Hulu Doesn't Suck!!

The first part of this story is familiar. Young startup companies (e.g. YouTube, BrightCove, etc.) produce amazing Websites that are able to host television shows (or snippets), movies and homemade videos. The Websites become hugely popular. The television and movie studios, owners of the copyrights to the content, sue the startups.

With me so far?

The way the story is supposed to continue is like this. The television and movie studios finally (years later) come out with their own Website to host their own content and blow it. The Websites are hard to use, are cluttered with ads and nobody goes there.

But, this time, that didn't happen.

Fox and NBC did a joint venture, no less, to produce a Website to feature their content. This Website, announced long ago, would start out with a little bit of content, including movies, television series, news programs and even snippets of popular segments. It would be viewable online but no content would be downloadable.

Well, it's here. It's called Hulu. And guess what? It doesn't suck.

In fact, it's pretty amazing. I personally love the site. But my wife, she's gone bananas. Let me back up a second.

My wife is a seamstress. She does a lot of work in what we call "the cutting room" where she has a TV to keep her company during some of the most boring parts of sewing. That TV had gone on the fritz recently and we decided to replace it or change our service to fix the problem.

But Hulu fixed the problem for us. Now she takes one of my laptops into her cutting room, fires up Hulu and watches a show while she's cutting. Simple.

Here are Hulu's benefits:

1. Hulu is incredibly easy to use. The placement of every button is intuitive, the behavior of every widget is predictable. It just works. It's the iPod of online video.
   
2. Hulu is free. Every TV show and movie is delivered for no charge.
3. Hulu's commercials are non-intrusive. There are commercials in every Hulu movie and TV show. But the commercial breaks are short (one commercial per break) and not that annoying. You cannot fast forward through the commercial. For me, that might actually be a problem, because I hate watching any kind of commercial, but my wife doesn't care. She's only half-listening most of the time anyway.
4. Hulu's content is good enough for now. Hulu has a nice mix of new and old TV series, plus a couple of pages of movies. The on-demand feature is so nice. Just decide which movie you want to see and it starts right there. For free. And I am sure that Fox and NBC are working to continue populating the site with more and more content. I see the series and movies coming on-stream every day.
5. There are even social aspects to Hulu. You can send a movie to a friend (e-mail them the link). You can send a snippet that you choose (a minute or an hour) to a friend (again - with a link).
6. Hulu video is good quality. Jump to full-screen video and you've got nearly television quality video. It's quite nice.

Congratulations to Fox and NBC. Great job! I could give a rundown of the downside of Hulu but that is documented sufficiently elsewhere. For now I just want to give a high five to Fox and NBC for a job well done.

By the way - there are even competitors to Hulu. Veoh and Joost are in this same space - what you could call "legal commercial video" and also doing well. I still prefer Hulu, but it's nice to see several services popping up like this.

Barack Obama Makes His Speech on Race - March 18, 2008

Barack Obama made his historic speech on race in America today, partially to address comments made by his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, made in a sermon last year.

I thought Obama's speech was eloquent and effectively brought the conversation back to how we can heal our current issues, including race relations. So many of these issues have dogged our nation for decades or centuries, and my view is that Obama is the only politician talking about Politics 2.0 and Government 2.0 where we will rethink our approach to each and every problem, without limiting ourselves to a Red Solution and a Blue Solution.

View Obama's speech right here:

Why I'm Voting for Barack Obama

I think what is missing from the debate over the Democratic presidential contest is brought to light best by a seemingly unrelated NPR series that ran last week.

They profiled the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). In the report, NPR said that the FCC is trying to wedge all Internet services into a "type of cable service" while they are assuming that wireless frequencies are just for cell phones.

Professor Bankler, one of their guests, says that the FCC is actually charged with promoting the American communications industry as well as regulating them. How can they continue to operate like this?

Try explaining network neutrality or the success of YouTube to an agency that is stuck in a forty-year-old paradigm like this.

Barack Obama is the only candidate that I hear who is talking about rethinking politics and government. He is bringing a fresh perspective to the problems that ail America. The arguments about experience and years in office are distractions from the fact that American government needs to experience a Renaissance. Who has the politic courage and will to execute this Renaissance? I don't think it is Hillary Clinton or John McCain, because they are dismissing Obama's calls for change as "eloquent but empty." Is that what we need? Small tweaks to today's systems? Or simply to choose the Red Team or the Blue Team and then fight the other's ideas to the death?

I say no. We need to rethink government. We need to rethink the political process. To rethink the FCC, FAA and EPA. To rethink industry and commerce and pollution and our approaches to global warming. Rethink airports and roads and cars. Rethink intellectual property rights and "the commons." Rethink how we approach everything and look for ideas for better ways.

