Monty Python’s Dead Scandinavian Parrot Lives!

Well, at least it did 55 million years ago. David Waterhouse, a curator of a natural history museum in England, has determined that the fossilized bones found in a cave in Denmark are those of an ancient species of parrot. This is the first evidence that parrots lived this far north, that something like a “Norwegian Blue” parrot could actually exist.

Michael Palin of Monty Python played the scamming pet store owner who theorized that the “Norwegian Blue” parrot recently sold to a dissatisfied customer was not dead, but was merely “pining for the fjords”.

When informed of the discovery, an amused Palin commented: “All I can say is that it just shows that nothing is original.”

It’s A Long Way To The Top (If You Want To Be An Economist)

Get a load of this. A discussion paper by an economist at the University of Calgary on how the different vocal stylings of Bon Scott and Brian Johnson effect economic decision making.

The author of the study, one Robert Oxoby, admits that the long standing argument on which AC/DC vocalist is better may be too subjective to answer conclusively. So instead, while testing Canadian college students in traditional economic game theory on negotiating, he had a song from each vocalist playing in the background. The goal is to determine if players in the game made more economically advisable decisions while listening to one or the other of the vocalists.

The songs chosen were “It’s A Long Way To The Top If You Want To Rock and Roll” featuring the late Mr. Scott and “Shoot To Thrill” by the current vocalist Mr. Johnson. The study used deeper cuts to avoid listener identification with monster smashes like “Highway to Hell” and “Back In Black.” Skimming the conclusions, apparently Mr. Johnson’s vocals resulted in more economically efficient decision making by the students.

Some comments.

1) Everyone knows that Bon Scott freakin’ rules so the study is flawed from the outset.

2) AC/DC music doesn’t make me want to maximize the utility of my economic decisions, it make me want to act as stupidly as I am able (hopefully within legal boundaries, but certainly while vigorously head-banging, an act that will cause severe cognitive dysfunction over prolonged periods.)

3) Listen to “Let There Be Rock” by the Drive-By Truckers and try to imagine any rational brain activity going on while listening to Bon Scott-era AC/DC.

4) “It’s A Long Way To The Top If You Want To Rock And Roll” kicks ass and is without a doubt the greatest song in the AC/DC catalog (dig the dueling solos between the electric guitar and the bagpipes!) I mean, that has to compromise the integrity of the study, right?

5) Steven Levitt, one of the authors of Freakonomics (and the source of this link), had it exactly right: “I hope this guy has tenure.”

Scientists Reveal We’re All . . . Buddhists?

Wow. A spectacularly interesting article by David Brooks on two issues upon which I am largely uninformed: religion and neuroscience. In his article “Neural Buddhists”, Brooks posits that the arguments between scientists and the religious will not be the current spat over the existence of God. The argument will pit advocates claiming scientific proof of the universal tendency of man toward a generalized spirituality and orthodox religious folks still claiming the need for their particular brand of religious worship. Brooks states that in the future the holy writings and practices of all major world religions may just be defined as “cultural artifacts built on top of universal human traits.”

Science is increasingly able to study and identify the physical evidence of moral and ethical transcendence in humans, which in its distilled essence looks more like the ethical underpinnings of Buddhism than anything else. Brooks predicts a future where science actually argues on behalf of the mysticism of universal love, leaving current believers of orthodox religious practices to argue that they aren’t some sort of Model T Ford and have value as a way to experience the infinite.

I guess. As a lapsed Episcopalian who took history and sociology of of science courses to get out of my college science requirement, I’m guessing this is what Brooks means. So break out the prayer flags and chant om, we’re all Buddhists now (or not.)

R.E.M. Cool, Again?

Andrew Leonard writes the “How The World Works” blog for Salon.com. His writings are generally about economics and globalization. His most recent post is a meditation on the evanescence of hipster street cred, as demonstrated by the career of R.E.M.

Andrew Leonard is obviously around my age, able to remember the amazing impact that the albums Murmur and Reckoning had on fans (and the Chronic Town EP for the really plugged in.) The band became a huge international success, selling boatloads of albums and playing concerts at the Enormo-domes. But their hipster street cred was lost relatively quickly. Mr. Andrews points to the ubiquity of the “Losing My Religion” single. I think the Top 40 breakthrough of “It’s The End Of The World As We Know It (And I Feel Fine)” probably sealed the deal for the cool kids and moved them off of college radio.

Hey, Microsoft offered them bazillions to use “End of the World” to launch the advertising campaign for Windows (to their credit they refused–and the Rolling Whores added to their bottom line by selling out “Start Me Up”. A lousy song for a lousy product.) But even though they produced several more very fine albums: “Green”, “Out Of Time” “Automatic For The People”, the band was not the same.

