The student said he objected to her
suggestions during the class that same-sex marriage isn’t open for debate and
that “everyone agrees on this.”
Punished for Blogging at Marquette: A tenured professor faces dismissal after
a blog went viral ---
http://www.wsj.com/articles/punished-for-blogging-at-marquette-1460071026?mod=djemMER
Also see
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/03/25/marquette-suspends-controversial-faculty-blogger-requires-him-apologize
Jensen Comment
Beyond the issues of free speech and open debate, there is the frightening use
of conversation recording of a professor's remarks without the professor being
made aware that the conversation is being recorded. At least Big Brother makes
it known that all conversations are recorded in an Orwellian society.
College campuses in the USA are becoming Orwellian with an army of lawyers
and reporters and the social media waiting outside the campus gates.
Monty Python’s John Cleese Worries That Political Correctness Will Lead Us
into a Humorless World, Reminiscent of Orwell’s 1984 ---
http://www.openculture.com/2016/04/john-cleese-worries-that-political-correctness-will-lead-us-in-an-orwellian-world.html
April 8, 2016 reply from Glen Gray
Both Chris Rock and Jerry Seinfeld have stopped
doing performances on college campus because of the PC-related issues. They
are both completely amazed at the current atmosphere at campus.
Hypocritical Shrinkage of Freedom of Speech and Courtesy on Campus
"Protesters Shut Down Discussion With CIA Director at U. of Pennsylvania,"
by Courtney Kueppers, Chronicle of Higher Education, April 4, 2016 ---
http://chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/protesters-shut-down-discussion-with-cia-director-at-u-of-pennsylvania/110017?elqTrackId=bb51f4937d1649f7aabb2fee1299ef05&elq=01c92017918f41188fad795b9a118331&elqaid=8539&elqat=1&elqCampaignId=2831
Protesters at the University
of Pennsylvania loudly interrupted the director of
the Central Intelligence Agency, John O. Brennan,
less than 15 minutes into a moderated discussion
last Friday, and subsequent interruptions ended the
event early,
reports the campus’s
student newspaper, The Daily Pennsylvanian.
According to the newspaper,
the event was held by the Fels Institute of
Government and other organizers, including the
university’s Center for International Politics.
Attendees were required to register in advance and
present identification at the door.
A YouTube
video shows protesters
shouting “drones kill kids” and “U.S. out of the
Middle East” before being escorted out of the event,
which was held at the university’s Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology. The video also shows a
couple of protesters holding a sign that says,
“Drone Strikes Breed Terrorism.”
The situation is similar to
what happened at Brown University in the fall of
2013, when protesters
shut down a lecture by a
former commissioner of the New York City Police
Department, Raymond W. Kelly, and other such
controversies on campuses nationwide. Events like
those have left college administrators
struggling with if, and
when, they ought to cancel controversial speakers.
Jensen Comment
Protesters like this on campus are hypocritical. They shut down the white John
O. Brennan but would welcome his African American boss as a hero on campus even
if President Obama delivered the same message as Brennan.
Years ago on my own campus the African American Colin Powell was cheered on
campus as the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and then
Secretary of State during the war in Iraq ---
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Powell
The cheers would've turned to jeers if his boss President Geroge W. Bush dared
set foot on campus even if he was the deliver the same speech as General
Powell.
Such is freedom of speech on campus in recent decades. The new term for
political incorrectness is microaggression. The message is not so much in the
medium as in the physical attributes of the speaker where minorities, females,
and non-Christians are allowed to deliver their controversial messages with
greater courtesy on campus. Such is freedom of speech on campus these days.
Liberal Diatribe
"Academe is Overrun by Liberals. So What? premium," by Russell Jacoby,
Chronicle of Higher Education, April 1, 2016 ---
http://chronicle.com/article/Academe-is-Overrun-by/235898?cid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en&elqTrackId=ae50733826504973ae0df556a8b21b1f&elq=b6d984b056324a4da6adc5d092621460&elqaid=8515&elqat=1&elqCampaignId=2811
So a lot of things!
Freedom of Speech
"Vast double standard on American college campuses," by former Harvard
University President Larry Summers, March 31, 2016 ---
http://larrysummers.com/2016/03/31/vast-double-standard-on-american-college-campuses/
It
has seemed to me that a vast double standard regarding what constitutes
prejudice exists on American college campuses. There is hypersensitivity
regarding prejudice against most minority groups but what might be called
hyper-insensitivity with respect to anti-Semitism.
At
Bowdoin College,
holding parties with sombreros and tequila is deemed to be an act of
prejudice against Mexicans. At
Emory,
the chalking of an endorsement of the likely Republican Presidential
candidate on a sidewalk is deemed to require a review of security tapes.
The existence of a college named after widely admired former US President
has under the duress of a student occupation been condemned at
Princeton.