All three politicians are calling for an increase in "green collar jobs" by investing in renewable energy. But is it that simple? Just throw some money at this nascent industry and it'll flourish? Didn't Jimmy Carter do that in the 1970s? How did that work?

I think our solutions will be much more complicated than a Red Solution or a Blue Solution. It will be a complex intermix of ideas from both sides, plus perspectives that neither side has even considered yet. I feel like my approach to health insurance is an example of this (free e-Book here). Parts of it are probably despised by liberals (it includes Health Savings Accounts) and other parts are anathema to conservatives (although I'm not sure what). And even other parts probably seem strange to both Red and Blue (all this stuff about holistic healthcare). But it might be just the solution we need to help solve our healthcare crisis.

Anyway, enough of my self-promotion. The reason I like what I hear from Barack Obama is that he is starting the conversation we need to have - about a Renaissance in America. (By the way, Barack, or anyone else - feel free to use that line!)

The Holistic Economy Endorses Barack Obama

I'd like to take this opportunity to express my support for presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Obama has inspired me along with hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of Americans. I believe there is nothing more important than a leader who can inspire us to do great things. I believe Obama is a person who is comfortable in his own skin. He is a competent manager, judging by the effectiveness of his campaign. And he is a good person.

His speech in New Hampshire after his loss to Hillary Clinton was especially riveting. If you haven't seen the video done by several musicians and actors setting part of that speech to music, please go watch it now. It is an emotional and important tribute to Obama's words.

Beyond pure inspiration, I urge you to examine Obama's Website. His positions on every issue, from renewable energy to security to immigration are sensible and well-considered.

I've included the words from Obama's speech below.

It was a creed written into the founding documents that declared the destiny of a nation: Yes, we can.

It was whispered by slaves and abolitionists as they blazed a trail towards freedom through the darkest of nights: Yes, we can.

It was sung by immigrants as they struck out from distant shores and pioneers who pushed westward against an unforgiving wilderness: Yes, we can.

It was the call of workers who organized, women who reached for the ballot, a president who chose the moon as our new frontier, and a king who took us to the mountaintop and pointed the way to the promised land: Yes, we can, to justice and equality.

Yes, we can, to opportunity and prosperity. Yes, we can heal this nation. Yes, we can repair this world. Yes, we can.

Deepak Chopra Says Barack Obama is "Self-Aware"

Deepak Chopra, well known New Age spiritualist, holistic health advocate and author, has provided a great insight into Barack Obama in his blog "Intent Blog."

Deepak cites Obama's quality of self-awareness as his best qualification for president. There is something about Obama that is unquantifiable, and maybe that's it. Obama just seems comfortable in his own skin, and maybe that represents true self-awareness.

Deepak quotes Benjamin Disraeli in saying that in order to be successful in politics, you need to know yourself and you need to know the times. Deepak adds that you also must be sought out by the times, which seems like it is happening with Obama as well.

I must admit that I've been so hopeful for 2008 (the entire year, not just the election) after I saw that Obama win the Iowa caucuses. I think he might be the person to make a difference in our country. And, as Deepak says, maybe America will become more self-aware in the process.

A Hospital is not the Best Place to be if You Have a Heart Attack

The New England Journal of Medicine released a study recently that showed that heart attacks in hospitals are more often fatal than for people who have heart attacks elsewhere.

The study goes so far to say you would be better off to have a heart attack in a hotel or casino than a hospital. The reason is the delay. In a casino, the staff usually responds more quickly and uses a newer, smaller defibrillator which works well. Many hospitals rely on an older, clumsier defibrillator and they are dealing with many other patients, so the delay in responding to you may be a life threatening three, four or five minutes.

ABC News report is here.

Carbon Tax vs Carbon Markets vs Commons Trust

There is a debate as to whether carbon taxes or carbon markets are better to reduce our greenhouse gas problem.

Carbon tax means adding a tax amount at the retail level that will be directed to fixing the environment. The arguments for it are that it is pretty simple and it is harder for the oil companies to play games to avoid it. The arguments against it are that it is an uphill battle politically (more taxes! is this communism??) and that it would impact the poor more than the rich. For an argument in favor of carbon taxes see this article and this advocacy Website.

Carbon markets are where the goverment sets up a bunch of permits to pollute and gives them to corporations based on their current pollution amounts, then the corporations are allowed to trade them amongst themselves. When this occurs, say the advocates, the corporations start to compete among themselves to use fewer permits so they can sell more of them to the greater polluters.

People who like the idea of carbon markets say that it is a true market-based solution to the problem. People who are against it say that it will take a long time to reduce pollution because the permits represent the current level of pollution and it will take years before this system will get us down to the levels we need to be. For an article showing carbon markets in a positive light, see this.

