Debating Myself

A candidate for Congress in Indiana (a Republican) recently made an odd choice of public appearance. It was odd because Tony Zirkle, an apparently very devout Christian, was appearing at a celebration to honor perhaps the greatest monster of the 20th Century.

Yes, Zirkle was at a Nazi celebration of Adolf Hitler’s birthday.

Zirkle, who is apparently crazy, had this to say:

When asked if he was a Nazi or sympathized with Nazis or white supremacists, Zirkle replied he didn’t know enough about the group to either favor it or oppose it.

“This is just a great opportunity for me to witness,” he said, referring to his message and his Christian belief.

I know 5 year olds that have enough information to know whether or not to favor neo-Nazis and white supremacists (the correct answer, by the way Mr. Zirkle, is in fact to oppose them).

But this is probably just a ridiculous publicity stunt by this clown, and we are all playing into his devious hands. Go ahead, check out his campaign website and read what he has to say about any number of issues.

The Economist has some juicy quotes on their American blog if you just aren’t up for browsing insanity for more than a little bit. I can’t resist reproducing this gem for you here:

In an interview, Zirkle told FOXNews.com he doesn’t think he is too far out of the Republican mainstream. He believes the solution to STDs and out-of-wedlock births is to separate blacks and whites into segregated states, but he says that’s fully in the tradition of the party.

On the one hand it is a triumph for American democracy and freedom of speech that someone with such crazy ideas could run for office and not be silenced.

But on the other hand, he is crazy, and I’m a big believer that rights come with responsibilities–like not going to Hitler’s birthday party… even if that means sacrificing your opportunity to witness to hate-mongers.

You may or may not be one of the millions of Americans who receive junk mail daily. I personally am still young enough to enjoy the novelty of receiving mail every single day, even if it is only another of the countless pleas for me to apply for a United Mileage Plus Visa. Yet for many Americans these daily mailings are not only a nuisance, but wasteful and a potential privacy risk.

Some sensible people have created some grassroots movements in state legislatures to allow citizens to opt out of junk mailings through a “do-not-mail” list similar to the national “do-not-call” registry. Remember, they are not banning the sending of junk mail, just giving consumers the option to opt out of it…

It is fair to say I was shocked when I read in the Washington Post that:

Then came the pushback from the postmasters, who told Pearson and other lawmakers that “standard” mail, the post office’s name for junk mail, has become the lifeblood of the U.S. Postal Service and that jobs depend on it.

Yes, that is the United States Postal Service attempting to block some perfectly sensible legislation for the preservation of jobs that it claims only exist to pass on useless junk mail to consumers! So, we pay for the salaries of postal workers with our tax dollars in order to receive superfluous mass mailings directly to our mailbox every day? Now that’s government service for you.

The article is full of little nuggets of madness. Here are a few choice selections:

Barred by law from lobbying, the Postal Service is nonetheless trying to make its case before a growing number of state legislatures… The agency has printed 3,000 “information packets” about the economic value of standard mail, with specific data for each of the 18 states that have considered a Do Not Mail Registry.

The Postal Service is working closely with the Direct Marketing Association, the trade group that represents retailers and the printing industry, in its new campaign — Mail Moves America — which is designed to quash the Do Not Mail initiatives.

Right, this sounds nothing like lobbying…

So far, their efforts appear effective. None of the states where Do Not Mail legislation has been introduced since 2007 has approved a law. And no similar legislation is pending in Congress.

Let’s step back here and consider some of the bigger issues:

Government Jobs

Every government job should in theory, by virtue of it being funded through the tax dollars of all, provide a public service. In this case postal workers supposedly hold together a mail system that delivers us mail in a timely and orderly fashion. If the creation of a Do-Not-Mail list threatens some jobs, admittedly government jobs with strong pension plans, doesn’t that mean that those jobs really only exist to support junk mail? Yes. Is junk mail really a public good the government should be providing?

The Environment

Anyone who knows me knows that I am about as far from an environmentalist as they get–I’m much too lazy to recycle normally–but shouldn’t environmentally conscious people be able to reduce their environmental impact by getting rid of unwanted solicitation? Phone solicitation has no tangible environmental impact, but not only do the mailings waste paper, but they also lead to greater landfill usage and increased emissions and fuel costs from the transportation of that trash to landfills. Perhaps we should tax direct-mail advertisers to cover this cost instead of allowing people to opt-out? I’m sure if that proposal is made an opt-out by consumers will start sounding really appealing.

Economics

Local governments, as I have mentioned, are already stretched pretty thin… so why should they have to continue to bear the burden of hauling around this useless garbage? It may not be a huge cost, but with rising fuel costs every trip to the landfill becomes more and more burdensome.

Government and Lobbying

Is it really appropriate for the Postal Service to make such intimate ties with industry lobbying groups? The Direct Marketing Association gave a modest $800,000 to lobbying firms in 2007, but certainly is targeting specific individuals–including including $6,610 to Sen. Thomas R. Carper (chair of the Postal Services subcommittee).