At
Yale,
Halloween costumes are the subject of administrative edict. The dean of
Harvard Law School
has acknowledged
that hers is a racist institution, while the Freshman Dean at
Harvard College
has used dinner placemats to propagandize the student body on aspects of
diversity. Professors acquiesce as students insist that they not be
exposed to views on issues like abortion that make them uncomfortable.
All I have discussed in the
past,
this is in my view
inconsistent with basic American values of free speech and open debate. It
fails to recognize that the a proper liberal education should cause moments
of acute discomfort as cherished beliefs are challenged.
But,
if comfort is elevated to be a preeminent value, the standard should be
applied universally. Unfortunately, there is a clear exception made on most
university campuses for anti-Semitic speech and acts.
The
State Department
has made clear that
it regards demonizing Israel or “applying double standards by requiring of
it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation” as
anti-Semitism. This makes obvious good sense. Does anyone doubt that
applying standards to African countries that were not applied to other
countries or singling them out for sanction when other non-African countries
were guilty of much greater sins would be deemed racism?
Instances of
anti-Semitism by this standard are ubiquitous in American academic life.
Nearly a dozen
academic associations
have enacted formal
boycotts of Israeli institutions and in some cases Israeli scholars.
Student governments
at dozens of
universities have demanded the divestiture of companies that do business in
Israel or the West Bank. Guest speakers and even some faculty in their
classrooms compare Israel with Nazi Germany and question its right to
continued existence as a Jewish state.
Yet,
with very few exceptions, university leaders who are so quick to stand up
against microagressions against other groups remain silent in the face of
anti-Semitism. Indeed, many major American universities including Harvard
remain institutional members of associations that are engaged in boycotts of
Israel. The idea of divesting Israel is opposed only in the same way that
divesting apartheid South Africa was opposed—as an inappropriate intrusion
into politics, not as immoral or anti-Semitic.
- See more at:
http://larrysummers.com/2016/03/31/vast-double-standard-on-american-college-campuses/#sthash.vmpg74hQ.dpuf
"How California's Colleges Indoctrinate
Students: A new report on the UC system documents the plague of politicized
classrooms. The problem is national in scope," by Peter Berkowitz at
Stanford University, The Wall Street Journal, March 30, 2012 ---
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303816504577312361540817878.html#mod=djemEditorialPage_t
The politicization of higher education by activist
professors and compliant university administrators deprives students of the
opportunity to acquire knowledge and refine their minds. It also erodes the
nation's civic cohesion and its ability to preserve the institutions that
undergird democracy in America.
So argues "A Crisis of Competence: The Corrupting
Effect of Political Activism in the University of California," a new report
by the California Association of Scholars, a division of the National
Association of Scholars (NAS). The report is addressed to the Regents of the
University of California, which has ultimate responsibility for governing
the UC system, but the pathologies it diagnoses prevail throughout the
country.
The analysis begins from a nonpolitical fact:
Numerous studies of both the UC system and of higher education nationwide
demonstrate that students who graduate from college are increasingly
ignorant of history and literature. They are unfamiliar with the principles
of American constitutional government. And they are bereft of the skills
necessary to comprehend serious books and effectively marshal evidence and
argument in written work.
This decline in the quality of education coincides
with a profound transformation of the college curriculum. None of the nine
general campuses in the UC system requires students to study the history and
institutions of the United States. None requires students to study Western
civilization, and on seven of the nine UC campuses, including Berkeley, a
survey course in Western civilization is not even offered. In several
English departments one can graduate without taking a course in Shakespeare.
In many political science departments majors need not take a course in
American politics.
Moreover, the evidence suggests that the hollowing
of the curriculum stems from too many professors' preference for promoting a
partisan political agenda.
National studies by Stanley Rothman in 1999, and by
Neil Gross and Solon Simmons in 2007, have shown that universities' leftward
tilt has become severe. And a 2005 study by Daniel Klein and Andrew Western
in Academic Questions (a NAS publication) shows this is certainly true in
California. For example, Democrats outnumbered Republicans four to one on
University of California, Berkeley, professional school faculties; in the
social sciences the ratio was approximately 21 to one.
The same 2005 study revealed that the Berkeley
sociology department faculty was home to 17 Democrats and no Republicans.
The political science department included 28 Democrats and two Republicans.
The English department had 29 Democrats and one Republican; and the history
department had 31 Democrats and one Republican.
While political affiliation alone need not carry
classroom implications, the overwhelmingly left-leaning faculty openly
declare the inculcation of progressive political ideas their pedagogical
priority. As "A Crisis of Competence" notes, "a recent study by UCLA's
prestigious Higher Education Research Institute found that more faculty now
believe that they should teach their students to be agents of social change
than believe that it is important to teach them the classics of Western
civilization."
Some university programs tout their political
presuppositions and objectives openly. The mission statements of the Women's
Studies program at UCLA prejudges the issues by declaring that it proceeds
from "the perspectives of those whose participation has been traditionally
distorted, omitted, neglected, or denied." And the Critical Race Studies
program at the UCLA School of law announces that its aim is to "transform
racial justice advocacy."