But there is a third view on how to reduce greenhouse gases. Peter Barnes, co-founder of Working Assets, wrote a book recently called Capitalism 3.0: A Guide to Reclaiming the Commons (Bk Currents) where he states that both carbon markets and carbon taxes are too problematic to be helpful in the long term battle against pollution. He sees a better alternative with establishing a commons trust. This would be where a third type of institution (not government, not private) is built in the United States (or any country) that is solely responsible for preserving the commons. In global warming terms, the commons refers to the atmosphere, clean water and healthy forests - the general ecosystem. The trustees represent all of us, including the future unborn generations, as well as the non-human species and the ecosystem itself. Their responsibility it to those stakeholders.

Each year, the trust would collect money from corporations who "use up" our commons in any way, either through polluting our air or water, chopping down trees, contaminating the soil or any other usage of the commons. Barnes calls this "commons rent." Those fees would go into three places: towards restoration of the commons (planting trees, cleaning up polluted areas), checks to all citizens and also investments. Yes, he is suggesting that each of us receive a check each year (or month) representing our share of the commons that was used during that period.

Commons trustees would not be government employees and would not have any connection to the government or the current political party in charge. Commons trustees would have a written contract with the U.S. citizenry and future generations that would keep them from violating the commons in any way. Trustees would be appointed by the federal government and then have long terms of duty, similar to Supreme Court justices.

I think this is an interesting idea, and certainly is different than carbon taxes or carbon markets. It has a lot of benefits, but I'm sure it would take a long time to educate people/voters about it. The nice thing is that you could start small, say, just the forests in southeastern Ohio, and then see how the small experiments work and move to bigger goals later.

Systems like this are already in place today. The largest is the Alaska Permanent Fund, set up to allow citizens of Alaska to participate in oil revenues. Each Alaskan gets a check of about $1,000 a year representing their share of the oil taken out of Alaska.

Let me know what you think of these three options. Probably the best idea is to try them all in small ways and see which ones work best.

Peter Barnes' blog is here.

I received this article as an e-mail forwarded from a friend. I thought it was so appropriate for the holiday season and also for our work lives in general. I requested and received permission from the author to post it on my blogs. I don't think I have ever simultaneously posted something on both my blogs, but this article seemed to fit (for my "other" blog, see here):

Here's the article.

Counterbalance

Carol Kinsey Goman, Ph.D.

During one of AT&T's many transformations, I interviewed the woman in charge of Employee Health Services to find out what she'd observed about the most resilient people in the organization. I asked her if she noticed anything that these employees had in common that helped them deal so successfully with change: Did they work in a particular geographic region? Had they reached a certain level of the hierarchy? Did they perform similar functions? Were they male? Female? Younger? Older?

The manager told me that none of those factors made a difference. She said, "People who thrive on organizational change have two things in common: They take good care of themselves and they have outside interests."

As I continued talking with professionals in thirty organizations (and seven industries), the same theme kept repeating in my interviews. People who were the most adept at dealing with organizational change, not only had a career -- they had a life.

A definition of the word compensate is "to provide with a counterbalance or neutralizing device." Change-adept individuals compensate for the demands and pressures of business by developing counterbalancing activities in other areas of their lives. They engage in exercise programs and healthful eating habits, they cultivate interests outside of the workplace -- sports, hobbies, art, music, etc. -- that are personally fulfilling, and they have sources of emotional support. Because employees with counterbalance have fuller, richer lives, they handle business-related stress better and are more effective on the job.

They also have a source of stability - external to the organization - which many refer to as their "anchor" or "rock."

One of the most memorable interviews I conducted on this topic was with the CEO of a cellular telephone company: "I've got one of those 'anchors' in my life," he told me. "It's my sock drawer." I must have looked startled because the CEO continued quickly. "I mean it," he said. "All hell can be breaking loose at work, but when I come home at night I open my sock drawer to find everything in color-coded, neat little piles. I tell you, it does my heart good."

I've included this story in my speeches for years, and only once have I had someone take offense at it. I had addressed the national convention of a real estate firm in Florida. A sales manager from California came up to me after the speech and wanted to book a similar program for his division. "I really enjoyed your talk," he said. "But when you speak to my group, please don't make fun of the sock drawer."

I told the sales manager that I would be happy to do as he asked, but was curious about the reason for his request. He looked at me sternly. "I don't want you to make fun of it because it works! I tell all of my sales people that if they are having a terrible day, where nothing is going right, they might as well go home and straighten out their underwear drawer."

After thinking about that comment, I had to agree. It doesn't matter if the source of counterbalance sounds silly to others; change-adept people know what works for them.