For fans, the fun of discovering and championing a new band ends in one of two ways–in the immortal duality posed by Neil Young in Rust Never Sleeps: burn out or fade away. Burn out spectacularly and you can remain an indie cult icon forever (Jeff Buckley, Elliott Smith). R.E.M. is still plugging along, but they are fading away in terms of relevance. If everyone knows the band, it’s no fun spending your time discussing their music with your friends. It doesn’t seem as compelling.

In his post, Andrew Leonard pointed out that the new R.E.M. album was being played on his local college radio station, and they have made the full circle from hip to hype and back again. I hope so, but I’m not so sure. As Bill Wyman definitively shows on this post from his blog Hitsville, rock critics have been writing ad nauseam that the “new” R.E.M. album is the return to form and former glory that their fans are desperately hoping for. I have the feeling that we’ll never feel the same about R.E.M. as we did back in the day. But we’ll still have our memories.

My First Taste Of The Grass

My First Taste Of The Grass

Originally uploaded by Phil At Sun

Last week I went out to Alliance Bank Stadium to root for the Pawtucket Red Sox against the hometown Chiefs. Why?
1) I’m never going to root against the Red Sox–majors or top farm team
2) The Chiefs nickname is racist.
3) I had to see the new grass field.

Oh well, the day was overcast and cold, the PawSox lost 8-5 and the thrilling young stars destined for Fenway are mostly already up in Boston due to injuries (Lowrie, Buchholz, Moss). It was still a fun day. Draft Saranac beer and a grass field. Beats lousy corporate brew and astroturf.

Babylon By Bus

No, not the live album by Bob Marley (with the cool map graphic on the inside album sleeve showing a Syracuse tour date). This is a book by Ray Lemoine and Jeff Neumann about their experiences in “Mission Accomplished-era” Iraq. Check out this cool excerpt from Outside magazine

Two young guys in post-war, early occupation Iraq. Are they with the military? Foreign Service? A respected NGO? No, they were the guys who sold the “Yankees Suck” t-shirts outside Fenway Park in between adventures traveling and playing high stakes poker. These guys bluffed their way into Iraq and within a couple of days talked themselves into a job establishing a network of indigenous not-for-profit charities in the “new Iraq.” Their story is an interesting microcosm of the problems facing the United States in their sad attempts at nation building in the Middle East.

While well-meaning and full of entrepreneurial spirit, the guys don’t speak the language, have little knowledge of the history and customs of the country and have no real plan on how to set up a non-profit sector (and no superiors with any real interest in planning.) However, they are blessed with the ability to relate to people, are totally free of any ideological/political baggage and are unconcerned about how to take credit for their activities.

Their party hearty spirit and thirst for adventure allowed them to meet a wide variety of people–government officials, military personnel, press folks, NGO employees and assorted drunken ex-pats and shady characters. As such, you get a much more in depth look at what is going on in Iraq than some more traditional press accounts. They give a terrifying portrait of the private “security” forces: beefy guys pumped up on steroids and drugs, out of control at all times, whether it’s shooting at convoys or starting bar fights. While they run across some stock military types that seem right out of central casting, they also highlight the work of what they call the new breed of military officer: highly educated, resourceful, helpful and dedicated. Many of the officers are so dedicated because they realize what a mess our country has made of this situation and feel obligated to make amends, somehow.

While the guys may be short on political analysis, they do manage to ask a number of pertinent questions and accurately assess the problems they themselves caused in Iraq. They wonder why nation building and the promotion of democracy is being done by the military, an organization that seems to be ill-suited to the task and often inflames the ire of those we are trying to help. They also acknowledge that the activities that they undertook were actually counter-productive.

Through their connections, they located small charitable groups around Baghdad and helped them distribute supplies donated from the United States. The guys realized, largely after their time in Iraq, that most of these groups were religious groups and the aid they supplied helped strengthen their reputations within the community as power brokers. The guys didn’t establish a network of Iraqi run NGO’s, but rather helped to exacerbate the tensions that exploded into all-out religious civil war shortly after their departure.

The book ends when they were forced to leave Iraq under a death threat from religious groups trying to muscle in on their program. The widespread violence and death of friends and colleagues turns the guys from young kids on a rollicking adventure into much more thoughtful individuals–although they do manage to get arrested in Jordan immediately after leaving Iraq, possibly their way of dealing with the enormity of what they’ve experienced.

The guys maintained that watching the Red Sox horrible loss to the Yankees in the 2003 playoffs was the catalyst for their adventure. The good news is that the guys did make it back to Boston in time to catch the Red Sox’ playoff and World Series victories in October 2004. Now I’ve just got to locate one of those “Yankees Suck, Jeter Swallows t-shirts!”

