Jack Heald

This post comes under the heading of “Not Exactly Scientific but Darned-Reliable Nonetheless”.

I was driving home the other day amidst the normal horrors of the southbound 101 at rush hour, and was irritated to see that traffic was stalled and slowed much farther along my route than normal. As I approached my exit, I saw the reason.

On the side of the road was a single traffic cop with his pretty blue and red flashing lights, and a single driver receiving a citation from said cop. As soon as traffic got past the cop by the side of the road, the traffic jam ceased and I was able to resume normal highway speeds.

Ordinarily, I would have forgotten this incident as it doesn’t seem particularly meaningful. We’ve all cursed the stupidity of people who seem to insist on slowing down to look at something on the side of the road, and this experience was no different. But the next day something happened that put the incident in a whole new light.

The next day I drove home the same time, same route, but traffic was moving at normal highway speeds the whole trip. At almost precisely the same point near my exit, I saw a car stalled on the side of the road. The only difference between this day’s trip and the previous day’s is that there was no cop with pretty flashing lights next to the stalled car.

And suddenly it hit me: cops cause traffic jams.

I’ve since noticed that this is almost ALWAYS the cause of traffic jams: whenever traffic on my commute is clogged up, the source of the bottleneck is almost always a cop on the side of the road writing a traffic tickets. I challenge you to start observing whether or not this is true in your community as well.

I hate traffic jams, especially unnecessary ones, and have been pondering the problem for years. I’ve always blamed the general stupidity of the populace for most traffic jams, but this observation has changed my opinion. Rather than condemn the populace for slowing down in the presence of flashing red and blue lights, why not just accept such behavior as a given in human behavior, and figure out a way to manage around it? And the way to manage around it is simple: prohibit the police from stopping anyone for traffic violations during rush hour.

I have proof-positive that if the cops would leave us alone to manage ourselves, we’d do just fine. (I know cops don’t believe this, but cops don’t believe anything.)

I propose that the cops stay off the road altogether during rush hour, and only show up in the event of a traffic accident. I’m sure some faint-hearted limp-wristed milqutoast will protest that the presence of traffic cops keep us safer, but my experience says otherwise. My experience says that the presence of cops – especially with their flashing lights – is the cause of the type of traffic snarl-ups which inevitably lead to multiple car rear-end collisions. I’d be willing to bet that those are the main sort of traffic accident that occurs during rush hour.

Want to have a faster, safer commute?

Get rid of the traffic cops.

…it only makes sense that the next one should be an actual clown.

Seriously.

But I’m not writing about that yet. I’m just making myself a note to read as much literature in the field of behavioural economics as I can. Found a good list to start with, though I suspect Mises’s Human Action is still better than any others.

Thanks to all of you who read and commented on my Earth Day post.

What would you do if the world were already exactly as it should be? How would you spend your time?

I’m an employee again. Trading wasn’t paying the bills.

Just thought you should know.

What this guy does on a bike defies imagination.Cj6ho1-G6tw

“… or the Son of Man, that thou visitest Him. For thou hast made Him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned Him with glory.”

I remember this line from one of the Psalms because it was in a choral piece by John Ritter that my high school choir performed. Amazing how putting words to music sears it into your brain, is it not? I was reminded of these words as I read this passage from Jacques Barzun’s magnum opus “From Dawn to Decadence – 500 Years of Western Cultural History“. I quote it here in it’s entirety and without comment. I think you’ll see why:

… a historian who contemplates the infinite diversity of human character, the range of human desires and powers, the multiplicity of social and political institutions, the endless schemes proposed for improving life, the numberless faiths, codes, and customs passionately adhered to, fiercely hated, and in unceasing warfare, the vast universe of art with its expressions in a galaxy of styles and languages—all these existing to an accompaniment of sacrifice, injustice, and su.ering, persecution imposed or willingly endured—such a historian is persuaded that these challenges to the concrete imagination cannot be merged and reduced to a formula. History is not an agency nor does it harbor a hidden powerl the word history is an ABSTRACTION for the totality of human deeds, and to make their clasing outcomes the fulfullment of some concelaed purpose is tomake huiman beings into puppets. For the same reason, history cannot be a science; it is the very opposite in that its interest resides in the particulars.

