Occupy Wall Street

Sunday I was watching Fareed Zakaria GPS, and I was struck by something. You see, he had Paul Krugman on, along with Steve Forbes (Editor-in-Chief of Forbes Media), Chrystia Freeland (Global Editor-at-Large of Reuters) and Bret Stephens (of the Wall Street Journal). Paul (excuse me, Mr. Krugman, if I am so forward as to call you by your first name) took the position that the Occupy Wall Street movement is a good thing because it reminds us how we first got into this financial mess in which we find ourselves, and reminds us that we haven't done anything to address the problems leading up to our financial collapse.

Ms. Freeland seemed to agree with Paul, at least on many points, while Mr. Forbes and Bret seemed to disagree, Bret more strongly than Steve. I've recently seen Paul on other shows as well, and frequently those opposed to his opinions seem to dismiss him as not understanding the way things work (it seems like human nature to say to those with whom we disagree, "You don't understand - you've missed the point."). I find this quite odd, as Paul won a Nobel Prize in 2008 for an economic theory relating to how free trade affects globalization, specifically how some countries do very, very well while others do poorly.

Meanwhile, Steve, though a business man, seems to have spent most of his time in journalism. Likewise, Bret may have attended the London School of Economics, but at the tender age of 28 he landed the job of editor-in-chief of The Jerusalem Post, and is currently deputy editor of the editorial page at The Wall Street Journal. I therefore assume he, too, is more journalist than economist.

If anyone in this group can say, "Excuse me, you don't understand economic behavior," it would be Paul. (I leave Chrystia out of this because she did not poo-poo Paul's theories).

Paul is an economist who writes a column. I follow Paul on twitter because I like his posts. I have taken to reading at least some of his blog entries because I like what he has to say. I am no economist, and there are things about which Paul speaks that I simply do not understand. In such cases, I have to ask myself, who do I trust? Just like Sunday. Do I trust Steve, a business man who may be protecting his own interests? Do I trust Bret, someone with training in economics but who has spent his whole professional life on journalism? Or do I trust the Nobel laureate who knows economics and has little interest in doing anything other than informing me (us) on how we can make things better?

I would not ask a reporter who writes articles on medicine to treat my cancer - I would go to an oncologist. The reporter may know quite a bit about medicine, but the oncologist is the clear choice. Likewise, I will always give more credence to the Nobel Prize winning economist than the reporter with an economics background.

GO PAUL! and #OWS!

Jamey Rodemeyer

I was trying to avoid posting something about Jamey Rodemeyer, but I am having trouble ignoring it, so here goes:

For those who are unaware, last week (9-18-2011) 14 year old Jamey committed suicide. The factors which contribute to something like this are many and varied. In Jamey's case there had been a history of bullying, but as a health care professional I have to say that this by itself is not a cause of suicide. It is a contributing factor.

Nevertheless, I am astounded at the actions of many in this case (though I shouldn't be - it happens all the time). Bullying should never be acceptable. I am sure the bullies - and their parents - at this moment feel no remorse and no sense of responsibility - after all, they did not kill Jamey. Jamey killed Jamey. Yet responsible they are, and accountable they should be.

If a person commits a felony, and in the process of that crime someone is killed, the perpetrator is charged with murder. It doesn't matter that they did not intend to physically harm the victim: if the crime had not happened, the death would not have occurred. I think this should be the case for bullying. If you bully someone who then commits suicide, you should be charged with homicide, the degree of which would be determined by the nature of the bullying.

Some, notably Lady Gaga, are calling for a new law to be enacted in Jamey's name. I don't think that should be necessary, though since bullying itself is not a crime, I do support Lady Gaga's efforts. And may I offer some wording for Jamey's law?

The excuse, "I was only bullying him, I did not pull the trigger/put the rope around his neck/etc." is as valid as "I only ran over that person because I was drunk and s/he was in my way."

And that says a lot, coming from me. Why? Because I so totally disagree with our current "justice" system. But that is a topic for another blog entry.

Homework

I have always loved to read. When I was in elementary school it became obvious to my parents that "grounding" me was not a very effective punishment if I was allowed to read, so "not being able to read" had to be part of my grounding.

However, when I was in junior high reading became a chore. I constantly had to write book reports, and they had to be written a specific way, and had to be about books from a specific list ... and I was never really interested in any of the books from the list.

So for years I didn't read - well, not anything that wasn't specifically assigned.

Also, when I was young, I would come home from school and do my homework first. It usually took me about 1/2 hour to 1 hour. After that I had time to do my chores and then have fun (play with my friends, watch TV, whatever). I remember I loved school - it was great to go to a place where I could spend 6 hours with my friends, the work wasn't that bad, and I was able to get very good grades.

But now I notice that kids come home from school and have two, three, four hours of homework - most of it just for the sake of giving homework. In my opinion, that's too much. I find it hard to believe anyone could enjoy life having to do that much busy work. The system seems to be geared toward driving the enjoyment out of life, just like my middle school drove the love of reading out of me.

I'm back to loving reading again. It happened in high school when I got to a pair of teachers (two years of English) who said, "Yeah, read whatever you want and then come tell me about it." It was much easier then to read things I liked and then discuss the book with someone else who had read it. I got to read Frankenstein, The Phantom of the Opera, Lord of the Flies, a couple of HG Wells stories - all very enjoyable, all thanks to teachers who wanted me to enjoy reading, not find it a chore.