Gas Taxes & Strawberry Statements

A favorite book of mine has always been James Simon Kunen’s account of his experiences as a student at Columbia, especially during the 1968 student uprising and takeover of administration buildings. The Strawberry Statement was one of my favorite books as a young high school and college student. It’s a great meditation on how events, even major ones like the Vietnam War and a campus riot, effect ordinary people. Kunen even referred to himself as a “single revolutionary digit.”

The current brouhaha over the Clinton-McCain gas tax holiday reminds me of two points in Kunen’s book. The title of the book was a reference to a statement made by a Dean at Columbia. Dean Herbert Deane allegedly said that students’ opinions about University policy had as much effect on his thinking as if the students told him they enjoyed eating strawberries. In other words, their opinions were irrelevant. Hillary Clinton’s “Strawberry Statement” is her recent declaration that she didn’t care if not one professional economist could be found to ratify the fiscal sanity of the gas tax holiday: “I’m not going to throw my lot in with economists.”

So now Hillary has changed the rationale for her campaign. Out is Hillary’s earnest appeal to well thought-out policy (as opposed to Obama’s ethereal and detached rhetoric). Clinton’s new rationale is her steadfast support of real folks, despite what those elitist always-did-their-homework-on-Friday-nights economists think.

Clinton justifies her position by declaring that a lot of well-thought out policy (and a lot of awful Bush policy) does nothing but make it harder for middle class families to eke out a living. This reminds me of another thought from Kunen’s book. During the disturbances at Columbia classes were cancelled and radical activists started offering “liberation classes”, sort of glorified teach-ins. Kunen mused that liberation classes weren’t going to do any good for say, the student studying classical music. Kunen noted that a lot of people get screwed by events over which they have little control and no say.

Clinton is correct when she notes that middle class families are being screwed and often public policy does nothing to help them, and possibly makes their problems worse. However, even the beleaguered middle class doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Their lives exist in a world of choices and decisions. Real leadership often requires elected officials to tell people that the decisions they have made cannot be sustained if the entire nation is to prosper.

America cannot continue to claim 25% of the world’s non-renewable energy resources. America cannot expect to see oil prices significantly decrease in a world where oil company production is falling every year and demand is booming due to the increase in the number of motorists in India and China. It is irresponsible and the opposite of leadership to tell middle class families driving SUV’s and living in the sprawl cities of the exurbs that their way of life (dependent on cheap gas) is in any way sustainable. Minimize the damage now instead of kicking the can down the road.

Stupidest.Policy.Ever

The gas tax holiday proposal by both John McCain and Hillary Clinton has been widely derided both by economists for its total ignorance of basic supply and demand theory and by environmentalists concerned that Americans are continuing to live in a dream world where 5% of the world’s population can continue to consume 25% of the world’s non-renewable energy.

The best rant on this policy is by Tom Friedman in a New York Times article entitled “Dumb As We Wanna Be.”

The McCain-Clinton proposal is a reminder to me that the biggest energy crisis we have in our country today is the energy to be serious — the energy to do big things in a sustained, focused and intelligent way. We are in the midst of a national political brownout.

However, the sheer stupidity of the gas tax holiday proposal has fostered an interesting contest. James Fallows, the wonderful writer for the Atlantic, asked readers of his blog to nominate the stupidest bipartisan public policy enacted by the federal government.

Among the worthy submissions:
farm bill and its subsidies to wealthy factory farm corporations
Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which declared Iran’s standing army a terrorist group
1986 Anti-Drug Abuse act, set up sentencing distinction between crack and powder cocaine
Patriot Act

The winner was mandates and subsidies for ethanol production and use.:

“I think bi-partisan support for ethanol is more stupid [than the McCain-Clinton 'gas tax holiday' plan], because it’s actually harmful and because it not only panders to the public … worse it panders to a special interest group (Midwest farmers and their regional politicians).
It’s harmful because: 1) it helped to catalyze higher levels of food inflation, 2) it consumes as much energy to make and distribute as it provides, 3) it deflects attention from developing trying sound policies to enhance our energy security, 4) it didn’t allow for removal of taxes on the import of truly energy efficient ethanol produced in Brazil from sugar, and 5) it’s a such an extreme example of government disfuntionality it causes people like me to become truly disillusioned with the political process.”

I’m not quite sure if my choices were bipartisan, but it’s hard to beat the stupidity of the Savings and Loan deregulation in the 1980’s and the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The former, combined with the Reagan administration’s hatred of government oversight and regulation allowed S & L ’s to be looted by corporate pirates, forcing taxpayers to bail out the system to the tune of $5 billion. The latter repealed the provision forbidding bank holding companies from owning other types of financial companies. many economists feel that this created the corporate climate that has resulted in the current meltdown of the mortgage market. That $5 billion S & L bailout will seem like peanuts when we’ve come through the worst of the credit mess today.

