Friday, May 28, 2004
Stupid People Tricks
Neil Boortz has an article up today on Tech Central Station on stupid people. Specifically Boortz asserts that 50% of Americans are too stupid to function well in society. On his radio show and now in pixels, Boortz has been railing on the fact that Americans are unaware that the economy is not just improving, but booming (averaging better than 5% GDP growth since the most recent tax cut, and > 1.5 million new jobs created, unemployment dropping to the mid 5% range). He also uses this article as a chance to call those who benefit from socialist government practices stupid.
I differ somewhat. While there is a significant dumbass following in the US, I don't believe it's anywhere near 50% - perhaps only 10%. I believe that many people are not stupid, just short sighted and ignorant (an important distinction to me). To me (and to a dictionary), ignorance is just an unawareness of the facts. Short sightedness (not in the dictionary), to me, is placing a higher value on the immediate than the long term. Stupidity is an inability to learn, particularly from mistakes, and I would posit, an inability to reason through to the consequences of one's actions. The latter part of my definition of stupid might imply that I think short-sighted people as stupid since the long term gain is by conventional wisdom greater than the short term. However, this analysis ignores the fact that different people have different preferences and different time discounting factors. Some people do value $1,000 today more than $1,000,000 tomorrow. Say you needed the $1,000 today to pay off gambling debts or you were going to sleep with the fishes. If I don't come up with the $1,000 today, it won't matter how much money I get tomorrow.1.
However, let's go through Boortz's examples again. In his economics example, that's classical ignorance. This lack of knowledge can be attributed to laziness, the media, or what not, but not stupidity. In his socialist example, of course some people are going to like receiving other people's money, and of course some people like the idea of are willing to forgo net earnings if the government, in effect, does their financial planning. The fact that there are some people willing to pay this price should not surprise anyone who has looked at supply-demand curves. (Price goes up, but some demand remains). Different strokes for different folks I say.2. 3.
However, there are indeed stupid people and even more people will occasionally do stupid things. So the following are some stupid things I've read recently.
Example 1
Chicago recently considered allowing Walmart to build a store, or more accurately, two different stores. Walmart proposed a store in an affluent white neighborhood and a store in a poor black neighborhood. Due in no small part to the anti-Walmart lobby, several alderman expressed concern over the effect that a Walmart would have on the communities, particularly the poor (the poor however, really really wanted a Walmart so they could buy stuff cheaper). In the end, Chicago decided to only allow one Walmart to be built - the one in white suburbia, the one where no one presumably needs employment, the one that's further away from people who would see the greatest benefit from shopping there, the one that didn't need neighborhood revitalization. So now people will drive from all over Chicago will drive to suburbia to buy groceries and CDs. And due to mall effects, drop their change there too. Further since the people working at Walmart probably won't be living in the neighborhood, the workers will see less benefit from the jobs created by Walmart as a larger portion of their income and time must be given to transportation.
Example 2
Saletan's Bushisms and Kerryisms. Both premises are deeply flawed. Bushisms are based on the idea that Bush is an exceptional bumbling idiot, and Kerryisms are based on the idea that Kerry is so exceptionally political that he can't bring himself to speak like a normal person and takes 100 words to say what can be said in 10. Most of the Bushisms give examples of his malapropisms, but this is something every person who speaks publicly regularly does. You just can't give two to three speeches a day and not expect to stumble over a word or two. Not if you intend to spend time doing something other than just practicing the speech. The specific Bushism I linked to is especially stupid as it overlooks the smack-you-up-the-side-of-the-head-with-a-two-by-four symbolism, namely that Bush was emphasizing the point that the US has enabled these men who had their hands to cut off to assume normal lives again so that something like shaking a hand could become routine again.
Kerryisms are also dumb as they don't recognize the role those little asides play. For instance if Kerry criticizes Iraq without a gratuitous praise of the troops, the criticism won't fly. If he's arguing for a minimum wage increase (which for the I disagree with for reasons I'll post on sometime later) then he better note the hardships he's placing on employers or he'll be labeled as insensitive to their needs and better note that the vast majority of people aren't paid the minimum wage, then he'll be labeled as out-of-touch. Politicians have to constantly cover their butts and this is what Kerry is doing when he puts in those asides.
In this example the premise is dumb and the execution is stupid.
Eugene Volokh also gives a critique of Kerryisms and Bushisms.
So there are stupid people out there, just not in the examples Boortz cited.
Footnotes
1. It's also precisely for this reason that I find criticisms of people who take payday loans so ignorant. It fills a very real void in the market for people who for whatever reason need money right now. (Would your bank give you a loan today - no collateral, just your paycheck?). If the rates charged are too high, I don't see that as a cause for worry either as large profits encourage new sellers which eliminates monopoly pricing capability creating a commodity market causing prices to drop. In the meantime, those who took the initial risk in filling the market void deserve whatever prime mover advantages they may have gained.
2. My strokes require two hands.
3. That being said, socialism is a stupid thing for a country to adopt if it is concerned with maximizing the economic well being of the country. Also, recognizing that different people have different preferences, I think people should be able to opt out of social security and medicare, if they so choose (but don't come crying to the government if you muck things up).