Even the august American Association of University
Professors—which in 1915 and 1940 published classic statements explaining
that the aim of academic freedom was not to indoctrinate but to equip
students to think for themselves—has sided with the politicized
professoriate.
In 1915, the AAUP affirmed that in teaching
controversial subjects a professor should "set forth justly without
suppression or innuendo the divergent opinions of other investigators; he
should cause his students to become familiar with the best published
expressions of the great historic types of doctrine upon the questions at
issue."
However, in recent statements on academic freedom
in 2007 and 2011, the AAUP has undermined its almost century-old strictures
against proselytizing. Its new position is that restricting professors to
the use of relevant materials and obliging them to provide a reasonably
comprehensive treatment of the subject represent unworkable requirements
because relevance and comprehensiveness can themselves be controversial.
On the boundaries, they can be—like anything else.
However, it is wrong to dismiss professors' duty to avoid introducing into
classroom discussion opinions extraneous to the subject and to provide a
well-rounded treatment of the matter under consideration. That opens the
classroom to whatever professors wish to talk about. And in all too many
cases what they wish to talk about in the classroom is the need to transform
America in a progressive direction. Last year the leadership of AAUP
officially endorsed the Occupy Wall Street movement.
Excluding from the curriculum those ideas that
depart from the progressive agenda implicitly teaches students that
conservative ideas are contemptible and unworthy of discussion. This
exclusion, the California report points out, also harms progressives for the
reason John Stuart Mill elaborated in his famous 1859 essay, "On Liberty":
"He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that."
The removal of partisan advocacy from the classroom
would have long-term political benefits. Liberal education equips students
with intellectual skills valued by the marketplace. It prepares citizens to
discharge civic responsibilities in an informed and deliberate manner. It
fosters a common culture by revealing that much serious disagreement between
progressives and conservatives revolves around differing interpretations of
how to fulfill America's promise of individual freedom and equality.
It is certainly true that not all progressive
professors intrude their politics into the classroom, but a culture of
politicization has developed on campus in which department chairs and deans
treat its occurrence as routine. "UC administrators," the California report
sadly concludes, "far from performing their role as the university's quality
control mechanism, now routinely function as the enablers, protectors, and
even apologists for the politicized university and its degraded scholarly
and educational standards."
In California, this is more than a failure of their
duty as educators. It is also a violation of the law. Article IX, Section 9,
of the California state constitution provides that "The university shall be
entirely independent of all political or sectarian influence and kept free
therefrom."
Continued in article
Jensen Comment
Partisanship in the classroom is contrary to AAUP policy, especially in courses
where politics is not part of the curriculum plan for those courses. However,
that policy is mostly unenforced by the liberal AAUP leadership,
Professor Berkowitz fails to mention one of the main reasons why many
left-leaning and right-leaning professors try to either leave partisanship
politics out of the classroom. Partisanship indoctrination can be hazardous to
teaching evaluations. For anecdotal evidence of this read some of the caustic
comments sometimes found at the RateMyProfessor teaching evaluation site ---
http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/
At the above site I looked up some professors that I know have a reputation
for injecting partisanship in their courses. Most of them paid a price for this
by having caustic RateMyProfessor comments from some students turned off by this
type of indoctrination in courses. Militant feminists also pay somewhat of a
price for similar reasons.
Bob Jensen's threads on liberal bias in academe ---
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/HigherEdControversies.htm#LiberalBias
Immigrants are hosted in just about 20 countries
The USA hosts nearly half of all immigrants; Nordic countries don't show up on
the graph ---
https://atlas.qz.com/charts/4JYKtQedx
Look at the graph you will never see shown by the mainstream media in the USA
"The One Kind of Diversity Colleges Avoid: I’ve seen faculty
searches up close. Somehow teachers with conservative views just don’t make the
cut," by John Hasnas, The Wall Street Journal, March 31, 2016 ***
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-one-kind-of-diversity-colleges-avoid-1459464676?mod=djemMER
Many universities are redoubling their efforts to
diversify their faculties in response to last fall’s wave of protests from
student groups representing women and minorities. Yale, for example, has
announced a $50 million, five-year initiative to enhance faculty diversity.
Brown has committed $100 million to hire 60 additional faculty members from
historically underrepresented groups over the next five to seven years.
America’s institutions of higher education seem committed to faculty
diversity. But are they really?
In the more than 20 years that I have been a
professor at Georgetown University, I have been involved in many faculty
searches. Every one begins with a strong exhortation from the administration
to recruit more women and minority professors. We are explicitly reminded
that every search is a diversity search. Administrators require submission
of a plan to vigorously recruit applications from women and minority
candidates.
