confess that they have no idea. Others think out loud for a while, developing and rejecting various theories. Only a few have come up with the right answer.

One hyperverbal friend was able to spit it out because he had read and memorized the opening crawl. Another, a hard-core science fiction fan, had been boning up on supplemental materials: "Clone Wars," an animated TV series consisting of "epic adventures that bridge the story arc between 'Episode II: Attack of the Clones' and 'Episode III: Revenge of the Sith.' "

If you have watched these cartoons - or if you've enjoyed some of the half-dozen "Clone Wars" novels, flipped through the graphic novels, read the short stories or played the video game - you will know that the battle cruiser in question is owned by the New Droid Army of the Confederacy of Independent Systems, which is backed by the Trade Federation, a commercial guild that is peeved about taxation of trade routes.

And that is not the only aspect of "Episode III" that you will see in a different light. If you watch the movie without doing the prep work, General Grievous - who is supposed to be one of the most formidable bad guys in the entire "Star Wars" cycle - will seem like something that just fell out of a Happy Meal.

Likewise, many have been underwhelmed by the performance of Hayden Christensen, who plays Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader. Only if you've seen the "Clone Wars" cartoons will you understand that Anakin is a seriously damaged veteran, a poster child for post-traumatic stress disorder. But since none of that background is actually supplied by the Episode III script, Mr. Christensen has been given an impossible acting task. He's trying to swim in air.

In sum, very little of the new film makes sense, taken as a freestanding narrative. What's interesting about this is how little it matters. Millions of people are happily spending their money to watch a movie they don't understand. What gives?

Modern English has given us two terms we need to explain this phenomenon: "geeking out" and "vegging out." To geek out on something means to immerse yourself in its details to an extent that is distinctly abnormal - and to have a good time doing it. To veg out, by contrast, means to enter a passive state and allow sounds and images to wash over you without troubling yourself too much about what it all means.

In corporate-speak, there is a related term used when someone has committed the faux pas of geeking out during a meeting. "Let's take this offline," someone will suggest, when the PowerPoint slides grow dark with words. Literally, it means, "I look forward to geeking out on this topic - later." But really it's a polite synonym for "shut up already!"

The first "Star Wars" movie 28 years ago was distinguished by healthy interplay between veg and geek scenes. In the climactic sequence, where rebel fighters attacked the Death Star, we repeatedly cut away from the dogfights and strafing runs - the purest kind of vegging-out material - to hushed command bunkers where people stood around pondering computer displays, geeking out on the strategic progress of the battle.

All such content - as well as the long, beautiful, uncluttered shots of desert, sky, jungle and mountain that filled the early episodes - was banished in the first of the prequels ("Episode I: The Phantom Menace," 1999). In the 16 years that separated it from the initial trilogy, a new universe of ancillary media had come into existence. These had made it possible to take the geek material offline so that the movies could consist of pure, uncut veg-out content, steeped in day-care-center ambience. These newer films don't even pretend to tell the whole story; they are akin to PowerPoint presentations that summarize the main bullet points from a much more comprehensive body of work developed by and for a geek subculture.

"Concentrate on the moment. Feel, don't think. Trust your instincts," says a Jedi to the young Anakin in Episode I, immediately before a pod race in which Anakin is likely to get killed. It is distinctly odd counsel coming from a member of the Jedi order, the geekiest people in the universe: they have beards and ponytails, they dress in army blankets, they are expert fighter pilots, they build their own laser swords from scratch.

And (as is made clear in the "Clone Wars" novels) the masses and the elites both claim to admire them, but actually fear and loathe them because they hate being dependent upon their powers.

Anakin wins that race by repairing his crippled racer in an ecstasy of switch-flipping that looks about as intuitive as starting up a nuclear submarine. Clearly the boy is destined to be adopted into the Jedi order, where he will develop his geek talents - not by studying calculus but by meditating a lot and learning to trust his feelings. I lap this stuff up along with millions, maybe billions, of others. Why? Because every single one of us is as dependent on science and technology - and, by extension, on the geeks who make it work - as a patient in intensive care. Yet we much prefer to think otherwise.