Leaders who encourage employees to develop counterbalance find that, beyond building a more change-adept workforce, there are additional business benefits. The president of CalTex in Kuala Lumpur told me that his company pays for any kind of training course that employees want to take -- the only exceptions being martial arts and cooking classes. He said that the most popular course is singing lessons. This was not totally unexpected since Malaysian employees regularly frequent karaoke bars after work. What he didn't anticipate, however, was the degree to which employees' singing lessons improved their ability in giving work-related presentations. People conquered stage fright and became comfortable with standing in front of groups and expressing their ideas. In fact, the only complaint from the president of the company was, "Now they think they can sing!"

So, as this holiday season progresses, remember to take good care of yourself. Encourage your staff, co-workers and team members to visit friends, to play, to laugh, to straighten out their underwear drawers - and to sing. Doing so will result in a more resilient organization. And that is very good for business.

Happy Holidays!

Carol Kinsey Goman, Ph.D., is a coach, consultant, and keynote speaker who helps her clients thrive on change. She addresses association, government, and business audiences around the world. She is the author of ten books including "This Isn't the Company I Joined - How to Lead in a Business Turned Upside Down." Her newest book, "THE NONVERBAL ADVANTAGE - Secrets and Science of Body Language at Work," will be published by Berrett-Koehler in May 2008. For more information, contact Carol by phone: 510-526-1727, email: CGoman@CKG.com, or through her website: http://www.CKG.com.
--

Carol Kinsey Goman, Ph.D.
Kinsey Consulting Services

Carol coaches executives, facilitates management retreats, helps change teams develop strategies, and delivers keynote speeches and seminars to association and business audiences around the world. She can be reached by phone: +1-510-526-1727, email: CGoman@CKG.com, or through her website: www.CKG.com.

Author of nine books, including:
* This Isn't the Company I Joined -- How to Lead in a Business Turned Upside Down
* Ghost Story: A Modern Business Fable
* Creativity in Business
* Change-Busting: 50 Ways to Sabotage Organizational Change
* Adapting to Change: Making it Work for You
* The Human Side of High-Tech

Are You Wasting Money on Annual Physical Exams?

Don't feel too bad if you missed having your annual physical exam with your doctor last year. In fact, no major North American clinical organization actually recommends doing an annual checkup. US News and World Report says that annual physicals might very well be a waste of your money and time, in the minds of many doctors.

The good thing about doing an annual checkup is that the doctor might find something that can be looked into further before it progresses. However, the bad aspects of the annual physical seem to outweigh the good: a) it costs money and time that are usually a waste, b) there is an excellent chance that there will be false positives for conditions you don't have, causing stress and more money and c) most diseases are caught when patients come in for other minor ailments anyway.

It's up to you. I haven't done annual physical exams with Western medical doctors for many years. I use a naturopathic physician and she has a more natural protocol that I prefer. To me, the false positives issue with Western medical tests is enough of a deterrent to keep me away from doing annual physicals.

Please Take a Moment to Question the Safety of Your Vaccines

When vaccines were first invented, we hailed them as a modern medicinal miracle. But in the last few years, people have been questioning a) whether they really still work and b) whether they may be harmful to children.

This article, posted on NewsTarget.com, brings some good discussion topics to the fore. Please give it a read and form your own opinions.

My Workout Promise...is Working!

Hi.  Just wanted to let you know that my promise to myself to start working out is really happening!  I have consistently worked out five to six times a week since that original blog post. 

I'm seeing the benefits too!  My waist has gone from 46" down to 40.25".  My goal is a long ways away, but I don't mind.  I have a great workout partner who holds my feet to the fire and I'm happy to be going on the right path again after soooooo long.

Is Globalization Working?

John Ralston Saul, a novelist from Canada, wrote an aggressive takedown of globalization in Harper's magazine several years ago that I've just gotten around to reading.

I've always been firmly behind globalization, but his article has caused me to rethink some of my most valued suppositions about it. Here is an interesting paragraph in his article:

This determinist approach toward agriculture as an industry rather than as a food source--toward the implications of everything from fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides to genetics, hormones, antibiotics, labeling, and sourcing--became the flash point for a far broader concern among citizens. This was the context in which a growing percentage of people judged the handling of key issues as different as mad cow disease, the availability of pharmaceuticals in the developing world, and global warming. They were beginning to feel that what was presented as an argument of Globalism versus protectionism was often just a confused opposition of personal choice and abstract corporate interests. So Globalization, put forward as a metaphor for choice, was organizing itself around not consumers but corporate structures, structures that sought profits by limiting personal choice.

I've always known firsthand that corporations are more efficient than government departments.  As a computer consultant, I've seen the belly of both, and, while neither is pretty, corporations have the ability to get things done by at least a factor of twenty-to-one compared to government departments.

