Wednesday, February 11, 2015

Advancing Modern Healthcare to the 1700s

1796...AD.  Edward Jenner develops the world's first vaccine for Smallpox.  For most of us, smallpox is as described here - ancient history.  This horrific disease terrorized the world for most of recorded human history by blanching its victims with a gut-wrenching outer appearance in addition to internal trauma.  Smallpox claimed the lives of over 20% of those who contracted the disease, including 5 European Monarchs and a Pharaoh.  Yet, smallpox was not limited to the Egyptians, the Renaissance, or even the Victorians.  To illustrate the recency of Smallpox devastation, the World Health of Organization estimates that smallpox was responsible for 2 million deaths in 1967, only 20 years before many of you reading this were born.  After a herculean effort, Smallpox was eradicated in 1980, one of man's greatest achievements.  After Jenner's success, vaccines were developed for Cholera (1879), Tetanus (1890), Tuberculosis (1925), Whooping Cough (1927), Polio (1952), Measles (1963), Chicken Pox (1974), and many others.  Despite the success of the development of these vaccines, only Smallpox has been eradicated and many of these diseases present a serious health issues in many of the world's undeveloped countries.

Typically just a checkbox for children and those entering high school and college, vaccines have anchored themselves in the news cycle because some parents are choosing not to vaccinate their children.  These decisions have been spurred by a myriad of fallacies, the foremost of which is the spurious notion that vaccines cause autism.  This false movement was started in part by Andrew Wakefield, a British physician who lost his medical license after the paper he submitted to the Lancet linking vaccines to autism was discredited.  Others have attacked some of the ingredients included in vaccines, which can include Mercury and Formaldehyde, which on the surface can appear disconcerting, but are safe in small quantities and serve a purpose.  Regardless of the reason, once a critical mass of people has become inoculated, herd immunity is established, which protects those who are unable to receive vaccines due to other pre-existing conditions (yes, my girlfriend has a public health degree :)).  Once this herd immunity breaks down, the risk of infection for those with immunodeficiencies skyrockets, as was recently evidenced in Disneyland.

Many others have provided their take on this ...bizarre? change of opinion in parents' health policies.  I do not have the technical background to provide a unique take on this from a scientific perspective.  Instead, let's look at this from an emotional perspective and how offensive this is to those who came before us.

My grandmother passed away a few months ago.  She was born in 1919, and in addition to living through the Great Depression, several wars, and the invention of the television, modern air travel, nuclear power, all things stemming from the integrated circuit, and gogurt, she could bake a mean chocolate cake and fried apricot pie.  But, she was also born before vaccines had been developed for all of the above diseases except for Smallpox, Cholera, and Tetanus.


It is difficult for our generation to fathom the anxiety associated with exposure to these diseases.  For those who have never seen an iron lung (<-- an incredible story), or are unaware of how extremely contagious Measles was and still is, neither bit of knowledge is particularly positive.  While every parent frets over the health of their young children, early 20th century parents must have felt like their children had to crawl through a minefield of infectious disease. Imagine telling a mother in 1900 that in 75 years, virtually all concern of exposure to these viral diseases would be eliminated.  Imagine first her disbelief and then her desire to do anything in her power to provide that immuno-defense for her children.  Yet, here we are in 2015, saving our nose to spite our face as we comb through statistics to showcase the literally one-in-a-million instance where vaccines could present serious consequences to gloss over the wonderful benefits they have afforded us.  How many of us would have volunteered for an Ebola vaccine if we knew it had the same success rate as vaccines for Measles, TB, and Whooping Cough?  What about a vaccine for HIV?

For those who would like to point out that science can reverse itself, you are correct. It has perhaps most famously occurred in the fields of astronomy and physics.  The earth was the center of the universe.  Then it was the sun.  Now we are pretty damn insignificant.  Newton was right...until Einstein was.  The data supported these transitions in scientific theory.  It is entirely feasible that a medical breakthrough could produce a treatment more robust and more safe than vaccines, but at this point in human history, vaccines present the best option for the overall health of humanity.


Wednesday, January 28, 2015

Work Tips at 1,000 Days

Sometime in the middle of this February I will have been in the working world for 1,000 days.  1,000 days and nights of carrying the ole lunch pail to work and clocking in and out.  1,000 days of Outlook, Timecards, and The Man (or Woman). 1,000 days of taking the train to work and enjoying nearly every commute as I smirk at cars stuck on the Connector.

This is not intended to be another LinkedIn list, and I admit that I am no more qualified to offer tips at work than any of the rest of you, but I hope that these tips will be of some use to those entering the workforce soon.


