Saturday, December 23, 2006

Poem of the Day XII

from John Donne's Divine meditations

15
Wilt thou love God, as he thee? then digest,
My soul, this wholesome meditation,
How God the Spirit, by angels waited on
In heaven, doth make his temple in thy breast.
The Father having begot a Son most blessed,
And still begetting, (for he ne'er begun)
Hath deigned to choose thee by adoption,
Coheir to' his glory, 'and Sabbath's endless rest;
And as a robbed man, which by search doth find
His stol'n stuff sold, must lose or buy it again:
The Son of glory came down, and was slain,
Us whom he had made, and Satan stol'n, to unbind.
'Twas much, that man was made like God before,
But, that God should be made like man, much more.

~

"But the angel said to them, 'Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord.'" ~Luke 2:10-11

"Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace to men on
whom his favor rests."
~
Merry Christmas!

Monday, December 18, 2006

Headline Leads Local Man to Blogging

I found an article on Yahoo! News about a study done on intelligence and vegetarianism with the following headline: “Kids with High IQ’s Grow up to be Vegetarians”. The headline bothered me immediately because it is such a blanket statement. So, all kids with high IQ’s become vegetarians? How about: “Kids with High IQ’s More Likely to be Vegetarians”? That would at least be less-misleading coming out of the gate.

Beyond the headline, though, the article itself has flaws. It assumes that the only cause of becoming a vegetarian is having a high IQ. It completely ignores any social factors that might have something to do with it. Perhaps it isn’t the IQ, but what the IQ provides, namely, income. If you have a high IQ you are more likely to go to college and get a good job. This gives you more money to spend on food. Being a vegetarian, and doing it right, is more expensive than eating meat, especially if you’re a vegan.

However, even if you don’t agree with my assessment above, the article itself goes on to say that there are many questions left unanswered by the study leading Lona Sandon, an assistant professor of clinical nutrition at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas to conclude that "we cannot draw any solid conclusions from this research.”

In that case, why is this even news? It wouldn’t be if it wasn’t for the headline. The study had to be spun so that it was seen as a direct link, otherwise all it says is, “some folks with high IQ’s are vegetarians.” Great.

Generally I think people understand to take headlines with a grain of salt, but this headline is just plain false. Editors are busy folks, but there should be more care taken when composing headlines.

Update

Today's Best of the Web had this to say regarding the article:

A new study shows that smart people are more likely to be vegetarians, reports HealthDay. But it turns out there's a catch:

"Children who scored higher on IQ tests at age 10 were more likely than those who got lower scores to report that they were vegetarian at the age of 30," Gale said.

The researchers found that 4.5 percent of participants were vegetarians. Of these, 2.5 percent were vegan, and 33.6 percent said they were vegetarian but also ate fish or chicken.

There was no difference in IQ score between strict vegetarians and those who said they were vegetarian but who said they ate fish or chicken, the researchers add.
Luckily for them, the definition of vegetarian wasn't on the test!

Friday, December 15, 2006

Continuing Education for Representatives

There’s an article over at CQ.com right now featuring snippets of an interview Jeff Stein had with Silvestre Reyes, the incoming chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. The results of the interview are a bit disturbing:

Al Qaeda is what, I asked, Sunni or Shia?

“Al Qaeda, they have both,” Reyes said. “You’re talking about predominately?”

“Sure,” I said, not knowing what else to say.

“Predominantly — probably Shiite,” he ventured.

Actually, Al Qaeda is only Sunni. As Mr. Stein puts it: “if a Shiite showed up at an al Qaeda club house, they’d slice off his head and use it for a soccer ball.” This is a key bit of information to know in order to understand the global battle with terrorism. In fact, as one small example, there was talk of reprisal from Al Qaeda after Hezbollah’s (Shiite) “success” in Lebanon. Why would there be a reprisal for actions that both groups would agree on? As Bernard Haykel wrote in his article “The Enemy of my Enemy is Still my Enemy”:

"[T]he rise of Hezbollah makes it all the more likely that Al Qaeda will soon seek to reassert itself through increased attacks on Shiites in Iraq and on Westerners all over the world — whatever it needs to do in order to regain the title of true defender of Islam."

I suppose these intricacies wouldn’t matter, though, because when asked about Hezbollah, Reyes replied:

“Hezbollah. Uh, Hezbollah...”

He laughed again, shifting in his seat.

I’m not writing this to claim superiority or to denigrate Representative Reyes. I’m sure there are many, many issues that Reyes is very familiar with, certainly more than me, and probably more than most of us, however if you are a Representative coming in as chairman of the Intelligence Committee, these are the types of things you should know. It’s a sad state of affairs that our representatives are so clueless on what is so often called the “defining issue of our time.” How can educated decisions be made about how to handle these global struggles without the proper information? Perhaps they should teach night classes over on Capitol Hill.