However, if a corporation takes over a function that a government department was once responsible for, and the corporation has a different (and wrong) goal, will it still be more efficient?  This is a point that Ralston Saul brings up that I stupidly hadn't considered before.

Ralston Saul says that in our efforts to globalize, we've paid attention (and measured) only the commercial aspects of things, ignoring the human and social aspects. This has caused us to be quite helpless when events that are economically insignificant but socially important occur, like the genocide in Rwanda.

Good God!  Will I turn into just another liberal big-government stooge?  I hope not.  This stuff is always more complex that I want to admit. But thanks anyway, John Ralston Saul, for making me think about my positions once again.

You can read much more from Ralston Saul, as well as see his collection of fiction and non-fiction writings, at his Website. I was first drawn to his work after hearing his lecture on the excellent podcast from TV Ontario called Big Ideas.

Sticking Your Kids With Your Debt

I typically have two big issues which I judge political candidates on: the environment and the national debt.

Almost every year, both issues have been completely overlooked in the election process by both parties. However, this year, the environment actually is being talked about and the Democrats seem to have some plans to improve things.

The national debt has had no discussion whatsoever. Have we forgotten that the yearly budget deficit, brought to zero under President Clinton, is now higher than it's ever been? President Bush and the Republican Congress ran up a massive amount of debt that we are going to have to pay back.

Correction - our children will be paying it. Which brings me to a point, brought up eloquently by Oliver "Buzz" Thomas, a minister, lawyer and author of the book "10 Things Your Minister Wants to Tell You (But Can't Because He Needs the Job)."

Thomas wrote a blog post for USA Today earlier this month about our penchant for debt. He feels that we are violating fundamental religious principles by running up this debt and putting in no effort to pay it back. Essentially, it is like building up a $30,000 credit card bill and then leaving it to your children.

Would you do that? Probably not. But, as Thomas points out, it is just easier when it is a distant, shapeless blob like the national debt. And our politicians, especially the spendy Republican President we have, don't help. Can't blame it on the war either. This administration has increased the national debt every year without even counting war expenses.

As Thomas puts it, "Whether you're Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Zoroastrian, your tradition has taught you at least this: a) Pay your bills and b) Provide for your children. Right now, we are doing neither.

So why aren't our politicians talking about it? Probably because it will be uncomfortable to pay back the debt. Services will have to be cut. Taxes will have to be raised (sorry W - your way ain't-a workin').

We have to re-insert this into our national discussion again. Do we need to resurrect Ross Perot to bring back the topic of paying the debt? I hope not.

How to Be a Glam-Granola Girl

What do you get when you cross a glamour queen with a granola girl? Wendy Roy, author of the new book "You Know You're a Glam-Granola Girl If..." says that is exactly what she is - A Glam-Granola Girl.

Wendy also feels that there are many others like herself. Women who delight in being beautiful, feeling sexy, and also have a deep respect for nature and the environment.

Wendy recently read my article on natural cosmetics, and we've had a number of chats through e-mail. She seems like a chronic overachiever - singer, composer, author, entrepreneur, instructor, you name it. She's even sung at Boston's Fenway Park regularly and composed a song that was sung on Idol, South Africa. Amazing woman!

But you might be most interested in her book. Published just in time for Christmas, her book "celebrates the glamourously earthy ladies of the world."

The book costs $14.95 and is available from Wendy's Website. Click here to order.

Here's a quote from Wendy on what a Glam-Granola Girl really is:

We are ultra-stylish in appearance, yet comfortable in our shoes, and our skin. We encourage ecological responsibility, and promote inner peace, as we understand that this is from where external peace grows. We are the ladies who break all molds, and feel elated by, and proud of it.

We are intelligent, we are women of substance, and we are quite extraordinary, actually.

We are Glam-Granola girls.

I've Started Exercising - For Real!

I've finally started working out on a regular basis. My wife and I have always gone for walks pretty much a couple of times a week, but it is never fast enough to be a "workout" for me and I've been getting fatter and fatter.

Right now I weigh 240lb and I have a 46" waistline. I don't have a weight goal, but I'd like my waistline to be a lot smaller. That means burning fat and building muscle.

And thank God I found a great workout partner. My buddy at work, Walt, is working out with me at 5:30am every weekday morning.

Maybe I'll take some before and after shots of myself and post them here (and maybe I won't - LOL).

We are following Walt's workout plan, which means lots of free weights, 30 minutes of cardio and working opposing body parts each day.

I'm looking forward to it. We've done one week so far and I haven't quit nor have I caught a cold (which is a usual thing for me starting workouts).

I'll keep you up-to-date on what happens.

My goal is to look good before I go home to Canada for Christmas, because the rest of my family is all totally fit and I'm not. Hey, vanity is an excellent motivator.