  • You have a lot to learn; but you will have some good ideas to offer to your superiors and organization.  Be confident in the ideas you can bring from school, but learn when to offer them.  There will be times you speak out of turn and cringe, and there will be instances where you could have offered a helpful idea but refrained.  You won't be fired for either.
  • Unless you are at a small start-up, you will have some co-workers who have a wealth of experience.  Take the time to find out who those people are and talk to them.  They may not be in your exact area of expertise, you may not sit near them, and you may have to awkwardly introduce yourself, but it will pay off.  Find a point of commonality and find time to learn from them.
  • Conversely, you will work with some people less intelligent and talented than you expected you would.  You probably graduated from a good school surrounded by intelligent friends and classmates.  The world has a wide spectrum of people, and many of those that might be less talented are still engaging, interesting, and good people.  Frankly though, some are weird.
  • Don't evaluate work on a day by day or week by week basis.  School often gave you boring classes that weren't what you were interested in - work does the same with projects and tasks.  Don't let a few bad days or weeks send you to Monster.com or LinkedIn too quickly.  Work is more of a long-haul grind than school (except for those getting a Ph.D :)
  • I am not an early riser, but getting to work early can have numerous benefits - the biggest - even above being seen as an early-morning go-getter - is time for conversation at the coffee pot/Keurig/donut box.  Here, you become a person and not a number. You can learn about projects, ask to be involved, learn about other people, and generally become more liked by your employees.  Some people aren't morning people and that's understandable - people return to the coffee pot several times throughout the day :)
  • Lunch is your most valuable time of the day.  I try to go out to eat with a co-worker, client, or someone else in the industry once a week.  While I may be friendly with these people, I intend for these to be learning lunches.  Prepare questions but don't make it an interview.  Ask those experienced people out to lunch and learn from them. As an added benefit, when you're still young, they will often pay for yours.  During the morning and afternoon grind, people are occupied with meetings, getting things done, phone calls, and other managerial tasks.  But here's what they don't tell you in school: everyone has to eat.  Half of the time, managers will agree to eat with you simply to get away from work stresses.
  • Volunteer.  For something. Anything. Make it look like you care about more than whatever you do for 40 hours. Pretend to be interested, then do a good job at whatever you're pretending.
  • If you are really passionate about your field, get involved in a professional society. Or start one :)
  • Plan vacations.  The year is too long to go week after week without having something to look forward to.
  • If you can, work late a few days and cut early on Friday to go to a museum or enjoy something in town.
  • While planning ahead, don't gloss over getting good at your technical area of expertise.  Planning for your second degree or CEO take-over will be pointless if you can't get promoted from Widget Make I to Widget Maker II.
  • Let's face it, sometimes you need a little gchat/texting/Lync to keep you sane.
  • Don't be afraid to show your co-workers you aren't a trained robot.  You can have feelings.  You can get sick.  You can be sad. You can be happy.
  • Buy you co-worker's girl scout cookies - mainly because Samoas are delicious.
  • Don't be afraid to ask questions.  Super cliche, but still super true.
These probably all don't apply to you, but hopefully you can benefit from a few of these.  I hope you have/had a great first 1,000 days of work, whenever they start or end.

Thanks for reading!

Monday, January 19, 2015

The Trait Most Good People Share

Good people. When asked to describe them, you might offer phrases like "kind" or "trustworthy" or "having integrity."  Synonyms abound for as how to describe good people and this slice of society's elite.  Yet, this elite is not tinged by swirls of racism or classism.  Good people can't be defined by race, class, geography, gender, education, or career.

We all know good people.  We all hope others think we are good people.  Fortunately, unlike grades on a curve or the All-Star Roster, there is no limit to how many good people the world can hold.  There can only be so many CEO's, or NBA players, or Stanford grads, but we all can be good people.  Statistically, there can only be so many wealthy and highly intelligent people, but we can all be good people.  There can only be so many A-list actors, Grammy winners, ballerinas in the Bolshoi ballet.  But we can all be good people.

If you were to form a committee of "experts" who could point you in the direction of good people for you to observe, what traits might you associate with most of these people?  Good hygiene (who doesn't love a frequent flosser)?  Out going and super smiley?  Response?  Great communicator?

My guess: The vast majority of these people frequently giving back to their community. These people are not just "involved," but also give back.  By and large, good people donate their time  - whether or not its asked - to better the community around them.  Think of the people in your life you consider to be good and how many of them donate time not just to an organization, but donate time to give back in some way.  Maybe they mentor.  Maybe they tend a community garden or teach Sunday School or coach youth sports, but I would bet you a Whataburger sandwich that they give back in some way.

Volunteering and giving back makes you feel good.  My father once told me that "if you have enough to give to someone else, you must be doing okay."  He was referencing money with respect to giving charitably, but the principle holds true for donating one's time as well.  If you have enough time in your life to give to other people, you must have your life put together.

Once you start volunteering your time, you suddenly find yourself around other people who enjoy doing the same.  You start interacting with other people who are often kind, generous, selfless, and care about the community in which they live.  It does not take a genius to see how these positive effects can begin to snowball.  

I have been fortunate to have had opportunities to give back beginning in high school that have continued through the present.  From dreaded CAS hours, National Honors Society, and Beta Club in high school to the many friends i gained through PSEF at Purdue to the wonderful people I continue to meet here in Atlanta through Community Bucket (shoutout to Jesse Grossman and that wonderful organization), I have found wonderful people in organizations designed to give back.  While everyone has different life experiences, (disclaimer: volunteering will not pay your bills, cook your food, wash your clothes, etc), I would suggest that the next time you are feeling meh, consider giving back to those around you or the community you live in.  You'll probably do good.

