Clemson has five sub shops in Downtown, three of which are national chains. These chains are everyone’s favorite. I, however, much prefer going to the local sub shop. To me, it is about supporting the local guy. Of course, subs are just an example. I feel this way about other commodities. I would rather buy my bread from a local bakery and meat from a butcher, etc (and I would, if there were such things in Clemson). I think the food quality is better; and did I mention that I like to support the local guy?

I am sure this rhetoric is nothing new. You have heard it a thousand times from a thousand hippies. The point of this rant focuses on this:

Wal-Mart just opened in our small town, despite the huge movement to keep it out, involving re-zoning, legislation etc. Even though I am all for the small guy in most cases, I was on the other side of the fence with regard to Wal-Mart. If I were to join the bumper sticker/yard sign crowd I would have made a sign that said, “I support Wal-Mart’s right to open in Clemson”. Acquaintances who are sick of my boycott of fast food chains have argued with me that this stance is contradictory. I don’t think it is.

I have expressed feelings similar to the ones I have about Wal-Mart before in other rants, but felt my message was lost because the example I used was too controversial. It’s not uncommon for people to attempt to force (via laws) others to adopt their ideas. In the long run, it never works. In my opinion this “legislating beliefs” approach is the definition of anti-Americanism (more so than any person opposing a war). You can, and should, try to inform, teach, and convince others that your opinion is right. But the second you try to force your convictions on others through legislation (re-zoning) you have chosen the wrong path. Think about it: If you have successfully convinced people that Wal-Mart is bad, then you should feel comfortable with Wal-Mart opening a store near you. If you were right, then no one will shop there; it will go out of business and close. Mission accomplished. However, if people wish to shop there then it is their choice, and who the hell are you to pass laws denying them that right?

I hope more people buy from the local guy. It is a better choice, in my opinion. However, I do not think that Wal-Mart is evil and I support Wal-Marts right to open in any town in America. People, make your own choices. Inform others, but do not pass laws forcing them to conform to your opinion.

P.S. Due to my fast typing I found out that “Wal-Mart” is in my word processor’s spell check dictionary. Coffeeman’s Bakery was not.

I walked into a conversation the other day in which a lady claimed she hates economists because they or their beliefs are bad for the environment.

Think back 100 or 200 hundred years ago. We the United States cut down just about every tree on this continent. We polluted the environment more than any entity ever. We sacrificed species of animals left and right and finally caught an entire river on fire. Everybody that partook in those practices knew they were harming the environment and knew that doing so was not good. Trust me any person knows it is bad to outflow your petro waste into a river. So why did they do it?

Because they were poor! This country did not start off as the richest in the world. We started off struggling the same way many countries are today. When our forefathers were faced with the choice between putting food on the table or saving the life of a spotted owl, (logging has endangered the spotted owl yet many of our forefathers made a living through logging) guess what they choose? And probably rightly so.

Because of this exploitation and past lack of concern for the environment our country prospered and our standard of living was elevated considerably.

Similar stories can be told of any industrialized and developed country.

We, citizens of these fortunate countries, are now able to sacrifice production and economic advancement to be more environmentally aware. Our choice is no longer "spotted owl or dinner". It is more like "spotted owl or bigger SUV". We have chosen to raise awareness and pass environmentally protective laws. These laws have slowed the continual rise of US per capita income and standard of living (bigger SUV) but we have all decided it is worth it, now.

But do not kid yourself. The difference is not that we are more environmentally aware than before, it is that we can now afford to be environmentally aware. So you can thank economic development and the economist working so hard for you. Economic development is the reason we have come to be environmentally aware.

In addition, economic development is the only way to get other countries/all countries to be environmentally aware. Citizens of developed nations look to developing nations such as Mexico, African countries, and other underdeveloped nations and ask: "How can you clear-cut your rain forests?" "How can you pollute the way you do?" "Why do you not have environmental laws?" Remember that they are only asking those questions while they are sipping on their Passion Fruit and Kumquat blended juice at an outdoor cappuccino/sushi bar. These developing nations are doing exactly what we did 100 years ago. They will continue to do it until they can afford not to do it. Therefore if you want to help the environment then help these nations develop economically (become an economist).

BTW, A new McDonalds creates available jobs, which in turn raises employees standard of living, which in turn helps the environment. So save the environment and build a McDonalds in Rabat, Morocco

Where are you from? Down North? Up East?

Next time someone is giving you directions and they tell you to go North, pay attention. They will point up towards the sky. Vice versa, when they tell you to go South they will point downward. Why? North is not up, South is not down. Most likely it is because of the typical world map. I was recently given a world map by an educational software vendor. I hung it on my cubicle wall and looked at it with some coworkers. It was very similar to the map below. Examine it. I think most would agree that this is your every-day run-of-the-mill world map.

View a larger image

When I looked at the map that was given to me and then this one above, I saw nothing odd. It looked like any other world map I have seen. Then my coworkers and I took notice to where the equator lined up on the map. It cuts the map in half right? Nope. In fact the equator lies somewhere around here:

View a larger image

So I said, "Okay they just cut the Southern 20% of the map off. Antarctica is boring." But that wasn

I have just spent a week in Orlando, Fl. Even though I was there on business I was able to fit in plenty of leisure time. I visited the attraction parks (Disney, Epcot, Universal, Seaworld) and ate at the ridiculously nice restaurants (fish guaranteed fresh that day hand picked by a fish monger, and prime center cut filets). It occurred to me that Orlando is very similar to Vegas. Both cities (at least the parts that tourists see) strive for complete fantasy. Things are taken to such luxurious extremes that the ridiculous is the status quo.

It then occurred to me that many foreign tourists come to the United States and only visit Vegas or Orlando. Could you imagine their impression of what it is like to live in the US?

It makes me reflect on my travels of the past and my goals when traveling in the future. If you really want to have any idea about the culture or country you are visiting, you better not be in a tourist trap or even a very touristy town. See you in June, Italy.