I'll Outlive You All

Moderate Wine Drinkers Less Likely to Develop Deadly Diseases
-Wine Spectator Online, Secondary Source

http://ang.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/58/6/689
-This is from the medical journal, Angiology, Primary Source

National Pig Day

Saturday, March 1, is National Pig Day.

I just found this out and I ended up giving it quite a bit of thought. This was especially so after I was reading Michael Pollen's follow-up to The Omnivore's Dilemma - In Defense of Food.

I grew up loving the lower quality pork products (i.e., hot dogs, sausages from the Sausage Guy at Fenway, and grilled bologna and cheese sandwiches). Ironically, I've never favored the "better" pork dishes like pork chops, etc. During college, however, I completely gave up pork after Dan-O showed me how unhealthy it was-which is true. Pork has a high fat content and low protein (for meat standards)...so the Case-gymers and I traded pork for baked beans, grilled chicken, and MetRx bars.

Now. It's amazing how quickly things change. I couldn't imagine eating a MetRx bar with all those faux ingredients and I rarely eat things out of a can. Grilled chicken is (and always has been) about as tasteful as tofu. Recently, I've found myself devouring pulled-pork sandwiches in New Orleans and anything full of "carnitas" in Mexican restaurants. In fact, I'd say pulled pork is my second favorite meat after a grilled steak.

It's a bit scary. I'm not sure if I'm following trends or I am correcting a mistake that I made during college. I remember "putting-up" with the taste of protein bars-but I don't ever remember preferring them. I also know that I gave up pork for nutritional reasons, not taste reasons. Who could actually prefer PowerBars over carnitas burritos at Anna's Tacqueria?

I'm curious if the other Case-gymers have had this same transition.

Health Care

This is an amazing step towards bring down health care costs.

Damn I love Google

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23274249

-Zachary

Grand Central

(shameless plug)

Google now has Grand Central in Beta testing (which means external people can use it. It's a pretty cool feature. You can call people for free and it stores all your voicemails on the internet (including work numbers, cell numbers, home numbers) and you can listen to them all in one place. It's also free. There are some other cool aspects to it too. Since some of you have about 5+ phone numbers (Scott), you may find it useful.

http://www.grandcentral.com/

America Needs a Mercy Flush

I'm not sure when this happened or how, but I'm going to look into it further. So America started in all it's glory with a bunch of religious exiles looking for new hope and freedom and turned into a country where the wealthy and productive made the decisions for the rest. We can argue about the validity of that as well as the ethical portions later. Then in and undetermined amount of time later the unproductive and non-movers started to gain power. Then mediocrity gained a toe hold and now fame. Now in schools kids don't get medals and trophies for winning, no everyone gets one regardless of how they did. All of the sudden it is a phrase that everyone loves, "everyone is special". Which translates to no one is. Schools are taught to the C student, not the A.

And here is the tie in, politicians don't take care of the people keeping the country and their campaigns afloat but to the mediocrity of the American public. That is what makes it ok for Obama to say what he did. Because the failing deserve their chance, regardless of what it does to the masses and the people who were innovative enough to makes things work in a system that ties their hands behind their back.

This is why I have to choke back bile every time I listen to debates and read about what politicians are trying to pull.

So some of you may be wondering do I think our business leaders should be running the world, maybe I do, and maybe not I am not sure. I think that the problem can be in two areas either government or people are innately flawed, or maybe we should just stop catering to the ones and governments who are (see Mexico in my last post, or see 90% of the American public).

-Zachary

re: Politics

wow, scathing indictments on politics by Hodgie and Zac. The matter-of-factness in both of your excellent points is scary though. As many of you know, I am not a staunch supporter of democracy - in fact Plato's "Allegory of the Ship" even came up in conversation tonight.