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

Comparing The Bachelor & The NFL

I don't watch much TV these days. Like many in my generation, I cut cable's cord and rely solely on streaming and the 5-ish major network channels I receive over the airwaves.  Since Scandal & How to Get Away with Murder ended a few months ago, 95% of my television has consisted of:
  • The Good Wife
  • A few maddening games of Purdue basketball
  • Portions of Cowboy games
  • The two semifinal games and College Football National Championship
  • Occasional Jon Stewart
  • 2 episodes of The Bachelor
In the last 72 hours I have watched an NFL game (still don't see how that wasn't a catch), my least favorite college football team win a National Championship, and 90 minutes of 20 women swooning over 1 male.  A few minutes into the swooning, I began to see several similarities between the NFL and Bachelor hype machines, which set in motion the following technical analysis.

The testosterone laden frenzy that fuels the NFL and its ups and downs is well documented.  Some of the country's most physically gifted athletes - regulated modern gladiators - stride onto striped fields bearing their tribe's insignia up to 20 times each year.  Through this physical adversity, bonds are forged, rivalries created, and lines drawn.  On game day, these relationships are on full display, as players employ both physical strengths and mental deception to distract their adversaries from gaining competitive advantage.  All of this is captured weekly in stunning 1080p or 4K, with dozens of cameras highlighting the toned muscles, cursing coaches, drunk fans, and manicured fields (okay maybe not in Chicago or Pittsburgh) that comprise the NFL game day experience.

http://nfldraftdiamonds.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Dez.jpg
Tonight I saw cameras capture toned skin, drunk women (Jordan), beautiful scenery and and manicured nails on the manicured lawn of a picturesque mansion.  Some of the nation's most beautiful women - modern day Aphrodite's - used their sass, fake laughter, and cleavage to battle one another for a man they hardly knew.  As past seasons have taught us, these women will forge friendships, passive-aggressive pacts, and rivalries in their attempt to win Mr. Chris Soules, a handsome farmer from Iowa about whom they know little else.

Surrounding the NFL is an army of other related industries.  These include journalism efforts emanating from every type of media known to man, ranging from the Worldwide Leader and major newspapers to small college newspapers and thousands of official and unofficial blogs.  In recent decades, Fantasy Football - sports gambling light - has continued to grow both in popularity and in dollars invested.  The hype has perhaps caused the NFL to be "too big to fail," as media giants cater to its scheduling demands.  As we near the Super Bowl, the Pantheon of programming hyperbole, the ghosts of Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson seem like distant bumps on a long road trip, speakers blasting the entire way.

http://www.girlsonthegrid.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/the-bachelor-show-abc.
The Bachelor does not match the NFL's standing in modern culture, although the world was rocked last week when Andi and Josh announced their break-up.  However, as I have recently learned, the Bachelor has its own cavalry of "journalists?" who chronicle the show's every move, faux pas, and rose delivery.  Accompanying these dedicated reporters of romance are Bachelor Bracketologists, who predict how long each of the girls will last on the show.  Much in the same way that ESPN and other sports outlets have their own Fantasy Football gurus, this hardcore sleuthing helps supply information to those guessing completing their Bachelor brackets.  Given these complementary guessing games, it is fair to ask: Can someone be any more sure that Rodgers will Discount Double Check or that The Legion of Boom will shut out an opponent based on last week's stats than they can be sure that Mr. Soules won't eliminate a girl next week based on his rose delivery this week?  These are tough decisions!

Further, as this blog entry fully illustrates, people who might not initially be interested in either of these shows can become interested as part of their infatuation with their significant other.  While some females truly love the NFL (I see you Stef!), I'm sure throughout history, after going to enough watch parties, some wives decide they might as well enjoy football.  In addition, I know of at least one other boyfriend or husband who watches the riveting... drama that unfolds weekly on ABC because they want to share common interests with their wife/girlfriend and I would surmise there are other male Bachelor viewers in hiding.  Unlike series like Game of Thrones or House of Cards, the NFL and the Bachelor likely have more disparate audiences if segmented by gender (and I would argue that the Bachelor still does).  Yet, anecdotal evidence suggests that in some social circles, the NFL and the Bachelor can draw interest from across the gender boundary.

To be fair to the NFL and its supporters (including me), it is a live event where fans can pay exorbitant amounts of money to attend and prove that what you see on TV actually occurs in real life.  For this, I have long argued that sports was the original reality TV.  You can see past the editing and experience the ungodly TV timeouts in person, never having to ponder what happens at the stadium in the time it took you to use the restroom, get another beer, fold your laundry, and rotate your tires before the game returns. The Bachelor does not afford us this luxury, perhaps my biggest complaint with this genre of "reality television."  This leaves us forever wondering how a group of 20 women who had never met really spend their week when not on exotic group dates. Yet despite the uncertainty of what happens in the editing room, many would agree that these shows draw significant (if not massive) weekly television audiences.

Millions tune in weekly even though many supporters would acknowledge that both shows have issues.  The Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson, Greg Hardy, and other violence related stories that gained traction early this NFL season were simply the latest in a barrage of issues the NFL has faced, ranging from how players treat women to the lasting impact of head injuries.  Most individuals would also likely admit that despite the attractive contestants and exotic locations, finding love on camera in the middle of a battle royale with 20 other contestants is a recipe for drama, crazy emotions, and embarrassment, rather than an ideal setting to find love.  