Scientists and technologists have the same uneasy status in our society as the Jedi in the Galactic Republic. They are scorned by the cultural left and the cultural right, and young people avoid science and math classes in hordes. The tedious particulars of keeping ourselves alive, comfortable and free are being taken offline to countries where people are happy to sweat the details, as long as we have some foreign exchange left to send their way. Nothing is more seductive than to think that we, like the Jedi, could be masters of the most advanced technologies while living simple lives: to have a geek standard of living and spend our copious leisure time vegging out.

If the "Star Wars" movies are remembered a century from now, it'll be because they are such exact parables for this state of affairs. Young people in other countries will watch them in classrooms as an answer to the question: Whatever became of that big rich country that used to buy the stuff we make? The answer: It went the way of the old Republic.

I'm at work today, and a coworker smells slightly of the green weed.
Here's a modern day Emily Post: Do you tell people you're around that they remind you of a Phish concert?

I enjoy listening to the debates on climate change, and how China keeps portraying itself as a "developing" country.
I'm sorry, buddy, but if you're consistently ranked as the world's third largest economy (ignoring any eurozone grouping) then you're not developing, you're developed.

However, I would be willing to agree with them if I could officially refer to China, in publication, as "Taiwan's underdeveloped sibling".

See, you can't have face and bitch about being poor and underdeveloped, can you?

So, I've got some money with odd stamps on them, I'm assuming that they're foreign banks, etc.
I decided, instead of saving useless pieces of paper, I'd just scan them and spend the originals.
Apparently, Big Brother Epson doesn't like this. It actually brought up a warning!
and won't let me scan them.
I hate computers.

Back on the Work Train again. Holding steady so far....

I'm now pondering why Arnie Schwarzen-moron signed the silly ammunition bill.
Now I'm going to be treated (more) like a criminal for wanting to go to the range.
And won't be allowed to mailorder ammunition because.... I'm really not sure, the mail truck might explode?
And have to be FINGERPRINTED when buying ammunition, because this will obviously prevent me from shooting someone. Just knowing my fingerprint is out there, pursuing me.
This law will work, though: Criminals commonly obey every other law but the one they're breaking.. No criminal will buy illegal ammunition, that just wouldn't be right. One might say criminal.

I hate politicians, they have an overstated opinion of their durability and strength of their laws. Here's an idea, how about we pass laws that punish people for doing things wrong, such as murdering others, and then enforce them when these things occur? Oh, wait, we ALREADY have them? And they don't magically keep people honest? I know, lets make more duplicate laws! 

So, 7-eleven is weird.
This goes without saying.
I bought a twelve pack of coke, and it came with a free pocket spanish-english english-spanish dictionary.
They're currently pushing Domo-kun merchandise, which isn't weird as much as awesome, but hey...

I'm watching some silly show on BBC, about a blond girl that moves things with her mind, the show switches to two girls making out (shocking!) and immediately segues into a commercial for ANOTHER BBC show advertising it's shocking storyline involving two high school girls who are messing around.

I can picture some staff meeting at the BBC.
"How can we improve ratings"
off in the corner : "How about lesbians"
Old british guy, vaguely drooling "by jove, I think you've got it, Intern Jane, she of the slightly short hair, you're brilliant. Memo to all, across the board: Spice up our storyline's with Lesbians. I want lesbians in all shows. I don't care if it's a show about all gay men, I want lesbians in there! Now excuse me, as I go home to my frosty wife..."

1. The Filmore fire, burning roughly towards my house, currently the big California fire, was started by a "spontaneously combusting compost heap"
2. I bought a Nintendo DSi to learn Japanese again. It's cheaper than an electronic dictionary.

Basically is the new "umm".
Except at least umm is honest. Umm says "I have no idea what to say next, so I'll make a little noise to waste time until my brain catches up"
Basically is just pretentiousness at its worst, and makes the person listening feel like they're being talked down to.

I'm in favor of replacing basically with portentously.

"so, portentously, you need to work on that project"

It adds an air of dread to everything you say.


The old, slightly chubby Steve Jobs used to slightly annoy me, like someone who had too many pieces of pie.
The new, super thin Steve Jobs, actually frightens me.
He reminds me of my mortality.

So today, paying slightly more than I'd preferred, I bought an oddity.
A tie tack, which is supposedly ivory, featuring a polar bear carrying a baby seal cub in its mouth.