Who "Should" Be in the Atlas Shrugged Movie

After hearing that Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie had bought the rights to the Atlas Shrugged movie, and that they were planning to star in it themselves, I couldn't help but think of who the actors for each character really --should-- be.

Erin Daniels as Dagny Taggart. I think Erin would have the perfect look and that she could play Dagny's personality most effectively. Her thin body, beautiful face and quiet but assertive nature would be a great fit for the role. I think Angelina, as beautiful as she is, seems a little too ethnic and too showy for the Dagny role. But maybe she will be able to pull it off (we hope).



Tate Donovan as Jim Taggart. Tate has the right look of youth even though he's in his forties and also can play the panicked executive very well. Plus, the guy's ex-girlfriends are Sandra Bullock and Jennifer Aniston - he must have something going for him!



My choice for Lillian Rearden is truly inspired. Joely Richardson has the cold eyes and elegant thin body to play the ultimate bitch of the story.



Mark Humphrey as Hank Rearden. Mark is a journeyman actor who would look good as a blonde and has the right face for the stoney responses Hank is always giving to people.



John Galt is actually pretty easy. All you need is a really good looking guy and put green contact lenses into his eyes. Brad Pitt is planning to play John Galt - he could be okay. My choice would actually be Christian Bale.



The rest of the people are pretty easy too. Oren Boyle can be any old fat guy. Wesley Mooch is a simpering fool. It goes on. If they can get those top roles right, the movie could be worth watching. I'm asking you, Brangelina, please reconsider acting in the movie yourselves. You might do Ayn Rand better justice if you stay behind the cameras on this one (as pretty as you both are).

The Four Boneheaded Biases of Stupid Voters (And We're All Stupid Voters)

Reason magazine is fast becoming one of my favorite news/opinion sources. They have a nice RSS feed and excellent articles.

I was especially taken by this article on the biases we all have about voting, and hopefully this explains how we end up with free-spending, policy-deficient politicians like George W. Bush.

Anti-Market Bias

I first learned about farm price supports in the produce section of the grocery store. I was in kindergarten. My mother explained that price supports seemed to make fruits and vegetables more expensive but assured me that this conclusion was simplistic. If the supports went away, so many farms would go out of business that prices would soon be higher than ever. I accepted what she told me and felt a lingering sense that price competition is bad for buyer and seller alike.

This was one of my first memorable encounters with anti-market bias, a tendency to underestimate the economic benefits of the market mechanism. The public has severe doubts about how much it can count on profit-seeking business to produce socially beneficial outcomes. People focus on the motives of business and neglect the discipline imposed by competition. While economists admit that profit maximization plus market imperfections can yield bad results, noneconomists tend to view successful greed as socially harmful per se.

A Speech on the So-Called Evil of Money from "Atlas Shrugged"

"So you think that money is the root of all evil?" said Francisco d'Anconia. "Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can't exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?

"When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears not all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor--your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money, Is this what you consider evil?

"Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions--and you'll learn that man's mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth."

For the rest of the speech (it is very long, philosophical and extremely well-put) go to Capitalist Magazine online. Wikipedia has a good article on the book "Atlas Shrugged" and a list of the characters in the book for background to this quote.

Should I Be Buying Railroad Stock?

I've been hearing a lot lately about the resurgence of rail. With gasoline prices rising now and almost certainly skyrocketing in the near future, railroads look like a fantastically efficient way to move goods around the country again. They can haul triple the amount of freight for the same amount of fuel as a truck.

St. Petersburg Times writes about it here.

Warren Buffet and Carl Icahn are investing in railroad stocks according to the Daily Reckoning Website.

Forbes talks about railroad companies reinvesting here.

All this while I'm re-listening to book mp3 of Atlas Shrugged, a 1950s era novel which centers on the railroad industry of the time. I love to listen to it everytime I need a shove in my level of productivity. This book makes me want to work harder.

Bandidas Movie - How Did I Miss This?

Two women whom I love dearly starred in the same movie in 2006 and, somehow, I missed it. Penelope Cruz and Salma Hayek came together in a turn-of-the-century Western played out in Mexico called Bandidas.

I haven't even seen the whole movie but I know I'm going to love it. We recorded it on TiVo and it's waiting for me...patiently. My heart is still beating fast...

UPDATE (Sep 10) - I've now watched it twice all the way through. Friggin' loved it. Honestly, these are two of my favorite women in the world.

New Study on Dairy Badly Flawed

"Drinking Milk Cuts Diabetes Risk" blare the headlines. The University of Cardiff in England just completed a study that showed that the more people drank milk the lower their incidence of metabolic syndrome, which is essentially a grab bag of symptoms that can lead to diabetes and heart disease: insulin resistance, obesity, high blood pressure, etc.