It is likely that we engage the NFL and shows like The Bachelor at least in part to put our own lives on hold and to live vicariously through others pursuing more unique activities.  I have no doubt die-hard NFL fans could provide a laundry list of other reasons they watch the NFL, and I'm sure most are legitimate.  All I can say is that after a long 3 hours of pondering, it is hard for me to say that cheering for grown men to advance and stop the advancement of an oblong, formerly pig-skin object is more logical than gasping at how someone you've never met offered a pruned red flower to someone else you've never met.  I only wish that the next girl to receive a rose would spike it, dunk it over a goal-post, or throw up the X, as the Bachelor has no 15 yard penalty for taunting.


Saturday, January 10, 2015

Red vs. Blue Update: Suburban Poverty

This is an update to the blog post from earlier this week that discusses Richard Florida's NY Times article entitled "Is Life Better in Red States?" This post relates Florida's article to a January 7 article in The Atlantic by Alana Semuels entitled "Suburbs and the New American Poverty."  


In relation to this blog, I thought her article was a great follow up to Richard Florida's January 3rd NY Times article that asks if life is better in red states, which I commented on in my initial post on this subject.  Florida's article offers the benefits offered by the policies employed by both red and blue states, as well as the inherent issues that associated with each, including the high cost of housing in blue states and the sprawl and low tax revenue often seen in red states.



http://allgeorgiarealty.com/files/2009/11/Gwinnett-County-GA-Map-allgeorgiarealty.com.jpg


Semuels' focuses on Gwinnett County, a suburban county centered about 25 miles northeast of Atlanta.  (As an ATLien studying transportation and urban planning, it is bittersweet that so many of these sorts of analyses and articles seem to be set in Atlanta).  Semuels swiftly shifts in and out of profiling some of Gwinnett County's families and individuals in poverty and provides statistics about poverty at the national, local, and regional levels.  Perhaps most poignant of these stats is the fact that "between 2000 and 2011, Atlanta's suburban poor population increased by 159 percent while the number of poor in the city remained essentially flat."  In an ironic and sad twist, life has come full-circle for those who decades ago fueled "white flight" in part to find homogeneic, gated-community harmony. This irony is emphasized by a quote from the article, when a resident claims that she "doesn't let the kids go outside," a statement more typically associated with the "perils" of the inner-city.  


From a policy standpoint, the most important points made in the article stem from the fact that "many of these communities lack the infrastructure, safety-net supports, and resources to address the growing needs of a poor population." Inner cities by nature have denser street networks than suburbs. This tighter spacing, often in a grid network, makes it easier to provide health-care, education, and resources, as agencies and non-profits can have more efficient routes to see clients and provide benefits.  This closer spacing also makes it more likely that they will be near others they know, trust, and can lean on.


Semuels' provides reasons as to why poverty rates in the suburbs have been increasing.  These include housing costs, and a disconnect between where jobs and housing are located, the skills needed to qualify for these jobs, the wages those jobs provide, and the transportation options available to access them. With gentrification, housing prices increase and good paying jobs follow millennials closer to the core. This leaves the poor with higher housing costs and often a dearth of jobs for which they are qualified (educating the poor is another blog post entirely), which means they must travel great distances to jobs in the suburbs.


How do these individuals access these jobs, given that in 2013 AAA estimated that owning a small sedan costs $7,000 annually? Yes, owning a car is expensive and often consumes more of a household's budget than estimated, when the cost of fuel, which although currently relatively cheap has been more expensive much of the last decade, maintenance, insurance, registration, and the actual cost of the vehicle is included. These costs impact the poor and middle class even more significantly.  Most of you reading this probably grew up in a suburban environment. Just consider the time, coordination, and uncertainty needed to keep a job in your suburban hometown if you didn't own a car. There might be a bus route nearby, but you will likely have to walk through a neighborhood with poor connectivity (see this, this, and this as to why the suburbs negatively impact walkability), or wait a long time for your bus due to long headways. Said simply, most of the time, it is nearly impossibly to move reliably within suburbs using transit. Thus, if you can't afford a car and have to walk or take transit, you likely spend hours each day commuting to a relatively low paying job.


Why is transit service typically so poor in the suburbs?  The reasons are numerous, but for the sake of simplicity let's boil it down to the following:

  • Suburbs typically have poor connectivity, decreasing the ridership catchment at transit stops
  • Many suburbanites are not as familiar with using transit and have grown up almost in an almost exclusively autocentric household
  • Suburban counties have less comprehensive funding mechanisms to support transit

The last bullet brings this post's update full circle. Semuels' article shows that the number of poor in the suburbs is increasing, which means that elected officials have to new challenges to solve and the economy in these locales is impacted in different ways. The ancestors of those who long-ago moved to the suburbs to escape the mid-century inner city blight seen now find themselves again adjacent to pockets of poverty. Florida's NY Times article relates as elected officials must make decisions (red v blue) to solve new and unfamiliar problems.  Semuels article The Atlantic provides a relevant and personal foray into the results of these decisions.