Before we even begin our selection process, we must
receive approval from the provost that our outreach efforts have been
vigorous enough. The deans and deputy deans of each school reinforce the
message that no expense should be spared to increase the genetic diversity
of our faculty.
Yet, in my experience, no search committee has ever
been instructed to increase political or ideological diversity. On the
contrary, I have been involved in searches in which the chairman of the
selection committee stated that no libertarian candidates would be
considered. Or the description of the position was changed when the best
résumés appeared to be coming from applicants with right-of-center
viewpoints. Or in which candidates were dismissed because of their
association with conservative or libertarian institutions.
I doubt that my experience is unusual. According to
data compiled by the Higher Education Research Institute, only 12% of
university faculty identify as politically right of center, and these are
mainly professors in schools of engineering and other professional schools.
Only 5% of professors in the humanities and social-science departments so
identify.
A comprehensive study by James Lindgren of
Northwestern University Law School shows that in a country fairly evenly
divided between Democrats and Republicans, only 13% of law professors
identify as Republican. And a recent study by Jonathan Haidt of New York
University showed that 96% of social psychologists identify as left of
center, 3.7% as centrist/moderate and only 0.03% as right of center.
The advocates of diversity in higher education
claim that learning requires the robust exchange of ideas, which is enhanced
when students and faculty have the greatest possible variety of backgrounds.
They argue that exposure to people from different backgrounds breaks down
unfair stereotypes and promotes understanding of those who come from
different circumstances than oneself.
It is also claimed that being in a diverse academic
environment better prepares students for an increasingly diverse workforce,
and that this preparation can only be developed through exposure to people
of diverse cultures, ideas and viewpoints. And a diverse faculty provides
students with role models who demonstrate that people from all backgrounds
can achieve intellectual excellence and are worthy of respect.
These are good arguments. But surely the robust
exchange of ideas is enhanced by exposure to and interaction with people who
have diverse political and philosophical viewpoints, not only cultural or
ethnic backgrounds. Actually engaging with those with whom one disagrees can
break down stereotypes and promote understanding across ideological divides.
And if students see faculty members who share their unpopular viewpoints,
they may be more inspired to pursue intellectual excellence.
The relentless call to actively recruit women and
minority candidates arises from the fear that if left to their own devices,
predominantly white male faculties will identify merit with those who look
and think like them, undervalue the contributions of those from different
backgrounds, and perpetuate a white male stranglehold on the academy. Yet
without an exhortation to pursue viewpoint diversity, this is exactly what
happens.
Predominantly liberal faculties identify merit with
positions that are consistent with theirs, see little value in conservative
and libertarian scholarship, and perpetuate the left-wing stranglehold on
the academy.
Continued in article
Liberal Bias in North American Universities ---
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/higHerEdControversies.htm#LiberalBias
"The One Kind of Diversity Colleges Avoid: I’ve seen faculty
searches up close. Somehow teachers with conservative views just don’t make the
cut," by John Hasnas, The Wall Street Journal, March 31, 2016 ***
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-one-kind-of-diversity-colleges-avoid-1459464676?mod=djemMER
Many universities are redoubling their efforts to
diversify their faculties in response to last fall’s wave of protests from
student groups representing women and minorities. Yale, for example, has
announced a $50 million, five-year initiative to enhance faculty diversity.
Brown has committed $100 million to hire 60 additional faculty members from
historically underrepresented groups over the next five to seven years.
America’s institutions of higher education seem committed to faculty
diversity. But are they really?
In the more than 20 years that I have been a
professor at Georgetown University, I have been involved in many faculty
searches. Every one begins with a strong exhortation from the administration
to recruit more women and minority professors. We are explicitly reminded
that every search is a diversity search. Administrators require submission
of a plan to vigorously recruit applications from women and minority
candidates.
Before we even begin our selection process, we must
receive approval from the provost that our outreach efforts have been
vigorous enough. The deans and deputy deans of each school reinforce the
message that no expense should be spared to increase the genetic diversity
of our faculty.
Yet, in my experience, no search committee has ever
been instructed to increase political or ideological diversity. On the
contrary, I have been involved in searches in which the chairman of the
selection committee stated that no libertarian candidates would be
considered. Or the description of the position was changed when the best
résumés appeared to be coming from applicants with right-of-center
viewpoints. Or in which candidates were dismissed because of their
association with conservative or libertarian institutions.
I doubt that my experience is unusual. According to
data compiled by the Higher Education Research Institute, only 12% of
university faculty identify as politically right of center, and these are
mainly professors in schools of engineering and other professional schools.
Only 5% of professors in the humanities and social-science departments so
identify.
A comprehensive study by James Lindgren of
Northwestern University Law School shows that in a country fairly evenly
divided between Democrats and Republicans, only 13% of law professors
identify as Republican. And a recent study by Jonathan Haidt of New York
University showed that 96% of social psychologists identify as left of
center, 3.7% as centrist/moderate and only 0.03% as right of center.