I cannot recommend this book highly enough.

…for admitting I watch “Dancing With The Stars“, but I have to say something about the television production. First, though, I guess I must defend myself for watching the show at all.

Here’s why I deserve to keep my Man Card in spite of my viewing habits. First, I don’t initiate the watching. My Best Beloved watches regularly and likes me to watch with her, so Imy primary reason for watching is to be a  Good Mate. Second, the female dancers have fabulous bodies, wear very little clothing and move like they are double jointed everywhere. EVERYWHERE. (Which reminds me: where is Edyta this year anyway? I always looked forward to seeing how close to naked she managed to get with her “costumes”.)

So, with that defense of my manhood complete, can I please speak directly to the producers of the show?

Would you guys try to remember that dance is an art form performed on a stage by an audience that is sitting still? And could you try to keep in mind that the choreography is designed for an audience which is seated in front of the stage?

In the couple of years I have been watching DWTS, I have been subjected to bizarro camera angles, quick cuts from camera to camera and zoom focus on small parts of the whole stage – all of which makes it impossible for the television viewer to actually see the piece as choreographed. Why do the producers think that swooping camera angles, fast cuts from image to image, and zoom focus on individual dancers makes for good TV? It might work for a drama filmed on a sound stage, but it SUX BIG HAIRY DONKEY BALLS for a stage production.

Can whoever produces this show try to think like an audience member sitting in front of the stage, and give us that single, static view of the whole stage without flicking back and forth from the camera in the attic to the camera backstage in the wings to the camera on the remote control helicopter? Please? I just wanna see the dancing. I’m not remotely interested in how creative you can be with camera angles.

It’d be like showing a football game and flicking through 20 different camera angles during the play. It makes it IMPOSSIBLE to follow the action. You wanna demonstrate how swoopy and artsy you can be with the cameras? Do it during the replay and the slo-mo. During the live action, we wanna see it like we have the SINGLE best seat in the house.

Okay?

Okay.

Here’s a cool video that helps us visualize the RBNs (Really Big Numbers) that the math geniuses running the country are busy juggling.

I am typing this post from my dad’s hospital room, waiting for him to be carted off to the cardiac cath lab for the insertion of several stents into his cardiac arteries.

(I talk like I know what the heck I’m talking about, but it’s an act. I live with a couple of nurses and have spent way too much time listening to them talk about my dad’s health issues; thus, I have absorbed some of the lingo.)

My dad’s heart is apparently not getting enough blood, which – according to the medical professionals I live with – is Not Good. The doctor caring for him, Dr. Nabil Dib, looked at the inside of his arteries in the Cath Lab on Thursday and found that the reason he feels like crap is because the arteries leading to his heart are mostly blocked. He had a triple bypass 9 years ago, but those <sigh> are also mostly blocked. This sucks for me; I cannot IMAGINE the level of Suck it is for my dad.

What blows my mind is that he would likely be dead if we lived somewhere other than America, or sometime other than now. The bypass done in 2001 likely kept him alive till now, and the procedure here is gonna have here in the next hour will likely make him feel 20 years younger AND keep him going for a while.

Imagine telling someone a hundred years ago that we are gonna fix your heart by shoving a tiny little tube inside your groin, snaking it up to your heart, inserting a stainless steel mesh tube inside your coronary artery and thus prevent a fatal heart attack. Oh, and the next day you’ll be walking around feeling like a million bucks.

Western aliopathic medicine SUCKS at disease prevention, but if you have a nasty, acute problem, western aliopathic medicine is just nearly magic.