Thanks for reading and I hope you have a good weekend!








Wednesday, January 7, 2015

Why I'm a Polar Bear: The Benefits of Cold Exposure

In the January / February issue of The Atlantic, James Hamblin writes about the relationship between cold exposure and weight loss in his article entitled "Will Global Warming Make me Look Fat?"

http://www.nicolanaturalists.ca/2011/11/02/across-the-top-of-russia-wildlife-adventures-on-the-northeast-passage-17-november-2011-7-pm-at-nvit/
Yesterday I was headed to work on MARTA, skimming this month's edition of The Atlantic when I stumbled across this: an article about both global warming and obesity - both of which relate to my interests in city planning and the future of cities.  And then the first sentence ..."When you put on the ice vest..."
For those who have known me awhile - especially in high school or at Purdue, I was a self-proclaimed polar bear.  Initially stemming from my affinity for wearing shorts in the cold and later transitioning as my chest sprouted enough hair to actually confuse me as a bear.

Mr. Freeze


http://batman.wikia.com/wiki/Mr._Freeze/Gallery
The aforementioned ice vest is an invention by Wayne B. Hayes, a UC Irvine professor (not pictured above), who claims that wearing it for an hour burns up to 250 calories.  Hayes and the author, Hamblin, explain that this calorie burn stems from thermodynamics, as the body must work harder to maintain a normal body temperature.  To give credit where due, Hayes' work was spurred by the efforts of Ray Cronise, a former NASA scientist who now devotes his time to cold exposure research.  Oddly, Michael Phelps spurred Cronise' interest in cold exposure.  At the peak of his training, Michael Phelps was consuming 12,000 calories a day while training, but burning no more than 3,000 calories each day while training. What was burning those other calories?  Why did Phelps not look like a beached whale?
[Suspense]
In the end, Cronise realized that it was the heat transfer properties of water, Phelps training medium, that were aiding him in this massive calorie burn.

Motivated by this finding, Cronise began taking cold showers and cold winter strolls and "lost 26.7 pounds in 6 weeks."  According to Cronise and Hamblin, this weight loss was due to the fact that his body was using stored fat to burn energy and stay warm.  While you may not have any bff's employing his methods, Cronise has gained mild fame from these discoveries as the subject of a Timothy Ferris best seller "The 4-Hour Body." He also recently gave a TEDMED talk where he discussed his findings.  Yet, even with this notoriety, Cronise emphasizes that one "can't simply freeze themselves thin" and notes that today, people rarely accept continued exposure to 55 degree temperatures.

Let's consider all of the other actions people take to lose weight.  I for one would much rather stay cold for a few hours than consume some of the cleanse drinks/smoothies I have seen or forego carbs.  In the big scheme of things, is cold exposure really that crazy of an concept in the quest to shed pounds?  Regardless, there is more to Hamblin's article than weight-loss.

"When I was Your Age..."

Hamblin points out that -
           "many of us live almost constantly, year-round, in 70-something-degree environments.  And when we             are caught somewhere colder than that, most of us quickly on a sweater or turn up the heat."

For most of us, it has been two generations (or less depending on where you are from) since our grandparents quite literally had to sit by the fireplace or wood burning stove to stay warm at some point in their lives.  Thus, our recent ancestors likely had to deal with the cold more often, were more tolerant of cold weather, and had less flexibility to flick a switch and find comfort.  While most of the people reading this likely worry little about getting cold, this is a very recent event in human history.

Hamlbin goes on to discuss how Cronise and two other colleagues (Bremer and Sinclair) propose a "Metabolic Winter" hypothesis which states that "obesity is only a small part due to lack of exercise and mostly due to a combination of chronic over-nutrition and chronic warmth."  In what is my favorite quote of the article, Cronise states "'In the last 0.9 inches of the evolutionary mile, we solve both [refrigeration and modern transportation."  Later Cronise goes on to suggest that "maybe our problem is that winter never comes."

My Thoughts

If you haven't noticed yet, this blog post is my sad attempt to put North Face and Ugg out of business.

This article speaks to me most from it's role as a microcosm of society's technological advances and the cumulative impact of these advancements on our health and daily routine.  Just as many cities' car-centric designs have resulted in less exercise, our ever-increasing demand for comfort may have produced a similar outcome, as bodies don't have to work as hard to keep us warm.  Those who drive to work literally spend 99% of their days and steps in a climate controlled setting, only subjecting themselves to the harsh elements of their locale in their garage and during the walk into their office (which also might be a garage).  Poor energy efficiency, health, and urban planning aside, the way in which we've organized our cities has reduced our tolerance to the elements. (Aside: denser, more vertical housing with more shared walls would help to lower the cost of heating for everyone and result in better planning with more walking, etc...)
---
Should we toughen up as a society?  Should we do away with flannel (sorry Vermonters), wool, and fleece (sheep rejoice)?  Perhaps the most logical course of action is as follows: The next time it's cold and you're under a blanket, eating popcorn, and feeling a little flabby, consider ditching the blanket and not the popcorn.