I must say, however, this acceptance of bullshit-politics, especially playing the game state-by-state (obviously, Obama did not mention this policy when he visited Google in November...) is sickening. For the sake of his pride, I hope he believes it is a good policy. Otherwise, how can we stand behind a "leader" who lies to get elected? Isn't that what we're trying to get rid of? Is lying about policies that much different than lying about WMD? Of course many more died in the latter, but Obama is depriving us of our sense of pride....

-Tim

The Dems

So both Clinton and Obama think it is a better idea to use high tech surveillance for illegal immigrants rather than put up a good ole fashion wall. How entirely like the democrats to spend way more money than necessary.

But then again, the America government thought it necessary to make sure it was ok with the Mexican government for us to put up a wall on our own damn soil. I mean what the fuck, we bomb the shit out of Iraq thinking we can get oil (by oil I mean get terroists and by get terrorists I mean get WMDs and by get WMDs I mean well golly gee my Dad started it with dem sonsa bitches so shucks I better finish it), and we get nothing from Mexico but we court them like the prom is next month and they are the pretties girl in town. But hey I guess that's politics and it makes no fucking sense

-Zachary

Politics

Obama's stance is doing what his positions tells him to do, play politics. I think he would support it if it gained enough momentum. And the scary part is it just might. Politicians may know economics, and probally most of them do but they want to win votes and to win votes means catering to the voters vunerablilty. And that is what Obamas is doing, and he is learning from history, Rommeny said he would get Michagans jobs back, which was a full face lie, and McCain said they jobs are coming back the truth and McCain got his ass handed to him there.

Also I saw this and thought some people might want to read it

Q. "Why can't the president be elected by popular vote? Why is the Electoral College still considered constitutional when it clearly undermines what a democracy stands for?"

The Electoral College is “considered constitutional” because it is constitutional.
The Constitution itself establishes the system of electors that we use. See Article II, section 1, Clause 2, of the Constitution: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress….”

Changing this system would require an amendment to the Constitution. It takes the agreement of three-quarters of the states to do that.

And the states with smaller populations (Vermont, Wyoming, South Dakota, etc.) are unlikely to agree to such an amendment, since the system established by the Constitution gives them a bigger voice in electing a president than they’d have if election through a popular vote were used.

-Zachary

ps Tim I will write about my one word soon

Re: Patriot Supporters

I think Obama understands that this is terrible economic policy. I think he also understands how a politician must compete in Presidential primary season if he/she wants to win the nomination. He needs to move to the left on many issues, including trade, to take votes from Clinton's base (especially in Ohio, which coincidently is one of the next states to vote) and that is what he is doing. I don't think you can take any of these ideas at face value until at least the general election competition is underway. Just watch, as soon as he gets the nomination, he will start moving way back to the center to compete with McCain for independents, which is the group that will decide this election. There is no way he would ever attempt to actually implement this policy.

Don't blame Obama, he is just playing the game.

Obama's "Patriot Employers"

Financial Times, 2/19, page 1: "Obama made an aggressive pitch to Ohio's blue-collar workers yesterday with a 'patriot employer' plan that would lower taxes for companies that did not ship jobs overseas..."

I 100% withdraw all support that I ever gave him. This is the worst piece of jingoistic rhetoric that I have ever heard of. I dare say, as protectionist as Ron Paul and republicans.

Why don't politicians understand economics? Why would you harm a company for attempting to decrease their expenses? Why would you harm SHAREHOLDERS who are already getting taxed beyond belief? Why would you harm all the blue-collar workers who hold PENSION PLANS and 401ks???

China and India are already far surpassing the US in many industries. Does he think this will change that trend? Does he think this plan will help GM regain market share from Toyota? Does he think anyone will be able to compete with Samsung, IKEA, and Sony?

How did he go to Columbia and Harvard and not learn this?