The advocates of diversity in higher education
claim that learning requires the robust exchange of ideas, which is enhanced
when students and faculty have the greatest possible variety of backgrounds.
They argue that exposure to people from different backgrounds breaks down
unfair stereotypes and promotes understanding of those who come from
different circumstances than oneself.
It is also claimed that being in a diverse academic
environment better prepares students for an increasingly diverse workforce,
and that this preparation can only be developed through exposure to people
of diverse cultures, ideas and viewpoints. And a diverse faculty provides
students with role models who demonstrate that people from all backgrounds
can achieve intellectual excellence and are worthy of respect.
These are good arguments. But surely the robust
exchange of ideas is enhanced by exposure to and interaction with people who
have diverse political and philosophical viewpoints, not only cultural or
ethnic backgrounds. Actually engaging with those with whom one disagrees can
break down stereotypes and promote understanding across ideological divides.
And if students see faculty members who share their unpopular viewpoints,
they may be more inspired to pursue intellectual excellence.
The relentless call to actively recruit women and
minority candidates arises from the fear that if left to their own devices,
predominantly white male faculties will identify merit with those who look
and think like them, undervalue the contributions of those from different
backgrounds, and perpetuate a white male stranglehold on the academy. Yet
without an exhortation to pursue viewpoint diversity, this is exactly what
happens.
Predominantly liberal faculties identify merit with
positions that are consistent with theirs, see little value in conservative
and libertarian scholarship, and perpetuate the left-wing stranglehold on
the academy.
Continued in article
Liberal Bias in North American Universities ---
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/higHerEdControversies.htm#LiberalBias
Question
What things bad for investors do Apple and Enron have in common?
The former CFO (felon Andy
Fastow) of Enron warned a group of execs that large US companies are doing the
same things he did ---
http://www.businessinsider.com/andy-fastow-talk-2016-4
. . .
He sent out the following event recap in an email:
I went to an event yesterday afternoon at which
Andy Fastow spoke for two hours. You may recall that he was the CFO of Enron
and served six years in prison for his crimes – and he’s now out on the
speaking circuit. I agreed with most of what he said. He acknowledged that
he was the primary cause of Enron’s demise and apologized for all of the
harm this caused. He said he knowingly engaged in numerous transactions that
were designed to mislead investors by hiding debt in
special purpose entities,
etc. He also noted, however, that every single one of them was approved by
Enron’s board, auditors, etc. – and, most alarmingly, gave numerous examples
of many major companies today are doing similar things, just not (for most
companies anyway) to the same degree. For example, he showed this picture
and asked if anyone could name the major company whose global headquarters
this was:
Continued in article
Bob Jensen's threads on
Enron and Fastow's hundreds of SPEs are at ---
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/FraudEnron.htm
The Hidden Economics of Porn ---
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/04/pornography-industry-economics-tarrant/476580/
Jensen Comment
I think this article misses a lot about porn, especially its multinational
economics of organized and unorganized crime in Russia and Asia. This makes it almost
impossible to get reliable data, especially since so much of the porn is
obtained free from sites that use free downloads as enticements for customers to
get hooked into eventually paying for more ---
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_by_region
I think the article puts too much focus on monopoly in an "industry" that's too
enormous to control by trying to regulate the monopoly or oligopoly aspects of
porn on the Internet.
Porn is huge in two sectors. Firstly, there's the legal kind that's available
for fees via cable's porn channel subscriptions and video via hotel room
rentals. Data is probably available from the big suppliers of this porn like
Time Warner Cable and the big hotel chains. Secondly there are the hundreds of
thousands of porn sites (most of which are legal) on the Internet that are
sourced from all over the world (especially from Russia). Porn is now available
at sites like YouTube that initially banned porn. Since the Internet is not
regulated it's virtually impossible to get reliable data on all the sites in so
many countries. I cannot imagine how financial revenue data can be sorted out
from all the free trafficking. In the USA law enforcement focuses mainly on
child pornography. A common ploy is to set up a stings where the buyers or
sellers are actually police officers. But child pornography is probably a small
portion of the total pornography "industry." The industry has also branched out
where porn is an enticement for getting malware on computers and then charging
victims to recover their computers.
Every accountant knows there's more to economics than just the revenue
transactions. There's also the cost side of things, especially when people in
the porn are exploited with by organized crime with drugs, extortion, human
trafficking, etc. There's also the problem of defining porn. Mostly we think of
it as being rather obvious in videos and pictures. However, there's also the
literature side and social media side of porn ranging from millions of short
stories to books and chat rooms --- many of which have only words with no
illustrations.