Thanks for reading and have a good hump day.


        

Monday, January 5, 2015

Red vs. Blue and the American Dream


Recently, Richard Florida, Canadian, frequent contributor to the NY Times, urbanist, and frequent commentator about his self-coined "Creative Class," wrote a piece in the Times entitled:

Via Reddit
In the piece, Florida chronicles the often stark divide between red and blue states, how their economies differ in what they need to thrive and what they provide to local citizens, how blue states have become more unequal, and the crux the nation faces going forward between these two strategies.

Please read the article; for those who read Florida frequently, his comments and conclusions likely won't surprise you.  And for those of you who know me (let's be real - this blog has been live for like 4 days - everyone reading this knows me) - you probably already know my thoughts on many of the topics discussed in the article.

To be clear, I agree with Florida in that a society cannot frack and sprawl it's way to prosperity without some consequences (health, environmental, etc).  Yet, it is important to emphasize Florida's points about inequality and the high cost of housing in blue cities like San Francisco, Boston, New York, and Washington D.C.  I think most would agree that the public and innate benefits offered by these cities (transit, food, arts, education the opportunities that stem from museums, great universities, and being surrounded by a dense collection of intellectuals) are superior to those offered in redder cities - sorry Dallas, Houston, Atlanta, etc. 

People have long indicated their preference for this with their zip code and wallet - some people sacrifice more square footage for a more walkable neighborhood and many people continue to choose the more bucolic American dream in exchange for being weekday commute warriors on the road.  What I have often posed to my friends in redder states (especially those I have known for awhile back in Texas), is if they would continue to choose to live there were the environmental and health damages induced by sprawl monetized and applied to their housing costs?  I won't try to sway any votes tonight, but considering the environmental externalities is at least worth a brief consideration.

The most daunting challenge I took from Florida's article is the inequality induced by these popular blue cities.  Because so many people want to live there and the tax rate needed to maintain a dense lifestyle is relatively high, housing costs in these places have sky-rocketed.  Build too high and the cost of going vertical makes housing expensive; building without density results in higher land costs - both of these factors have resulted in smaller and smaller units and longer and longer commutes.  Creating methods to provide low-medium cost housing going forward will be critical for these blue cities.  I certainly have no breakthroughs.  My only direct thought would be to perhaps explore asking developers not to build units with stainless steel appliances and granite countertops in every unit.  The higher profits the developers can glean from these units also end up pricing the median worker out of most new construction.  I realize this request would not employ capitalism to the fullest, but that probably bothers me less than it might bother you.  
Other potential solutions likely involve examining tax policy in general - but that would digress from the intended discussion points of this article quickly.

I am always amazed at how divisive our country can be.   Children who grow up in the same neighborhood in similar family structures can end up with vastly different political and social values.  The divisiveness seems as strong as ever and these differences will likely remain strong for better or worse - some people will still prefer 400 ft studios in Manhattan and others will still prefer acre lots in McKinney or Acworth, and I have come to accept there is nothing wrong with that, as long as all parties are paying for the resulting external costs.

As emphasized in the article, red and blue states will continue to depend on each other.  Blue states will need to find long-term solutions to at least quell the recent rapid rise of housing costs and provide reasonable options for their lower-income residents.  Red states will need to recognize many of their recent low tax high frack policies are both environmentally and economically unsustainable in the long run.  There will be no shortage of opinions offered in the meantime.

Thanks for reading - have a great day!

--------------------------------------------------------------UPDATE ---------------------------------------------


See update to this post in other blog entries






Sunday, January 4, 2015

Book Review/Summary: David & Goliath

I recently read Malcolm Gladwell's 2013 book, David and Goliath, a book that discusses how underdogs disadvantages can end up benefiting them later in life.



This is the 5th Gladwell book that has received my time and I would rate it as middle of the pack, but it was still a worthy read and per usual with his books, there are many interesting anecdotes and points he makes.

While cliche and expected given the title, I enjoyed Gladwell's in-depth discussion of the actual David and Goliath encounter from biblical times.  Gladwell used research from historical experts on combat in biblical times to illustrate how David's expertise as a "slinger" made the result of the fight not as surprising as it is often labeled to be.  (A slinger is someone who used a slingshot in the same principle as an archer to accurately hit targets with small rocks from up to 100 yards away).  In addition, history also suggests that Goliath may have had vision problems (no contacts or glasses back then) and based on his quoted text from the Bible, actually needed David to approach him in order to actually engage in combat.  Gladwell presents the point that David and the Israelites defeated Goliath and the rest of the Philistines by attacking him in a manner in which he didn't expect and spends much of the rest of the book applying this principle to more modern circumstances.

I will address the lessons that I believe Gladwell wants the readers to learn in a bit, but I found it interesting that the Bible and those teaching it's scripture typically convey the David/Goliath story's result as miraculous, when military history suggests otherwise.  I believe that reading this story with the full litany of facts perhaps allows the reader to arrive at a different conclusion than is typically presented in the Bible.

Non-Traditional Means of Victory

Another of the interesting factoids Gladwell presents is a study made by the political scientist Ivan Arreguin-Toft, in which he found that in those instances where the weaker party fought with unconventional or guerrilla tactics, they won over 60% of the time.  (See Vietnam, Russia's fight against Afghanistan, the United States Revolutionary War, etc).