Comments(0) |
Neil Boortz has an article up today on Tech Central Station on stupid people. Specifically Boortz asserts that 50% of Americans are too stupid to function well in society. On his radio show and now in pixels, Boortz has been railing on the fact that Americans are unaware that the economy is not just improving, but booming (averaging better than 5% GDP growth since the most recent tax cut, and > 1.5 million new jobs created, unemployment dropping to the mid 5% range). He also uses this article as a chance to call those who benefit from socialist government practices stupid.
I differ somewhat. While there is a significant dumbass following in the US, I don't believe it's anywhere near 50% - perhaps only 10%. I believe that many people are not stupid, just short sighted and ignorant (an important distinction to me). To me (and to a dictionary), ignorance is just an unawareness of the facts. Short sightedness (not in the dictionary), to me, is placing a higher value on the immediate than the long term. Stupidity is an inability to learn, particularly from mistakes, and I would posit, an inability to reason through to the consequences of one's actions. The latter part of my definition of stupid might imply that I think short-sighted people as stupid since the long term gain is by conventional wisdom greater than the short term. However, this analysis ignores the fact that different people have different preferences and different time discounting factors. Some people do value $1,000 today more than $1,000,000 tomorrow. Say you needed the $1,000 today to pay off gambling debts or you were going to sleep with the fishes. If I don't come up with the $1,000 today, it won't matter how much money I get tomorrow.1.
However, let's go through Boortz's examples again. In his economics example, that's classical ignorance. This lack of knowledge can be attributed to laziness, the media, or what not, but not stupidity. In his socialist example, of course some people are going to like receiving other people's money, and of course some people like the idea of are willing to forgo net earnings if the government, in effect, does their financial planning. The fact that there are some people willing to pay this price should not surprise anyone who has looked at supply-demand curves. (Price goes up, but some demand remains). Different strokes for different folks I say.2. 3.
However, there are indeed stupid people and even more people will occasionally do stupid things. So the following are some stupid things I've read recently.
Example 1
Chicago recently considered allowing Walmart to build a store, or more accurately, two different stores. Walmart proposed a store in an affluent white neighborhood and a store in a poor black neighborhood. Due in no small part to the anti-Walmart lobby, several alderman expressed concern over the effect that a Walmart would have on the communities, particularly the poor (the poor however, really really wanted a Walmart so they could buy stuff cheaper). In the end, Chicago decided to only allow one Walmart to be built - the one in white suburbia, the one where no one presumably needs employment, the one that's further away from people who would see the greatest benefit from shopping there, the one that didn't need neighborhood revitalization. So now people will drive from all over Chicago will drive to suburbia to buy groceries and CDs. And due to mall effects, drop their change there too. Further since the people working at Walmart probably won't be living in the neighborhood, the workers will see less benefit from the jobs created by Walmart as a larger portion of their income and time must be given to transportation.
Example 2
Saletan's Bushisms and Kerryisms. Both premises are deeply flawed. Bushisms are based on the idea that Bush is an exceptional bumbling idiot, and Kerryisms are based on the idea that Kerry is so exceptionally political that he can't bring himself to speak like a normal person and takes 100 words to say what can be said in 10. Most of the Bushisms give examples of his malapropisms, but this is something every person who speaks publicly regularly does. You just can't give two to three speeches a day and not expect to stumble over a word or two. Not if you intend to spend time doing something other than just practicing the speech. The specific Bushism I linked to is especially stupid as it overlooks the smack-you-up-the-side-of-the-head-with-a-two-by-four symbolism, namely that Bush was emphasizing the point that the US has enabled these men who had their hands to cut off to assume normal lives again so that something like shaking a hand could become routine again.
Kerryisms are also dumb as they don't recognize the role those little asides play. For instance if Kerry criticizes Iraq without a gratuitous praise of the troops, the criticism won't fly. If he's arguing for a minimum wage increase (which for the I disagree with for reasons I'll post on sometime later) then he better note the hardships he's placing on employers or he'll be labeled as insensitive to their needs and better note that the vast majority of people aren't paid the minimum wage, then he'll be labeled as out-of-touch. Politicians have to constantly cover their butts and this is what Kerry is doing when he puts in those asides.
In this example the premise is dumb and the execution is stupid.
Eugene Volokh also gives a critique of Kerryisms and Bushisms.
So there are stupid people out there, just not in the examples Boortz cited.
Footnotes
1. It's also precisely for this reason that I find criticisms of people who take payday loans so ignorant. It fills a very real void in the market for people who for whatever reason need money right now. (Would your bank give you a loan today - no collateral, just your paycheck?). If the rates charged are too high, I don't see that as a cause for worry either as large profits encourage new sellers which eliminates monopoly pricing capability creating a commodity market causing prices to drop. In the meantime, those who took the initial risk in filling the market void deserve whatever prime mover advantages they may have gained.
2. My strokes require two hands.
3. That being said, socialism is a stupid thing for a country to adopt if it is concerned with maximizing the economic well being of the country. Also, recognizing that different people have different preferences, I think people should be able to opt out of social security and medicare, if they so choose (but don't come crying to the government if you muck things up).
Comments(0) |
