Economics

Capitalism, free markets, externalities, efficiency and personal finance

Related Tags:

Business Cars Environment green Health hybrids Innovation News Politics Post Science The Internet

Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription

Ben Stein in Expelled Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription, Did you know that all over the country, nay the world, people are being persecuted for their belief and intelligence. Zopiclone description, Did you know that a small, powerful elite controls everything that children are exposed to in school for their own devious, online buying Zopiclone hcl, Doses Zopiclone work, Darwinistic ends. Did you know that only a complete outsider, rx free Zopiclone, Zopiclone long term, a rebel with nothing but guts and a heart of steel, can expose the truth, Zopiclone natural. After Zopiclone, You might not know these things because none of them are true. But the makers of the movie "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" and star Ben Stein will try to shovel that particular pile of poop in theaters this February, Zopiclone recreational. Thanks to Pharyngula, an excellent blog by an actual scientist, for the tip, Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription. Comprar en línea Zopiclone, comprar Zopiclone baratos, From the movie's home page:

Ben realizes that he has been “Expelled,” and that educators and scientists are being ridiculed, real brand Zopiclone online, Buy Zopiclone no prescription, denied tenure and even fired – for the “crime” of merely believing that there might be evidence of “design” in nature, and that perhaps life is not just the result of accidental, Zopiclone without a prescription, Zopiclone no rx, random chance.

The movie Expelled, in a sense, where can i buy cheapest Zopiclone online, Buy Zopiclone online cod, is nothing new. It follows the established tactics of the creationist / intelligent design crowd, Zopiclone no prescription, Buy generic Zopiclone, trying to fight the "materialistic" "darwinists" in the court of public opinion rather than in the labs or peer-reviewed journals. It's yet another attack on science, Zopiclone samples. About Zopiclone, "And what's so wrong with that," you might ask, Zopiclone street price, Zopiclone blogs, "this is a democracy after all."

We don't do science by popular vote for the same reason that we don't design bridges and perform heart surgery using a jury of our peers. Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription, The value of a scientific theory can only be judged by it's correspondence to reality and it's predictive power.

Despite all of Ben's moral indignation, where can i cheapest Zopiclone online, Zopiclone coupon, intelligent design has yet to come up with any testable, falsifiable theories, Zopiclone from canadian pharmacy. Zopiclone wiki, Most of the arguments I've read boil down to one of three things: "The Bible says so," "I know it when I see it, purchase Zopiclone, Zopiclone dose, " or "I am very good at statistics but my conclusion is hard-wired into my assumptions." This is America, so you are free to believe any or all of those things, Zopiclone canada, mexico, india. Zopiclone class, Just don't get upset when you say that to a scientist and he or she asks you, "okay, Zopiclone from canada, Cheap Zopiclone no rx, so how can we test it to see if it's true or not?"

You don't need an undergrad degree in biology to understand this. Geneticists, Zopiclone trusted pharmacy reviews, Online buy Zopiclone without a prescription, working with a framework built upon the theory of evolution, are creating new things every day, Zopiclone schedule. You are eating corn and soy that they genetically modified, Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription. Where can i buy Zopiclone online, Geologists, working with a framework that includes millions of years to form the earth rather than a few days, are finding oil and other resources every day. Every time you fill up at the gas tank, you are disproving creationism.

In fact, for all the money spent on selling this idea to the American public, creationism and intelligent design have yet to come up with a single useful technology. Intelligent design advocates lose their jobs in the science fields not because of some elitist conspiracy, Mr. Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription, Stein, but because the free market rewards results.

And the worst thing about this whole episode is that casting Ben Stein as a rebel is about as reidiculous as you can get. How many underdog crusaders for truth do see laughing it up with George W. Bush.

Ben Stein and George W.  Bush laugh it up

Ben Stein wrote speeches for Nixon, Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription. You can put him in shorts and have him pose with a spray can on movie posters from here to Walla Walla Washington, it won't make him into some kind of rebel underdog fighting against The Man. Ben Stein is The Man.