Gladwell went on to present another case of a California middle school girls' basketball team employing a full-court press tactic to win games, and the resulting backlash from other coaches who believed that the team was not participating in traditional or fair basketball tactics.

These examples illustrate the advantage of employing non-traditional means to gain an advantage in combat or friendly competition and in relation to my own thoughts, I believe that people feel pressured to conform to societal norms, even with they believe they could benefit and they could benefit others more if the employed non-traditional measures.

Smaller Class Size?

Considering that the odds are decent that I will be a parent at some point in my life and that those bearing my DNA will likely attend school, my own current interests with education policy, and multitude of friends in education,  I found the discussion of the relationship between class size and education fascinating.  Gladwell includes this discussion along with other similar storylines, including wealth hardship (dyslexia for example) in relation to the concept of the inverted U-curve.

The idea is that for some things in life, benefits accrue up to a point, then have diminishing returns, and then actually decrease benefits altogether. Specifically with regard to class-size, Gladwell references several studies to chronicle that benefits do accrue as class size diminishes, if the class size were starting at 40 or 50.  However, if class size falls below 12 or 15, there are not enough viewpoints to provide a broad base of perspectives and maintain balance in the classroom (the study indicates that the ideal class size is likely 18 students).  The smaller class size allows a domineering personality to take over, making it difficult for introverts to voice their opinions in class or for teachers to maintain control against a disruptive personality.

Parents believe that smaller class size is helpful and push for this for their children.  Colleges and high schools seize upon this belief and include their class size in many of the statistics they publish to try to win top children (and their parents).  Gladwell references a school called Hotchkiss in Lakeville, Connecticut that is apparently one of the premier boarding schools in America, charging its attendees $50,000 annually.  Despite it's 12 Steinway pianos and a Fazoli, it's average class size is 12.  Thus not only is Hotchkiss full of attendees with similar socio-economic standing with similar perspectives and viewpoints, it has classrooms with a limited number of viewpoints to air these limited viewpoints.

Big Fish in a Small Pond or Small Fish in a Big Pond

Gladwell discusses the story of Monet, Manet, Cezanne, Renoit, and Pisarro, a group of artists in the mid-19th century Paris who are now known as the founders of the Impressionist movement.  In the mid 1850s, all aspiring artists in Paris submitted works to an annual competition.  Those whose works were selected for the competition received nearly instant acclaim and saw the value of their works increase.  The Impressionists had long been frustrated by their works lack of acceptance into the Salon competition.  To make a long story short, these artists decided to create their own venue to showcase their works, and in this smaller arena where they were competing with fewer artists, they became quite successful.  As anyone with any knowledge of art would know (I cannot include myself in this group), this separate venue launched the  artists into fame.

Gladwell also discussed the story of Ms. Caroline Sacks, a brilliant student who ended up attending Brown University to study biology.  Due to the extreme competition at Brown and difficulty with organic chemistry, Sacks lost confidence in her abilities and never pursued her intended career.  While some might divert this discussion into Ms. Sacks' work ethic, Gladwell's point is that the pressures of high-intensity environments can reduce the confidence of individuals.  This point is furthered by Gladwell's analysis that shows that the bottom third of students at Harvard drop out with the same frequency as lower tier students at a less prestigious university.  To quote Gladwell:

"We have a group of high achievers at Hartwick and a group of lower achievers at Harvard...each is studying similar subjects with similar textbooks, but the overwhelming majority of Hartwick All-Stars get what they want and end up as engineers or biologists.  Meanwhile, the lower achievers at Harvard are so demoralized by their experience that many of them drop out of science entirely and transfer to a science major."

There are a multitude of avenues along which to discuss this, varying from the need (which can be debated) for additional STEM degrees or the competitive nature of America's education system and America in general.  Those of us who have experienced the joy and defeat of the curve in college know all too well that there are a limited number of job offers for top graduates - for any major - and that those who succeed should be rewarded.  Gladwell's statistics illustrate the impact that competition can have on confidence in the classroom (and in all likelihood, life in general).  How can society ensure that capable individuals are not left behind when they encounter stiff competition while still maintaining the benefits that American ascribe to the healthy competition of capitalism and essentially what becomes capitalism within education?

Gladwell's point is that people whether they should place themselves as a Big Fish in a Small Pond or as a Small Fish in a Big Pond given how competition can erode confidence.  Yet, is it worth taking a step back to question why brilliant people can be so devastated and shaken from their confidence that they abandon the pursuit of what they love?  Should we question whether workplace and education competition truly results in bringing the cream to the top?  Taking a bit of latitude here, it is my opinion that this system leads to much of the greed in this country, exemplified by the meltdown that occurred in the bowels of lower Manhattan in 2007 and 2008.

Benefits of Dyslexia?

Would anyone think that dyslexia could help one's career?  Gladwell delves into the intricacies of answering this question by discussing how those who have had to deal with the unfortunate difficulties of dyslexia have frequently risen above these difficulties and accomplished a great deal.  Gladwell applies this same principle to other difficulties, such as losing a parent at an early age or growing up in a destitute household and points out statistics (for example, the number of presidents who had a parent die young) that also illustrate how having difficulties and overcoming them can benefit people later in life.