My point is that this article from The Atlantic misses most of the
real "economics of porn" including loss in productivity on the job in the public
and private sectors ---
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography
The only things we can safely conclude about porn is that it's both a very
complicated industry and a very enormous industry that exceeds most anything we
can imagine since it extends so far beyond traditional economics of financial
transactions, including the many types of bartering schemes in porn
Rule 34 ---
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_34_(Internet_meme)
"Is Rule 34 actually true?: An investigation into the Internet’s most
risqué law," by Caitlin Dewey, Washington Post, April 6, 2016 ---
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/04/06/is-rule-34-actually-true-an-investigation-into-the-internets-most-risque-law/
Here’s a fun parlor game to play
with your (inebriated, adult) friends: Pull out a smartphone with “safe
search” disabled, and try disproving the 34th rule of the Internet. Rule 34,
according to long-standing legend, goes something like this: If it exists,
or can be imagined, there is Internet porn of it.
Tetris blocks? Yep,
absolutely.
Leprechauns? The Web’s
got it.
Robots? Aliens? Goats? Trombones?
Buck up and Google them.
As bemused players have gradually
been finding, however, there is a new catch in the game: It may actually be
more difficult to find porn of everything/anything now than it had been
previously. In the 13 years since a British teenager first coined the term
“Rule 34,” Internet consumption patterns and the online porn industry have
changed. Alien goat sex may still exist somewhere in the Internet’s
unplumbable depths, but it is far deeper down than it used to be.
“I think we’re seeing the death of
Rule 34,” sighs Ogi Ogas, a computational neuroscientist at Harvard and the
author of the first large-scale study on Internet porn. “It’s out there, if
you want to find it. But it’s not easy anymore.”
[Did
online porn kill the Playboy nude?]
Ogas conducted his study — an
analysis of more than 55 million pornography searches — in 2009 and 2010, at
the tail end of the period that may go down in history as the golden age of
Rule 34.
Like the mainstream media during
that same period, the porn industry was experiencing some major turbulence,
thanks to the Internet. Home computers and faster Internet speeds liberated
consumers from the awkwardness of interacting with an inquisitive mailman or
video-store clerk, which meant they could chase down whatever flavor of smut
they wanted. And thanks to the same technologies that were fueling these
cool new things called “Web logs,” just about anyone with an Internet
connection and a willing audience could produce it.
There are few good censuses of porn
sites from this time, alas: Even Ogas’s study looked at what users searched
for, and not what they actually encountered. But some earlier “netporn”
researchers described a branching constellation of increasingly niche sites
arrayed around every conceivable sexual identity and interest: “No theme is
remote enough,” one pair of researchers
said in 2007. “No fetish too exotic.”
Continued in article
Question
What things bad for investors do Apple and Enron have in common?
The former CFO (felon Andy
Fastow) of Enron warned a group of execs that large US companies are doing the
same things he did ---
http://www.businessinsider.com/andy-fastow-talk-2016-4
. . .
He sent out the following event recap in an email:
I went to an event yesterday afternoon at which
Andy Fastow spoke for two hours. You may recall that he was the CFO of Enron
and served six years in prison for his crimes – and he’s now out on the
speaking circuit. I agreed with most of what he said. He acknowledged that
he was the primary cause of Enron’s demise and apologized for all of the
harm this caused. He said he knowingly engaged in numerous transactions that
were designed to mislead investors by hiding debt in
special purpose entities,
etc. He also noted, however, that every single one of them was approved by
Enron’s board, auditors, etc. – and, most alarmingly, gave numerous examples
of many major companies today are doing similar things, just not (for most
companies anyway) to the same degree. For example, he showed this picture
and asked if anyone could name the major company whose global headquarters
this was:
Continued in article
Bob Jensen's threads on
Enron and Fastow's hundreds of SPEs are at ---
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/FraudEnron.htm
Chelsea Clinton Decries Obamacare's 'Crushing Costs' ---
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/03/28/oh-my-chelsea-clinton-slams-obamacare-n2138922?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=
Deloitte's Auditors Fail to Detect $500 Million Ponzi Fraud
"Aequitas investors file suit against Tonkon Torp, Deloitte," by Jeff Manning,
The Oregonian, April 4, 2016 ---
http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2016/04/aequitas_investors_file_suit_a.html
Investors burned in the flameout of Aequitas
Capital Management have filed suit against Portland law firm Tonkon Torp and
accounting giant Deloitte & Touche, claiming the firms enabled the massive
Ponzi scheme allegedly masterminded by the Lake Oswego financial company.
"Investors trusted Aequitas and their trust was
abused," said Keith Ketterling, of the Stoll Berne Lokting & Shlachter firm
in Portland. "The law makes the lawyers and accountants responsible to the
same extent as Aequitas, because these professionals are the gatekeepers,
and their services lend credibility to the investments."
Tonkon Torp, one of the most respected corporate
law firms in town, for several years represented Aequitas and helped prepare
prepare financial documents for investors that were materially false,
investors allege.
"The Aequitas securities could not have been sold
without the legal services that Tonkon provided," investors claim in the new
complaint.