Leader

I must say, I'm highly anticipating the reasons behind some of the words posted. My first thought, also happened to be "happiness," but here's why I opted for "leader":

My idea of a personal mental nirvana doesn't exist in the English language (nor any others that I know of). Happiness/joy/glee/gaiety has become so arbitrary (along with love) that it has come to be the definition of much lower descriptions that cannot live up to the meaning that needs to be expressed. Happiness is nearly synonymous with contentment or more scarily, even apathy. A more desirable feeling would be ecstasy (intense joy or delight; rapture according to my dictionary), but this still doesn't capture what people really yearn for. As I am not trying to have a semantic argument based on this point, for clarity purposes I'll use "777" below to describe this non-word.

In my opinion, 777 cannot be just achieved whenever. [Yes, I know this is about to start an argument.] 777 needs to be earned. By this, I mean a person needs values and a philosophy on life in which to measure herself against. Without a solid system or understanding of one's own beliefs, desires, and passions - true 777 will never be achieved. "Happiness" can be achieved by hanging out on a beach all day or enjoying a nice glass of wine. While these things are wonderful and possibly deserve a close 2nd place, it isn't what we all live for. If it was, none of us would have gone to college or participate in careers.

Instead, it takes a "leader" to lead herself to follow her dreams, focus on the important things in her life, and succeed at those things; 777 is the feeling/thought achieved. Leaders can enjoy happiness that other forces or people have created (such as wine, beaches, nature, books), but will understand that the most important task is to create: create goals; create measurements; create solutions; create a life. Creation may mean creating happiness for others, wealth for oneself, literally creating a life for someone, or creating a solutions to bad beer or global warming. With any of these, the satisfaction attained could never be explained by, nor caused by "happiness" as we know it. It takes a leader to lead one's own philosophy and dreams, lead others to assist, and lead oneself to one's own personal 777.

belief

re: one word

i agree with zac and hodge...happiness

One Word

Love

One Word

I'm gonna have to agree with Zach on this one and go with happiness.

One Word

Happiness

-Zachary

re: one word

confidence

re: One Word

leader

One Word

ok - this is a bit of a survey, but I'm curious how many people are reading this and this is one of the hardest questions in the world - so I'm very interested in the answers.

What is the one word/characteristic/trait for a person that is the most important in life? NO explanations until others have posted.

re: Organic Food

Many people lump "organic," "local," "environmentally friendly," and "fair-trade" together. This is very, very wrong and I'd like to address points by Zac & Brian.

Organic food, which is over 90% of my diet, is a very confusing and misleading term which changes its definition depending on what type of food is being described. In general, however, we'll say it is food that is grown in the manner of our cave-men ancestors (or Adam & Eve - for Maura). In this, I mean - no hormones, no pesticides, and preferably no preservatives (but that means no asparagus for 9 months a year...which is where the 10% of my diet comes in).

On a selfish level, organic food is probably the healthiest. It is eating meat in the natural way that humans and other omnivores have traditionally eaten. E-coli, salmonella, etc are still possible (even likely considering I eat rare meat & vegetables), but you are still eating a "normal/traditional" diet, which does not include TV dinners, high-fructose corn syrup, and power bars.

As you noticed, I did not mention environmental reasons. There is a lot of debate on this and until organic food can be mass-produced in every location (good luck to Las Vegas & Anchorage), it will be more environmentally friendly to farm & ship in mass quantities (as current), than have millions of "Sweet Sara's Farm" watermelon shipped around the world. There's more to this, so if provoked, I'll go into further detail.

Environmentally-friendly food is grown by farmers who care about the land, etc (i.e., Native Americans & some organic farmers). This is great, but I think it should be an added benefit. We have many more environmental problems to worry about and this is very little compared to cars, deforestation, and Beijing.

As Hodge alluded to, fair-trade distorts economics. It encourages over-production, similar to subsidies, and should not be encouraged. The farmers should move to a different crop (perhaps wine?).

In summary, I eat organic because I think it's better for my body and I want to live as long as possible. I don't eat organic to save the planet or because it's "fair" or any other bandwagon reason. I wish all people would do the actual economic research on these things before waving their protest flags.