As someone who frankly has led a very privileged life, I have often wondered how my life would be different if I had experienced any significant difficulties.  I have many close friends who I respect greatly that have suffered difficulties and can see in their lives the benefits that these unfortunate circumstances have produced, as unfortunate as they may be.  Gladwell discusses "near misses" and "remote misses" with respect to the bombing of Great Britain in World War II and how those citizens who had experienced multiple remote misses gained confidence and courage.  I can see how many of my friends have gained courage from both their near and remote misses and have immense respect for they have had to endure.

Years ago, I can distinctly remember wondering and even wishing for difficult circumstances to arise in my life to have some event or condition to overcome and from which to potentially benefit.  Yet, I am also extremely thankful for the position and resources into which I was born and realize that it might even be offensive to some not presume that many individuals born into difficult circumstances would not give anything to have additional resources with which to move ahead in life.

In my opinion, the biggest question this book presents is whether or not certain difficulties are worthwhile.  Should we ever want to be subjected to commonly perceived difficulties?  To take this a step further, would we want our children or loved ones to face these challenges - even if statistics say benefits can be gained or at the very least, the challenges aren't as difficult as often perceived?

Try checking out the book from the library or on Kindle and enjoy the read.

Have a great day!



Saturday, January 3, 2015

Krog Street Market + Streetcar

Despite this being my first post, I don't think a personal blog needs much of an introduction.  I have wanted to keep my thoughts organized for awhile now and decided this is as good of a place as any. ---------

I went to the Krog Street Market for the first time today and unfortunately, was not overly impressed.  The Korean Chicken sandwich I had from Fred's was good, but was no better than what I could get from Newk's for less money.  Fred's had other sandwiches (Po' Boy, nearly vegetarian Banh Mi, burger, Porchetta, others) for $9-$12+ as well as a variety of fry options.  The market had other fast-ish food restaurants including Barbecue and a Mediterranean restaurant, in addition to Hop City, a soap store, a pet store, a butchery, and some other sit down restaurants.

My biggest complaints with Krog St. Market are as follows:
1) Practically, it needs more seating.  The building has the square footage for additional seating and tables, yet does not seem to have acquired them.  Perhaps they are going for the it's so awesome and crowded we can't even get a seat feel, but even 10 more seats would have made a significant difference.

2) I was surprised at the high prices at the restaurants/fast food places and the relative obscurity of the shops in the market.  While Inman Park and the O4W are established and closer to simply up than up-and-coming, I was hoping that the assumed lower rent and location of the Krog St. Market would facilitate reasonable reasonable restaurant prices and shops with every-day items.  In addition to relatively higher prices for the sandwiches and barbecue menus I perused, the Krog St. Market also had very specialized shops given the lack of other nearby stores.  I love to smell good and I love animals, but a soap and pet supply shop seem very specialized.  I think local residents would have much preferred something akin to a convenience store of CVS where they can buy frequently used products.  A quick Google search shows the closest such facility in Savi near Barcelona Wine Bar in Inman Park.

Perhaps its my significant lack of commercial real estate or retail knowledge (it is severely lacking), but the word "Market" evokes thoughts of a one-stop shopping experience from days of old.  The Krog St. Market is a one stop soap-pet food-meat-beer shopping experience, which sounds like it would satisfy a very clean bachelor with a dog, but the rest of us need paper towels, deodorant, and other items that the Market doesn't have.  If a more private entity did not want to offer these services, I think the KSM would have been great for something like Wal-Mart's local stores or a similar concept from CVS or Walgreens or any other convenience store.

---

The slight disappointment of the Krog St. Market was off-set by the chance to ride the Atlanta Streetcar.  I cannot believe it has been 3.5 years since I was interning for MARTA and working with the City of Atlanta and CAP to plan the route, vehicle characteristics, and payment structure.  Riding today, it was interesting to see which elements made the cut from our long ago discussion.  I am still curious how the fare system and related infrastructure will be implemented, but with the first 3 months of operations free, there is still some time to integrate these systems.

As far as ridership, there were many joy riders taking a loop on the system today, which is to be expected given how long it has been open.  However, I could see that there were already people using the streetcar as last mile connectivity to access downtown.  This seemed especially true for elderly residents and those with strollers.

While riding to the King Center, one can see that there is still ample opportunity for development along the eastern portion of the alignment.  Despite the initial investment, additional construction is needed to achieve Portland-esque success here in Atlanta.  Hopefully sustained ridership and the continued up-tick of the economy will push additional investment near Sound Table and east of the alignment.

Furthermore, it is my hope that this development is well integrated into the existing community.  The Atlanta Streetcar was pitched as a vehicle (pun-intended) that would help unite the Sweet Auburn neighborhood after the Downtown Connector divided one of America's most historic African American neighborhoods.  Atlanta's poor record of razing the old to make way for the new suggests that community leaders should keep a close eye on development plans and permits.

Thanks for reading - go make someone's day!