To sum up:


  • Creationism is kept out of the science books because it's not science, and they don't have any results;

  • Creationist hope to make an end-run around the scientific method with movies and other clever marketing techniques; and

  • Ben Stein is a law professor, a Hollywood actor, and a political elite - he's not Erin Brockovich or Edward R. Murrow.

.

Similar posts: Seroquel For Sale. Modalert For Sale. Buy Topamax Without Prescription. Terbinafine For Sale. Cialis For Sale. Is Niravam addictive. Is ProSom safe. Carisoprodol duration. Buy generic Xanax. What is Lexotan.
Trackbacks from: Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription. Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription. Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription. Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription. Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription. Zopiclone for sale. Zopiclone no rx. Zopiclone description. Order Zopiclone from United States pharmacy. Zopiclone trusted pharmacy reviews.

Mefenorex For Sale

Mefenorex For Sale, Here's my unsought input for you today. Ordering Mefenorex online, I live on a street with a lot of duplexes. It's a nice neighborhood, is Mefenorex addictive, Mefenorex reviews, the houses are in good shape, and generally speaking it looks like the sort of place you would like to live, purchase Mefenorex for sale. Mefenorex forum, Monopoly Board But not all the houses are owner-occupied like ours, and some owners are out-of-state investors who maybe care a little less about upkeep, doses Mefenorex work. Mefenorex from canadian pharmacy, Some of the residents are elderly and have a hard time with gardening and yard work. And with the huge subprime mortgage problem looming over the country, houses here and there are going into default and sitting neglected, Mefenorex For Sale.

You've probably seen all the dramatic headlines about the Dow decline today, purchase Mefenorex online, Purchase Mefenorex, in part because of the weak housing market. Well, Mefenorex gel, ointment, cream, pill, spray, continuous-release, extended-release, Order Mefenorex no prescription, I've got an idea that will get the market up and running again. Okay, Mefenorex steet value, Herbal Mefenorex, probably not, because I'm not a financial genius and I know relatively little about real estate, online buying Mefenorex. What is Mefenorex, Still, I have an idea and thought I would share, Mefenorex schedule. Mefenorex For Sale, What if I started buying the duplexes next door to my house and then, instead of just renting out all the units individually, I created a condo association and sold the units as condos. Buy Mefenorex no prescription, I doubt it would make sense to do this with just one house, but if I had a whole street full of duplexes, my Mefenorex experience, Online Mefenorex without a prescription, that could add up to a considerable number of condos and a decent amount of property to be managed by the association.

This would have some of the benefits of buying a house, real brand Mefenorex online, Mefenorex for sale, since these are houses with their own basements, parking, effects of Mefenorex, Mefenorex street price, etc., with some of the benefits of buying a condo like not having to mow the lawn yourself, Mefenorex images. Mefenorex australia, uk, us, usa, It might be especially good in large cities and old, inner-ring suburbs that are fighting to keep neighborhoods from decline, Mefenorex price, coupon, Mefenorex no prescription, since it would guarantee a certain level of maintenance across a wider area and condo owners might be more invested in the community than renters in the same units.

The concept just needs a catchy name, Mefenorex overnight. Condohood, Mefenorex For Sale. Purchase Mefenorex online no prescription, Neighborminium. I'm not sure those work, Mefenorex without a prescription. Japan, craiglist, ebay, overseas, paypal, Maybe something French--after all, people like to live on cul-de-sacs but I don't think they would like to live on bottom-of-bags, online buying Mefenorex. Where can i find Mefenorex online, Perhaps voisinage condos.

Now, Mefenorex use, Buy Mefenorex from mexico, I don't really know if this is a new idea, and I haven't really looked, so don't get mad if this is old news. I admit it sounds a bit like buying up Baltic Avenue and putting four houses on it so you can turn them in for a hotel. On the other hand if it is a brand new idea, don't even think about running out and getting a business method patent because this simple blog post is prior art, and they are starting to care about prior art again.