Deloitte prepared the 2014 and 2015 audited
financial statements for Aequitas, which painted a reassuring portrait of
Aequitas' financial strength. Deloitte offered a so-called "unqualified"
opinion in its 2014 audit that Aequitas' financials fairly and accurately
represented the company's financial condition. The U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission now claims that Aequitas by 2014 was little more than a
large Ponzi scheme, reliant on new investor money to cover its expenses.
Continued in article
"Japanese Elderly Commit Crimes Hoping to Get into Prison! Retail Spending
Plunges; About that Deflation!," by Mike Shedlock, Townhall, March
30, 2016 ---
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/mikeshedlock/2016/03/30/japanese-elderly-commit-crimes-hoping-to-get-into-prison-retail-spending-plunges-about-that-deflation-n2140536?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl
Despite overwhelming fears of deflation in Japan by
economists, by the Bank of Japan, and by prime minister Shinzo Abe, all of
the preceding forgot to get the opinion of consumers.
Here’s the real deal on alleged deflation: An
increasing number of Japanese elderly are repeat shoplifters, trying to get
caught, hoping to be rewarded with a two year prison sentence because they
cannot get by on government pensions.
Life of Crime
Please consider Japan’s Elderly Turn to Life of
Crime to Ease Cost of Living.
Continued in article
Jensen Comment
Remind's me a bit of Mayberry where Otis gets stoned and then enjoy's Aunt Bee's
good cooking before leaving jail ---
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Griffith
More than half of the
black and Latino students who take the state teacher licensing exam in
Massachusetts fail, at rates that are high enough that
many minority college students are starting to avoid
teacher training programs,
The Boston Globe reported. The failure rates
are 54 percent (black), 52 percent (Latino) and 23 percent (white).
Inside Higher Ed, August 20, 2007 ---
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/08/20/qt
"This new education law could lower the standards for teachers'
qualifications," by Gail L. Boldt and Bernard J. Badiali, Business Insider,
March
. . .
Teacher academies
The support for the ESSA has largely come from its
reducing much of the heavy-handed federal oversight of education. States and
local school districts can now make more decisions about how best to support
student learning.
We are happy that the ESSA supports
less testing. In addition, it emphasizes a
“well-rounded education.” Students
will study arts alongside the academic subjects
that were favored under No Child Left Behind.
However, our concern is the inclusion in Title II
of the ESSA of language which authorizes routes to teacher certification
that attempt to fast-track the preparation of teachers for pre-kindergarten
through 12th grade positions.
Nationwide, in order for graduates of teacher
education programs based in colleges and universities to gain state
certification as a teacher, the programs
must follow state requirements such as required
entrance and exit exams and the number of credit hours in specific subjects
such as reading, math and special education.
In the new ESSA legislation, the envisioned
fast-track academies will be exempt from states' teacher certification
requirements.
In other words, they do not have to
meet the standards for accountability and
accreditation required of university-based teacher education programs.
Continued in article
"Do Education Programs Dole Out Too Many Easy A’s?" by Rebecca Koenig,
Chronicle of Higher Education, November 12, 2014 ---
http://chronicle.com/article/Do-Education-Programs-Dole-Out/149947/?cid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en
Are teacher-training programs rigorous enough? A
new study, completed by a group that has long been critical of the quality
of teacher preparation, makes the case that they’re not.
Education students face easier coursework than
their peers in other departments, according to the study, and they’re more
likely to graduate with honors.
The report—"Easy A’s and What’s Behind Them,"
which is to be released Wednesday by the National Council on Teacher
Quality—argues that a more-objective curriculum for teaching candidates
would better prepare them for careers in the classroom.
"We’re out to improve training," said Julie
Greenberg, the report’s co-author, who is a senior policy analyst for
teacher-preparation studies for the advocacy group. "We want teacher
candidates to be more confident and competent when they get in the classroom
so their students can benefit from that."
Continued in article
"‘Easy A’s’ Gets an F," by Donald E. Heller, Chronicle of Higher
Education, November 14, 2014 ---
http://chronicle.com/article/Easy-A-s-Gets-an-F/150025/?cid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en
Wow: 97% of Elementary NYC Public Students
Get A or B Grades ---
"City Schools May Get Fewer A’s," by Jennifer Medina,
The New York Times,
January 28, 2010 ---
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/30/education/30grades.html?hpw
NY Times: Federal Judge In Puerto Rico Calls 100% Tax On Walmart Unlawful
---
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2016/03/federal-judge-in-puerto-rico-calls-walmart-tax-unlawful.html
Jensen Comment
Who benefits the most from this decision given that Walmart could pull out of
Puerto Rico with little or no impact on its worldwide bottom line?
Sanders' initiatives could add $15 trillion to the
national debt ---
http://www.businessinsider.com/sanders-plan-adds-15-trillion-to-debt-2016-4
He doesn't have a clue about the disastrous economics of his political
initiatives.