Government agencies lobbying lawmakers constitutes not only a direct conflict of interests–by driving a wedge between voters’ interests and the actions of policymakers–but it also makes the government more inefficient. The Postal Service already enjoys a monopoly and by shaping legislation that controls the agency the Postal Service can prevent even reasonable democratic pressures from forcing it to become moderately more efficient.

Obviously impeding the ability of citizens to control branches of the government is particularly dangerous in an unwieldy bureaucracy where many decisions may already be made through processes that are far from transparent. The Postal Office may be a rather benign example, but if the Post Office is so efficient that only $250 million (just a guess) is wasted each year—why should we accept that?

The Bright Side

I’m stumped. This hurts everyone except a small number of postal employees who could probably find another job–even in today’s unstable economy. The big shipping firms always seem to be hiring and would probably gladly take workers with package handling experience.

So, I guess all that is left to say is that if we can’t get rid of our junk mail, we should all do something useful with it and raise up arms to make the government hear our demands for a “Do-Not-Mail” registry. Here’s a start–

If you thought drunk driving in a car was bad… you need to see this video.

Thanks to Reuters for the tip…

“If you don’t know what it is… don’t eat it.” (From a Wendy’s commercial)

A friendly reminder from your local Wendy’s and the Stating the Obvious Foundation.

Oh Dave Thomas we miss you.

To kill is not to be a geek, but to be a geek is to kill. This Washington Post story discusses an Oakland, CA trial that has to rank as one of the more bizarre murder trials in recent memory. Some major figures in this drama:

• A mail-order bride gone missing
• An extremely successful asocial computer programmer indicted for homicide (Mr. Hans Reiser)
• Family von-Weirdo
  • The brother contends that he and his brother drive without front seats
  • The parents make obscure references to their son’s undergraduate thesis on reality and perception
• A cross-dressing/bondage enthusiast best friend (Sean Sturgeon… really, that’s his name)
  • Who also proclaimed he killed several people years ago
  • Who had an affair with the mail-order bride
  • Who was the “maid of honor” in the wedding
• And of course, Dungeons and Dragons

If all of this seems weird, that is because it is. You have to read the whole story to believe it, but here are a few choice quotes summing up the legal defense that the attorney for the alleged murder, a Mr. Hans Reiser, has developed:

“Being too intelligent can be a sort of curse,” defense counsel William Du Bois said. “All this weird conduct can be explained by him, but he’s the only one who can do it. People who are commonly known as computer geeks are so into the field.”

Of course it can! Computer geeks are silent killers waiting to be unleashed. Every one of them. It is definitely not more likely that sociopaths come from all walks of life (though perhaps disproportionately from Berkley, like Mr. Reiser), and it was only a matter of time that a computer program joined their ranks…

At least the judge in the trial seems reasonable:

The thesis [Han’s undergraduate thesis at Berkley] might apply to the evidence, which the judge in the preliminary hearing termed thin.

I guess I should be careful what I put in my undergraduate thesis as well. Seems to be a trend… (more…)

Benjamin Lovell went to the bank attempting to add to the $800 in his Commerce Bank checking account only to discover something pleasantly surprising–$5 million + dollars. Some guys have all the luck. Apparently Commerce Bank is really trying to live up to its slogan “America’s Most Convenient Bank.”

Naturally, Mr. Lovell did what any sane human being would do on discovering his new found wealth–he withdrew over $2 million over the next few days. For his part he made a series of sound investments, including some expensive jewelry for his girlfriend.

Unfortunately for Mr. Lovell this story does not have a happy end. The bank, noticing this unusual activity, realized that an error had been made–involving a mix-up with the account of another more fortunate and much richer Benjamin Lovell–and contacted the authorities. Mr. Lovell was promptly arrested and is being held on charges of grand larceny with bail set at $3 million, which Mr. Lovell unfortunately cannot use his accidental millions to pay. But, here is the kicker–Mr. Lovell faces a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison. New York is supposed to be tough on crime, but come on! People convicted of accidental homicide (though that case is another story) face less time than Mr. Lovell.

The penal code is a reflection of the values of our society, and apparently our society has chosen to really protect big corporate banks from their own mistakes. Just don’t expect the same treatment from the bank when you make a banking error. Bank of America apparently doesn’t seem keen on helping customers who make costly typos while conducting online banking. Wells Fargo is notorious for signing customers up for extra account features (and their subsequent monthly charges) without notice–meaning the consumer has to go through the time-wasting effort of getting those charges refunded and removing the extra account features by telephone. In fact, according the Ripoff Report, banks make a lot of mistakes, and often leave their consumers with the bill.

Do I think Mr. Lovell should go to prison? Not particularly. Should he give the money back, now that he knows it isn’t his? Absolutely. The burden should be on the bank to fix their own mistake. There is no reason Mr. Lovell should be held responsible. Once he was notified by the bank that an error occurred, he became responsible, but until then it is the bank’s job to figure out where the money went.

I don’t see any jury in their right mind convicting Mr. Lovell, and rightfully so. People learn from their financial mistakes the hard way, and a multi-billion dollar bank should too. And Mr. Lovell should probably do his banking elsewhere.