Plutocracy

The split between the Rich and everyone else has always been an issue in human society. There are many who argue that this split is a driving force of social instability. (I'm not entirely convinced of this, as I think it only tends to provoke instability when you encounter the inequality. In feudal times, things has some stability because locally things were more equal. I'm not sure if that holds up, though.)

Regardless, I think a lot of what is going on in the US in particular, but in Canada as well, is due to the simple fact that the Rich live in a different world than the rest of us. Privilege blinds, and so decisions that seem insane to normal people make perfect sense if you view things through the eyes of money.

Firstly, it makes it hard to empathize, and The Upper Class has trouble with human emotions.

But ultimately, when talking about trying to fix things, there is the old aphorism of "don't fix it if it ain't broke". And if you are high enough on the ladder, it ain't broke. They are doing fine, so why should they worry about the little people?

In Canada, income inequality in Canada is higher than it has ever been.

Please note: From the beginning of the Second World War to 1977, the income share of the richest one per cent dropped from 14 per cent to 7.7 per cent; By 2007 they'd made a comeback: the richest one per cent held 13.8 per cent of incomes.

In the US, I think it is 24%.

In both cases, I believe Wealth disparities are even higher, of course.

Incidentally, this is why I side with Krugman over Stross somewhat on the "Corporations are alien invaders" idea. Or maybe I split the middle. What Corporations do is allow a framework to make the sociopathy of people more rewarding, self-justifying, and easier. Corporations as people doesn't help the matter, but it isn't the root cause of "I'm important and you're not", which has remained a core of humans being terrible to one another for as long as recorded history.

You WANT these books!

The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them.
--Mark Twain

As the happy yuletide season of gift-giving steals upon us, the thoughts of many of us turn to books - those fine constructions of human intellect and thought that delight and challenge us from when we first discover the joys of deciphering written language to our final journeys from this mortal coil.

Smart people give books to their friends and loved ones. Kind people. Passionate people. People who are deeply full of awesome. People like you.

In case you haven't noticed, I'm pitching.

What books would make me pitch like this? What would possibly reduce me to shameless, fawning shill?

Brotherly love, of course.

BUY MY SISTER'S BOOKS!!!

Books about girls who are boyproof. Books about punk rock! Books about geeks! Books about vampires! Books about guerrilla art! Books about ballerinas! Books about grandmas!

THERE IS NO END TO THE AWESOME!!

Do you know someone who like any of these things? Then you know someone who you should buy these books for. You can send them books through the magic of something called the postal service. You can wrap them in paper? You might bury them under a tree. Perhaps you will fling the books at passersby in an ecstatic ritual of knowledge sharing and spontaneous joy-bringing. I do not judge.

(Unless you purchase no books, in which case I judge you harshly and without forgiveness, as I am a jealous Old-testament style god about such things.)


On a less hyperbolic note, these books are fantastic - especially for the Young Adult audience they are mostly aimed at. Geektastic and Grandma's Gloves fall outside that range.

The way you two talk

The Economist hosts a debate on whether the language we speak shapes the way we think.

As most of you know, I'm not a believer in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in any kind of strong form.

The "anti" position is being taken by one of the regulars at Language Log who freely admits he isn't all that "anti" the hypothesis so much as the way it get used in pop culture.

I think my favourite part of the debate, though, is the commenter who phrased things thusly:

"Eskimos have separate words for flurries, blizzard, slush, powder, sleet, hail, graupel, drifts, névé, frost, ice, glaciers, … while we poor benighted English-speakers are stuck with the work-around of sticking modifiers on one word, "snow", for any solid H2O from the atmosphere."

I enjoy angry, intemperate ranting

I know I'm late to the party, but this kid's speech really is inspiring.

And as long as we're talking angry, but on-target, rants from across the pond - an Irishman has few compunctions about swearing to get his point across about the economic situation.

Of course, they are both ultimately wondering Who will tame the Vampire Squid?

More quotes

Not sure I can vouch for any of these.



Daring ideas are like chessmen moved forward; they may be beaten, but
they may start a winning game.

--Johann Wolfgang von Goethe



Young men make wars and the virtues of war are the virtues of young men:
courage and hope for the future. Then old men make the peace, and the vices of peace are the
vices of old men: mistrust and caution.

--Alec Guinness

An excuse is worse and more terrible than a lie, for an excuse is a lie
guarded.

--Pope John Paul II


Love does not consist in gazing at each other but in looking together in the
same direction.

--Antoine de Saint-Exupéry


A fool learns from his experience. A wise person learns from the experience of others.

--Otto von Bismarck



A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable, but more useful
than a life spent doing nothing.

--George Bernard Shaw

Majority rule only works if you're also considering individual rights. Because
you can't have five wolves and one sheep voting on what to have for supper.

--Larry Flynt