"If you're poor in another country, this is the scariest thing Bernie
Sanders has said," by Zack Beauchamp, Vox, April 5, 2016 ---
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11139718/bernie-sanders-trade-global-poverty
. . .
From Sanders's point
of view, this makes sense. He has recognized, correctly, that freer trade
with countries like China has hurt a subset of American workers (while
benefiting others).
But there's one big
problem, according to development economists I spoke to: Limiting trade with
low-wage countries as severely as Sanders wants to would hurt the very
poorest people on Earth. A lot.
Free trade is one of
the best tools we have for fighting extreme poverty. If Sanders wins, and is
serious about implementing his trade agenda as outlined in the NYDN
interview and elsewhere, he will impoverish millions of already-poor people.
Continued in article
In an op-ed published in yesterday's
New York Times,
Nobel laureate, economics professor and "Conscience
of a Liberal" blogger Paul Krugman took aim at what he
believes is the culprit for the US' "shortage of urban dwellings" and the
un-affordability of existing housing inventory . . . Though long an
advocate of regulation and
central planning in just about every economic sphere,
Paul Krugman
has railed against rent control and land-use
restrictions as drivers of inequality and artificially-inflated prices for years.
In late 2015 he argued, "this is an issue on which you
don’t have to be a conservative to believe that we have too much regulation."
Anthony L. Fisher ---
http://reason.com/blog/2016/04/05/paul-krugman-blames-over-regulation-for
Jensen Comment
I might add that Paul Krugman also favors free trade --- unlike Bernie Sanders
and some other presidential candidates trying to garner labor votes with trade
restrictions that are harmful to the economy.
Finding and Using Health Statistics
---
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/nichsr/usestats/index.htm
Bob Jensen's threads on economic statistics and databases ---
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/Bookbob1.htm#EconStatistics
Medicare Fraud is Rampant ---
http://townhall.com/columnists/stevesherman/2016/02/05/medicare-fraud-is-rampant-n2115375?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=
States Where Doctors Earn the Most (and Least) ---
http://247wallst.com/special-report/2016/03/30/doctor-pay-by-state/#ixzz44bLJI7RD
Or try ---
http://247wallst.com/special-report/2016/03/30/doctor-pay-by-state/?utm_source=247WallStDailyNewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=APR012016A&utm_campaign=DailyNewsletter
01 - Alaska
02 - South Dakota
03 - Iowa
04 - Nebraska
05 - Iowa
. . .
46 - Maine
47 - Maryland
48 - Michigan
49 - Delaware
50 - West Virginia
Jensen Comment
I think this ranking is probably more misleading than helpful. Physicians,
especially the most successful physicians, typically are in private business
where they have their own billings and staff. They may own their own office
buildings or rent office space from others such as medical clinics. The point
here is that they are on not on salary.
ER physicians are often in partnerships where hospitals contract with the
partnerships to cover the ER services. Billings may vary with demand for those
ER services. Partners in turn share the profits.
Like other salary rankings such as ranking of professor compensation by
university, the rankings are meaningless unless other things are factored in
such as the cost of housing. For example, we can hardly compare the salaries at
Stanford University (read that Silicon Valley) with the salaries at Dartmouth or
the University of New Hampshire where housing is expensive within the State of
New Hampshire but hardly comparable with Silicon Valley housing costs. Also
other things must be factored in such as housing subsidies and fringe benefits.
Having said this it did surprise me that states not having large cities (like
the top five states ranked above) came out higher than states having large
cities like California, New York, Texas, and Ohio.
"Therapy Lizards Are No Joke to Employers," by Bill Pilchak, Pilchak
and Cohen, 2/26/15 ---
http://mi-worklaw.com/author/miworklaw/page/8/
. . .
New Yorker Magazine, not often friendly to
the business perspective, noted the problems businesses face and documented
how easy it is to get a psychologist to certify the need for a support
animal. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/10/20/pets-allowed . The
author noted that anyone could register their animal (or actually a beanie
baby) as a support animal for a fee between $70 and $250. The author
registered a thirteen-pound turtle with the Emotional Support Animal
Registration of America, who evaluated her over the phone and provided her
with a letter certifying her need for the turtle. She also succeeded in
registering a snake, a turkey, an alpaca (who she tried to take on a train)
and a pig (who she did take on a plane in a stroller) as emotional support
animals.
The New Yorker
author found that those who push the envelope are armed by federal
publications that warn that the only two questions that may be asked is: 1)
Is the animal required because of a disability? 2) what work or task has the
animal been trained to perform? Such publications exist, however, other
publications suggest other strategies.
April 8, 2016 reply from
Wright MacEwan
I wonder if there is a prize
for being the most annoying person in the world?!?!
Almost seriously: In Victoria Australia, where Uber is outlawed, and taxi
fares
Bob Jensen's universal health care messaging ---
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/Health.htm
Bob Jensen's Home Page ---
http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/
.