If you have a few hundred thousand sitting around and you'd like to help me follow my vision, or if you want to fill me in on the laws and regulations I'm ignoring, please post a comment below.

Similar posts: Buy Restoril Without Prescription. Clonazepam For Sale. Acyclovir For Sale. Buy Mefenorex Without Prescription. Klonopin For Sale. Vardenafil long term. Modalert images. Loprazolam used for. Mazindol dosage. Buy cheap Rivotril.
Trackbacks from: Mefenorex For Sale. Mefenorex For Sale. Mefenorex For Sale. Mefenorex For Sale. Mefenorex For Sale. Mefenorex no prescription. Mefenorex photos. Mefenorex pictures. Mefenorex samples. Mefenorex reviews.

Buying Your Way into College – Affirmative Action for the Rich

We've written before about why schools continue the practice of favoring legacy admissions - accepting the sons and daughters of wealthy alumni. Now there is some empirical evidence of the economics that drive this practice. Slate Magazine recently ran an article about the puzzle of charitable giving in economics - if markets are driven by individuals rationally pursuing their own best interest, where does charity come from? A new study by Jonathan Meer of Stanford and Harvey S. Rosen of Princeton shows that when it comes to donations to one's alma mater, charity isn't altruism. Alumni with kids are 13 percent more likely to donate, and they are more and more likely to donate as their kid reaches age 14. At that point there's a big split - for those parents who's kids go on to apply to the school, donations continue to increase. The parents whose kids do not apply to the alma mater drop off giving. It seems pretty clear that many parents give to their schools because they think it will influence their kids' chances of getting in. Colleges an universities benefit from this, but the study did not examine whether or not the donations worked. This whole process strikes most people as unfair, mostly because the focus on GPAs, SAT scores, and admissions essays makes it look like it's supposed to be a meritocracy. Americans love democracy (where everyone gets an equal say and an equal chance) and stories about unlikely success stories and self-made men. Allowing external factors to secretly skew admissions is so unpopular that affirmative action has been continuously attacked. Legacy admissions are affirmative action for rich people. So my advice to schools is to either do away with the practice (not very likely), or make it public. Why not set aside a certain number of admissions, and just let parents bid on them in an auction? The regular admissions will be more of a meritocracy, and auctions are pure capitalism, something Americans love. Heck, put the admissions up on eBay, that way you don't have to build your own infrastructure.