One problem. The study did not specify what the control group drank. Think about it. If there was one group drinking more milk, what would the other group likely be drinking? Water with stevia? Doubt it. They were probably drinking more soda and sugared energy drinks.

So, perhaps the headlines should have read "Milk Better Than Soda." Yeah, well, what isn't?

Further, the study reports that the number of people in the control group versus the milk-drinkers was virtually the same as far as who was actually diagnosed with diabetes during the study. The metabolic syndrome rate was lower in the milk-drinking group, but the rate of diabetes was the same, even given the twenty-year span of the study.

A better-conducted study from 2000 showed that cow's milk actually increases the incidence of diabetes by a factor of three. The results of that study are here.

Taking Drugs for Your Disease Can Cause...Another Disease

Public Citizen's excellent Website WorstPills.org features an article this week on the various "side effects" caused by today's most popular pharmaceutical drugs. As if that's not enough, they also have written anecdotal stories of people harmed by drugs, including people who developed additional diseases caused by the drugs.

Larry, an otherwise healthy 58-year-old man with diarrhea believed to be due to “irritable bowel syndrome,” was given Stelazine, a powerful antipsychotic tranquilizer to “calm down” his intestinal tract. Stelazine is not even approved for treating such medical problems. Six months after starting Stelazine, Larry developed severe parkinsonism and was started on L-dopa, a drug for treating Parkinson’s disease. Presumably, the doctor did not realize the parkinsonism was drug-induced, and the Stelazine was continued. For seven years, Larry took both drugs. Then a neurologist specializing in Parkinson’s disease saw Larry, recognized the real cause of his problem, stopped the Stelazine, and slowly withdrew the L-dopa over a six-month period. Larry’s severe, disabling parkinsonism cleared completely.

Read WorstPills.org entire article here.

Review of Side Effects Movie

I finally bought the DVD for the movie "Side Effects." I have been wanting to see this movie for a long time. Dr. Pam Popper at the Wellness Forum introduced me to it, but I haven't had a chance to see it until now.

Side Effects is a movie about the drug industry. It is based on a true story, the budding career of a pharmaceutical sales rep named Kathleen Slattery, who also happens to be the director of this movie.

The story begins with Karly Hert's (Kathleen's character) start in the pharma business. The initial pay and perqs get her excited, but she isn't really good at the job for a while. Finally, she decides to tell the doctors the unvarnished truth about the drugs she's selling, being upfront about all the side effects. It works, and Karly becomes the top sales rep, earning top dollars selling their marque drug, named Vivexx (named suspiciously like Vioxx, the arthritis drug that killed tens of thousands).

Karly finds out that the drug company withheld important side effect information, and does some digging to find out the real facts. She does some great detective work and at the end, makes a difference in a big way (trying to avoid spoilers here).

The movie itself is quite entertaining. That is for one reason and one reason only. Karly is played by Katherine Heigl, who is from Grey's Anatomy on TV and recently starred in Knocked Up. Katherine is an amazing actress. She holds the entire film together. I can sympathize that Kathleen Slattery is a first-time director, and as such, she does an okay job. But the movie has many problems, which can all be traced back to the director. Awkward ten-second scenes that mean nothing, strange interviews with doctors interspersed throughout, and awful performances by almost everyone except Katherine Heigl. The actors who play Karly's boyfriend and her two bosses are especially painful to watch. Again, it's understandable that, with a budget of less than $200,000, you're not going to get great actors to surround a star, but it doesn't make it any easier to watch.

I have one more bone to pick. As a red-blooded guy, it pains me to complain about this, but why does Katherine Heigl have to get undressed on-screen a half-dozen times or more with no connection whatsoever to the plot? It seems like a very cheap way to get our attention. Yes, Katherine has a beautiful body, but even a sex-crazed guy like myself can tell when he's being manipulated.

Having said all that, my wife and I still watched the whole thing and we still liked it. We both thought it was a tribute to one of the best new actresses of the twenty-first century, Katherine Heigl.

And, setting my inner movie critic aside, the story is good and the message is incredibly important. I suggest that, if you want to buy the DVD, you consider getting a combo-pack with Kathleen's companion movie called "Money Talks," which is a documentary on the same issue of pharmaceutical companies' undue influence on doctors.

Both movies are worth watching. We all need to learn more about this issue and find out what we can do to mitigate the risks.

Aspartame Linked to Cancer Again

In a study conducted by the Ramazzini Institute in Italy, aspartame was found to be linked to malignant tumors and leukemia in rats.

The link is a PDF, so you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is a free download.

Vinegar for Weeds

Well, I'm putting my money where my blog is. I tried using this vinegar, soap and water solution (see recipe under "Vinegar and Dish Soap" heading) on my weeds today, mostly thistles and dandelions. I'll let you know how well it works.