Wednesday, December 06, 2006

The Chinese Worker, the American Consumer, and the World Market

I read an interesting article from Business Week the other day. The article, titled “Secrets, Lies, and Sweatshops” details the practices used to try and prevent unethical and illegal treatment of workers in Chinese factories and the loopholes and tricks used to get around the system. All major American retailers have a system in place for inspecting, monitoring, and auditing factories for abuses to workers. In most cases, each supplier factory is required to undergo a yearly factory audit that checks on such things as underage workers, fair pay, and safety. If a factory fails, they must make changes to come up to code, much as a restaurant would have to do if it failed a health inspection, or face consequences. These changes can be very costly, and so of course factory owners find ways to cut corners. There are many practices used, such as having two sets of books, one with the actual employee’s age and time sheets, and one with false information, or coaching workers on how to respond to inspectors if questioned, or even good old fashioned bribery. None of this is new, but the article does mention one very interesting trend: a new industry has sprung up to help factories out. For a $5000 fee you can hire a consultant from Shanghai Corporate Responsibility Management & Consulting Co. to come to your factory and “solve” your audit problem. Of course, the consulting firms’ stance is that they only assist factories in making legitimate improvements to come up to code, but the Business Week article mentioned above interviewed a former worker, Tang Yinghong, at Ningbo Beifa Group, a factory which supplies various items to Wal-Mart:
Lai [Mingwei, the consultant] provided advice on how to create fake but authentic-looking records and suggested that Beifa hustle any workers with grievances out of the factory on the day of the audit, Tang recounts. […] After following much of Lai's advice, the Beifa factory in Ningbo passed the audit earlier this year, Tang says, even though the company didn't change any of its practices.

While American companies do make good faith efforts to try and stop unethical practices, and Chinese factory owners, for the most part, are willing to comply where reasonable, all too often ethical treatment is trumped by the almighty dollar. The American consumer wants low prices and every retailer’s number one strategy is to provide that. Time and time again, price is the determining factor in a consumer’s choice. You only have to look as far as declining customer service as an example of how that strategy didn’t work as well as 10% less cost did when trying to draw customers. For example, Home Depot built there business on customer service: “You Can Do It, We Can Help”, remember? However, having an ex-plumber or electrician work in your store costs a lot more than an 18 year kid working over the summer, so experience goes by the wayside and a few pennies less to Joe Consumer (and another point or two to the company’s margin) takes over.

This price pinch, of course, stretches to the suppliers as well. To pay their workers more and to implement certain safety practices costs money. Most Chinese suppliers make very low margin, the money is in the volume, so an extra 5-10% cost can be the difference between making money and breaking even. Every major retailer will fight tooth and nail to keep prices the same for products year after year, even if material prices go up. Every retailer knows that there are 100 other Chinese guys waiting to get the business if a current supplier can’t perform. If material prices are the same for everyone, and labor prices are supposed to be the same, where do those extra savings come from? All too often it’s from cutting corners. The retailers know this, but they have to show that they are trying to curb unethical practices. As long as Joe Consumer thinks that the store he shops at is cracking down on unethical practices, his conscience is clear to buy cheaper socks.

The problem, of course, is on both sides. American companies could agree to raise prices a bit to allow for more ethical practices, and implement even stricter audit regulations, but at the same time the deception would most likely still go on, and the factory owner would pocket the extra cash. Unfortunately, human nature is such that saving a few bucks trumps any altruistic good we wish on our fellow man. This is true no matter what country you’re in.

This being the case, the only thing that could possibly change the system would be to put some power into the worker’s hands. Of course, even now, the worker is not forced to work in the factories. He chooses it because it allows for a better life. It still may not be fair or ethical, and this certainly isn’t an argument for the rightness of unfair practices, but the worker does make the decision that the extra money is worth the long hours and low pay. However, there are changes in the air. Wages are increasing and hours are decreasing for factory workers. The main reason is there has been a massive shortage of workers over the past year.

Most years, Chinese New Year puts a dent in production schedules, especially for spring goods. The reason is that many workers do not return from vacation. They go back home, get comfortable, and decide time with their family is more important than venturing back to the city. However, last year after Chinese New Year, around 1.7 million workers didn’t return. The problem has only gotten worse for factories in southern China.

Why the shortage? One reason is that the Chinese government recently repealed many of the taxes they had on farms. With the extra money, more farmers can stay and work at home instead of seeking out work in the city. But the biggest reason is China’s “one-child” policy. Every couple is allowed only one child by law. This went into effect 18 years ago, so the current emerging work force comes from a generation where there are no brothers and sisters. This decline in the workforce combined with the fact that a family with only one child will put all of their resources into that one child has caused the migrant worker pool to dwindle (read more in this NYT article). Also, the large amount of business done in China has caused larger and larger factories to emerge, which can pay workers better and offer more benefits and with the rise in technology, workers from different factories can communicate easier on what they are making.

While there is a long way to go, the money we are pouring into China does seem to be improving the quality of life there. In fact, some companies are beginning to source in countries such as Bangladesh because labor rates are rising in China. While we should continue to monitor abuses, and should punish them when found, we also must hope that the market will allow for better conditions naturally. This isn’t to say we just sit back and wait, there is much that can be done to care for people well, and we should be active in it, but you can’t change human nature. As much as I hate to admit it, in many cases, market forces do a better job of policing us than we do.