Movie Review: SiCKO

SiCKOAs a lefty liberal, I like Michael Moore. As a journalist (I have more creds than just a blog, I swear), not so much. Lucky for me he's making movies for the masses and not writing for The Washington Post. Otherwise, he'd have been shut down years ago. Instead, we can enjoy his films for what they are - films that while maybe not full of "truthiness" will make people talk and think. As Moore state in the film, SiCKO is not actually about people who don't have health care in America. It's more about people who DO have health insurance and get screwed by it. People who pay the premiums and deductibles and still get denied care. In America, we like to get what we pay for, but when it comes to insurance it doesn't seem to work that way. He tells the stories of an older couple who have gone bankrupt paying for medical treatment for heart attacks and cancer, even though they have good jobs with good insurance. The middle-aged woman who's brain tumor was considered not a medical emergency and died. The young woman who's surgery was paid for by her insurance and then payment was revoked when it was revealed that she had not disclosed a previous yeast infection when applying for insurance. Moore reports in the movie that he received over 2500 emails from people with stories about the horrors of health insurance - many of them from people who work in the insurance industry. The most stand-out story was that of Linda Peno, a former medical reviewer (the person in charge of deciding who gets what care) for the Humana HMO. Ms. Peno stated in a congressional review:
I wish to begin by making a public confession. In the spring of 1987, I caused the death of a man. Although this was known to many people, I have not been taken before any court of law or called to account for this in any professional or public forum. In fact, just the opposite occurred. I was rewarded for this. It brought me an improved reputation in my job and contributed to my advancement afterwards. Not only did I demonstrate that I could do what was asked, expected of me, I exemplified the good company employee. I saved a half a million dollars.
It may be no secret that insurance companies are for-profit businesses and saving money is their game. After all, we're a capitalist society. But is this the right way to go? Moore points out our socialized fire and police protection. Our free schools. Free libraries. Why not free, government-controlled health care? Most are quick to point out Canada's socialized medicine and how it's just...bad. Long wait times to see doctors and get procedures done. Sub-par professionals and facilities. In the movie, Moore visits some Canadians and speaks with them about their speed and quality of care. The Canadians he spoke with were happy with both. He also spoke with British and French people about their socialized medicine and American ex-pats in England and France about their care. All of those countries got glowing reviews. Of course, this is the sort of thing one sees in a Moore movie that one might need to take with a grain of salt. Is the Canadian health system really as good as Moore would have us believe? When every review is glowing one has got to assume there were several opinions left on the cutting-room floor. Two examples of rebuttals for this film come from The Associated Press and Kurt Loder of MTV News. The AP article is sort of rubbish - while it points out that Moore inflates numbers a bit in the film (reporting 50 million uninsured in the U.S. as opposed to 44.8 million, for example) when you're dealing in millions of lives the rebuttal is sort of moot. Whether it's 50 million or 44.8 million uninsured, or $800 million given to health insurance companies from a Medicare bill or $729 million...it's all still too much. Moore also points out that American is 37th in the world in terms of health care. The AP points out that Canada is 30th. Loder is quick to point out flaws in the Canadian and French systems. It doesn't matter what rank Canada has or how French is bungling their medicine. When it comes to actual health care resources, America is top-notch. Doctors come here to train and dignitaries come here for procedures. Unlike Ottowa's "one chemo machine," the American health care infrastructure is in place. Moreover, since we're the last modern western country to delve in to socialized medicine we're able to assess all other failed and successful systems and create one to meet our needs. But can we? Will we? Can we afford it? For my small company, it costs roughly $800/mo to insure one family of three and about $200/mo to insure a single person. This is before any out-of-pocket costs, of course (one employee reports having to pay about $5000 out-of-pocket in 2006 when his family of 2 became a family of 3). The auto industry is crumbling largely in part to the increasing cost of health care for current and retired employees. People are paying for health care in one form or another, so why not alleviate those personal and industry costs and put the money towards a more greater and fair use? One of the interviewees (from England) in Moore's movie makes a seriously strong point - if the government can find money to kill people, why can't it find money to help people? If it costs my company an extra $300 per month in taxes instead of $200 a month in premiums to keep me insured under a government plan and I am guaranteed never to be denied any health care, how could I argue with that? We've all got tales of being screwed by health insurance. I was lucky enough to be brought up under one of America's best health insurance plans as the child of a union auto worker. I never had to fight for any sort of care. But, when I was 18 (still under my dad's insurance as I was in college), I was diagnosed with Temporal Mandibular Joint Disorder (TMJD). Before I got treatment, I was to the point where I had to drink my dinner through a straw because I couldn't open my mouth wide enough or have the power to chew. TMJD treatment, which can be long and expensive whether you have it surgically corrected or corrected through orthodontics, is not covered under most health insurance including mine. Lucky for me, my college fund was supplemented with scholarships and my folks were financially well-off to just bite the bullet and pay for treatment. I was extremely lucky to have been diagnosed at the right time in my life. Had it happened today, no matter what my health insurance status, I'd have been in serious, serious debt. As everyone grows and goes through the working world, we are all in fear of losing health care or losing health. This is our future and it seems hopeless. SiCKO points out that in other countries, government fears the people while in America the people fear the government. In America we're strapped by debt and fear of not being able to get or stay healthy. We're apathetic and scared and we don't vote. We don't discuss. We don't rebel. SiCKO will hopefully turn American thought and discussion back from a losing war in the Middle East to the very real and very domestic problem of American health care reform. Moore's ideas and presentations might not serve as a good template for what can or should be done but SiCKO is definitely a movie worth seeing and hopefully starts the ball rolling on discussions about what can be done.