-Tim

PS.
On forced/collective farming: Many people buy "fair-trade" because the "non-fair-trade" farmers are usually paid shit and all of the profits go to some type of businessman/dictator. This is not a valid solution to this problem. I certainly do not believe in any type of forced (or unforced) socialism nor slavery. We should not try to "fight with our dollars." This only hurts the farmers under the current situation while helping the few "fair-trade." Have you ever wondered why these "lucky" fair-trade farmers don't have to participate in these slave-like collective farms that you're trying to boycott? Buying fair-trade is feeding the same monster.

The farmers should do the following: a) grow a different crop. If this isn't possible, they should b) move somewhere else. If this isn't possible, they should c) try to sneak into the US or France and collect welfare. If this isn't possible, then d) let natural selection take it's course and become fertilizer for the farmer down the street.

Organic Food and Environment

Hodge, et. al

This gives data, on organic farming, read it
http://eatwild.com/environment.html

Just make sure your hatred for organic farming is correct, cause well it may not be as bad as you think, or mabye better.


-Zachary

Re: Organic Foods

Alot of it can be chalked up to government subsidies as well b/c farmers will deplete land of nutrients by intensely growing crops that aren't necessarily suited to wherever they are farming b/c of the ridiculous govt subsidies for certain crops.

Also, I don't think you can argue for organic foods from an environmental perspective since it is also bad for the environment by encouraging deforestation. I'm not saying fertilizers are good for the environment but neither are organic processes. So then I guess we're fucked both ways, so who cares, lets go organic, the earth is screwed either way. There we go, now I'm on board.

Lets go Celts.

Organic Foods

This is another plug for organic foods

Over the last 50 years or so the USDA has been tracking nutrition values in some 43 different crops and the levels of nutrients have dropped in them. Specifically Vit C was down 20%, iron 15%, riboflavin 38%, and Calcium 16%, down 10% were zinc and selenium. Now this may not only be chalked up to fertilizers, but they most likely have been contributing to it.

So while it may take more land to produce organic food, you have to eat more fertilizer made food to get the same nutrition equavalience. And if this trend continues it will just get worse, not to mentions killing the environment in to process.

-Zachary

John McCain

Here is my list of problems with McCain.
1. He is trying to overturn Roe vs. Wade, and I know some of you say yes he is trying to return the power to the states. I agree that is good, but what it does is then make it illegal to travel from one state that doesn't allow abortion to another state that does to get an abortion. Bullshit in my mind.

2. Gay marriage. Who the fuck are we to say that marriage is only between a male and a female. It is unbeliveable to me that this is still an issue in american society, well ok not unbeliveable but pretty close.

3. Health care reform, I agree with him on many of thing things he wants to implement to help health care. But I do not agree with tax breaks to those who want health care. I do not believe health care is a natural right, and it is surely not in the constitution or its amendments so why are we pushing so hard for it. Secondly on the same note health care is a service and a trade, and no one can go into a grocery store and demand that food is given to them for free. But there is a perversion of thought and entiltment that allows people to say that health care should be given to them for free. And I can probally with out a conter argument from anyone state that food is more tied to survival than health care but no demands for free food are seen. Not only that the government through tariffs and subsidies makes food more expensive, i.e the sugar industry. Ass backwards is the title for thinking on health care in my mind.

Cheers
Zachary

Re: Philosophy and Good

I think the problem is that trying to come up with a universal definition of a word that has been used by so many for so many different purposes is near impossible. Philosophy is at its heart a personal exercise and the trial for each of us is to try to come up with our own philosophy of good. This will obviously be partly or wholly defined by the definitions and meanings others have ascribed to it but nonetheless it is an individual endeavor. So try as we might to come to some grand definition of a word so widely used as good, it will always be a futile attempt.

By the way, the Pats are gonna murder the Giants on sunday.