Oh, it was great to get out in the sun for a few minutes. I used to hate yard work with our house, because there is so much of it. But now I actually like it because it gets me out of the house and into the sun.

And, no, I do not wear sunblock. A lot of the news reports about sun and skin cancer are wrong, wrong, wrong. As the Journal of the National Cancer Institute at Oxford states, sunscreen appears to be linked to skin cancer more closely than sun exposure to skin cancer.

Whoa. Where the hell did that rant come from?

50 Uses for Vinegar

This blog entry has fifty uses for vinegar. It cleans. It softens. It kills weeds. It freshens. Let me know what works for you.

There's also a book that has tons of uses for apple cider vinegar, specifically. It is supposed to be good for your health. Strange how something as acidic as vinegar would help your body alkalize. The book is in its Fifty-Fifth edition.

I'm Deleting My Post about Sicko

I made a post on this blog about Michael Moore's new movie "Sicko" and I am now deleting that post from my blog. I have not seen the movie yet and I need to do that before I make my comments.

I read some very thought-provoking comments on Moore's Website that made me realize I may be speaking out of turn.

This deletion is a result of my own research. I have not been contacted by Michael Moore's organization or anyone else, this is my own decision.

Thank you.

I Found a Salsa Without Cilantro

UPDATE:  Frontera has stopped selling this product, as far as I can tell.  They switched the shape of the bottle, stopped selling this salsa flavor, and now EVERYTHING has cilantro and/or "spices" in it.   Damn it. Damn it. Damn it.

I finally found a salsa that contains no cilantro!

Why am I so excited? Especially considering that I love cilantro?

Well, the reason is that my wife is allergic to cilantro. This sad fact took the two of us several months to determine, but it became quite obvious when I purchased a bunch of fresh cilantro and she put it into a chili that she ate for several meals in a row. She broke out in a red, itchy rash on her neck and chest, and this happens now to a lesser degree whenever she eats something with the fragrant, tasty herb in it.

I say "sad fact" because both of us enjoy the taste of cilantro. There are apparently many people who don't like the taste of it, but for us, it is just because of my wife's allergy that we stay away from it.

And staying away is not easy. Cilantro has become the herb of the decade in restaurant food and any type of prepared grocery store food. Indian food almost always contains cilantro. The Chinese call cilantro "Chinese parsley" and use it liberally.

And Mexican food has cilantro in everything. Especially salsa.

So, for those who don't like the taste of it, or, God forbid, are allergic, take heart. Frontera Kitchen's Red Pepper and Garlic Salsa has no cilantro listed on the ingredients (available at Whole Foods Market). I'll report back later if Tamara starts having reactions to this too.

By the way, cilantro and coriander are from the same plant. Cilantro is the leaves and coriander is the ground-up seeds. My wife is allergic to both.

Group of Presidential Scholars Give President a Letter Asking to Cease Torture

(Mari Oye second from right)

The Presidential Scholars of 2007 visited the President this summer like they do every summer. But this time, several of them (almost a third) signed a letter asking the President to stop torturing prisoners and enemy combatants.

Mari Oye (second from right in photo) was the one to hand the letter to him. To his credit, the President read the letter right there in front of her. His only response was "America doesn't torture people. America doesn't torture people."

This has to be the most underreported story of the summer. Why are the networks all Paris Hilton's butt and totally missing this story? I heard it originally on the Democracy Now! podcast but also found an article on the Boston Globe Website that is pretty good.

Democracy Now! has the entire transcript of Amy Goodman's interview with Mari Oye and one other scholar who was involved.

Democracy Now! is my new favorite podcast. Here is some background on the Presidential Scholars program.

Rare Earth Magnets Act as Possible Shark Repellant

Since 2001, SharkDefense has been working on a chemical shark repellent. The co-founder of this small company was playing around with powerful rare-earth magnets in 2005, when he dropped one next to their shark research tank in Oak Ridge, New Jersey. The lemon and nurse sharks inside instantly darted to the opposite wall.

Bewildered, the two scientists began to investigate. The results of their studies are at a site called Ocean Magnetics (their spinoff company).

They've found that sharks dramatically avoid magnets made from neodymium, iron and boron. They think the magnets overload a shark's ampullae of Lorenzini, small vesicles and pores around the head that form part of a subcutaneous sensory network.

Nice alternative to chemical shark repellants. Better for everyone.

Link.

Socks for your Sandals

So, it's too cold to go barefooted but you still want to wear your flip flops? You need Flip Flop Socks!

I can see that these could be useful for those in-between weather days. Or if you want to hide your ugly feet from view, but still want to be comfortable?