Recycling is Good for the Environment After All.

Does sorting bottles and cans really save the earth? You may have heard the rumor that the whole thing is a big sham - either a misguided to make ourselves feel better about our wasteful lifestyles, or worse a conspiracy of crystal-wearing, tree-hugging hippies. You may have noticed a number of geeky environment-related posts on Unsought Input. Some of our writers like to think of themselves as environmentalists. Now, before you click your back button, I should explain: no one here will ever tell you to stop driving and live in a cave! We are positive, progressive environmentalists who come to our green views through a love of innovation, efficiency, scientific progress, and yes, even market economics. So, is recycling a bunch of bullshit designed to make us all feel better about ourselves? Does putting glass and plastic in a green bin actually damage the environment more than help? Penn and Teller seemed to think so in an episode of their show, Bullshit. Bullshit is a great show, it's very entertaining, and they call out psychics and feng shui practitioners on their unsupportable claims. It's also filled with things that are less objective debunkery and more Penn and Teller opinion. The duo have a number of reasons for disliking recycling. For example, there is no shortage of landfills and believe recycling uses more energy than it saves. They liken it to a dogmatic religious practice. Are they right? should we give up and put throw our used printer paper in with the coffee grounds and litter box tailings? Well, according to The Economist, recycling is worth it in almost every case. For those of you unfamiliar, The Economist is hardly a bastion of feel-good hippyism. In American terms the magazine is notoriously fiscally conservative (which is sometimes called economic liberalism in Europe). In a recent article they report the results of a study by the Technical University of Denmark and the Danish Topic Centre on Waste:
The researchers then looked at more than 200 scenarios, comparing the impact of recycling with that of burying or burning particular types of waste material. They found that in 83% of all scenarios that included recycling, it was indeed better for the environment.
If you live in a community that does single-stream garbage collection, you might wonder if they really do sort out the recyclables. Chances are they do, and single-stream systems can actually be some of the most efficient:
San Francisco, which changed from multi to single-stream collection a few years ago, now boasts a recycling rate of 69%—one of the highest in America. With the exception of garden and food waste, all the city's kerbside recyclables are sorted in a 200,000-square-foot facility that combines machines with the manpower of 155 employees.
The big question about recycling is really a series of separate, somewhat related questions. First, are we really running out of landfills? Of course not, we have several deserts and oceans just waiting to be filled. Now, to ask the actually meaningful question: are we running out of landfills near large population centers that generate the trash? That answer is a lot closer to yes. It turns out most people don't want to live next to a dump, so dumps are getting harder and harder to build. Suburban sprawl only makes it worse. Second, is recycling economically worth it? Recycling is indeed subsidized in most cities. But the answer to this question depends on things like commodity prices, new technologies and innovations, and whether or not you try to count the market externalities. Finally, does recycling have a net environmental benefit? This is actually a huge question, and life cycle analysis is not easy to do. How far back to you go? If you go all the way back to the energy expended on mining raw materials, transportation, etc., then the answer tends to be yes. Now, does this one study prove for all time that recycling is worth doing? Of course not - that would be rather dogmatic. But it is further evidence, with a thorough methodology. This is how science works. For example, here's another paper that examines the significance of assumptions in life cycle assessments like this one. When was the last time a religion or superstition publish a report examining possible issues in their underlying assumptions? Earlier I called Bullshit a great show, and it is. So how did they get it wrong on this issue? Penn and Teller are absolutely brilliant when it comes to debunking flim-flam artists, because they have years of training and experience as flim-flam artists themselves. Magicians and psychics (and the like) use the exact same techniques in their work --the difference is that magicians tell you it's a trick, and not supernatural god power. When the show ventures into other topics, though, the quality varies depending on the experts they rely on. [youtube]9oloM_dSoW4[/youtube] So, to recap:
  1. Recycling? Good.
  2. Dogmatic crystal-wearing, tree-hugging hippies? Bad.
  3. Penn and Teller on flim-flam artists? Good.
  4. Penn and Teller on scientific topics? Not so much.