Bruce and Little Steven Listmania

Time Magazine has named Bruce one of the 100 most important people of 2008. He’s one of only three musicians, the others being Miley Cyrus and Mariah Carey. It’s a weird kind of tribute. Sean Penn’s written profile is almost unreadable:
“In the chain of our responses to the most influential art, or artists, of our day, there is a link for most of us, an image. One could describe it as a honey-drip, slow-motion picture. We see one hand passing a baton into another, the influences of the influential. And in that rite of passage, Bruce Springsteen is no exception.”

Much more interesting is Little Steven’s profile of Alex Rigopulos & Eran Egozy, the creators of the video games Guitar Hero and Rock Band:

“The record business is over! there’s no new rock ‘n’ roll on the radio! Kids couldn’t care less about music! Quick, somebody call Alex and Eran. Yes, I mean Alex Rigopulos, 38, and Eran Egozy, 36, the Batman and Robin of Harmonix, who, with the video games Guitar Hero and now Rock Band, may have saved classic rock for generations to come . . .Just when it looked as if a generation of teenagers might grow up without falling in love with Lynyrd Skynyrd, the Who or the Rolling Stones, Rock Band has pulled them back into the musical gumbo that ate their parents (and perhaps their grandparents). Vive la Rock Band!”

In an article titled the “Best Of Rock”, circa 2008, Rolling Stone noted what we’ve always known, Bruce & The E Street Band are the best live performers in rock.

They also noted that the best punk band is Against Me!, giving them some street cred with oldsters like myself by mentioning that Bruce is a big fan.

Other opinions to which I found myself nodding my head vigorously in assent:

Best Forgotten Seventies Rock Genius: Lowell George (forget, like hell. “I miss Little Feat more than I miss being seven years old”–Bonnie Raitt)

Best Reunion: Led Zeppelin

Best TV Theme Song: “Way Down In The Hole” The Wire (but which of the 5 different versions?)

Best Bar Band Poets: The Hold Steady

Rolling Stone also asks Little Steven to pick the best garage rock of all time–he goes for two vets and two newbies: The Shadows of Knight, The Pretty Things, The Len Price 3 and The Chesterfield Kings (from Rochester–the band he thinks the most of right now.)

What’s Mine Is Mine And What’s Yours Is Open To Negotiation

Last night, I went to the Common Council’s public hearing on the city’s proposed 2008-09 budget. Unlike some hearings in past years, there were few people in attendance (perhaps a dozen) and the whole thing wrapped up in about a half hour.

However, the tenor of the meeting remains the same. People from the school district and various groups affiliated with teachers and parents of schoolchildren came to ask the city to spend more money on the school district.

The appeals came in two forms. The more savvy or connected speakers hewed to the school district’s party line and asked for a specific amount–$1.2 million. The less discriminating came and asked the city to fund the school district “fully.” Both groups alluded to the undeniable truth about the students in the city school district–students in abject poverty, many with little fluency in English, cost the district more to educate than do affluent children from the suburbs. When you start from so far behind, it takes more effort and more investment to catch up.

Unfortunately, no one speaking up for the school district has even an elementary grasp of the city’s economic structure and many speakers hold a thinly-veiled contempt for the city. The speakers constantly allude to the historic underfunding of the school district by Albany, lumping the city into the mix as an unindicted co-conspirator, questioning the Mayor and the Council’s commitment to our children.

Syracuse is a city where twice the amount of the local tax levy goes to the school district than to all other city services combined. Yet speakers for the school district seem to believe that the city is holding out on the schools, withholding money. The reality is that the city’s tax levy is now a small percentage of the both the city’s budget and the school district’s budget. The city and schools rely on transfer payments from Albany to survive. In fact, the structural deficits faced by both bodies–in the form of contracts with their unionized work forces–and the pensions, health care and other benefits that go along with those contracts–are insoluble without massive infusions of state aid.

Therefore, it is rather unseemly to go before the Council to beg for an additional $1 million, threatening to cut jobs if your budget isn’t increased by less than half a percentage point–particularly given the very large increase of state aid received this budget year. Is the school district so mismanaged that over 70 jobs are left to dangle in the wind unless an additional 0.3 % is added to the school budget? (An addition that was added at the very last meeting of the school board’s discussion of their budget?)

At least no one got up and asked the Council to please raise my taxes and give the money to the school district. Do these people even understand basic economics? Do they think that these costs are only born by those with the ability to pay? If the city raises its property taxes, it will fall disproportionally on the poorest neighborhoods and those least able to afford increases. The elderly on fixed incomes. Poor tenants paying higher rents. The poor students that you claim to care so much for will just have another stone thrown into their sinking boat.