Fact or Fiction

Today's Helpful Hint

Ken Pirok — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:48:07 GMT

When you're moving heavy furniture, don't keep your cell phone in your front pocket.

Free Enterprise Socialism

Ken Pirok — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:16:58 GMT

“Democracy and free enterprise involve social justice and equality, but equality of rights and opportunities, not necessarily of income.”

Does this sound right to you? Inherent in the “American Dream” is equal opportunity. Anyone who works hard enough, can achieve a higher level of income. Is this how we view our system? Doesn’t this way of thinking separate our form of government from socialism and communism?

But wait! This just in, “Socialism means social justice and equality, but equality of rights, of opportunities, not of income."

Raul Castro made this statement just days ago while announcing the end of excessive state subsidies and wage limits in Cuba.

Is socialism turning into free enterprise? Have we become socialists? Or, did socialism and communism just come to an end.

Today's Helpful Hint

Ken Pirok — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:56:07 GMT

If you allow your lawn mower to run completely out of gas, then it will be much harder to get it started again than it was to begin with.

Why Vote? Here's Why...

Ken Pirok — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 14:37:38 GMT

In a November 6, 2005 column, Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner, the authors of Freakonomics, wondered, “Why Vote?” On their blog Tuesday, Levitt reminded us again that, as an economist, he sees little or no value in voting in the upcoming Presidential election.

The “evidence” that voting doesn’t matter consists of a study of Congressional and state legislative elections, showing that the odds of a single vote affecting an election are extremely rare. (Although, the analysis turned up no less than nine state legislative elections out of 40,000 that ended either tied or decided by a single vote.)

The problem is that this entire analysis fails to consider the fact that many additional local elections and referenda share the ballots with state and national races. And, numerous local elections are decided by one or two votes or even by coin flips in cases of ties.

I know this can happen, because it (almost) happened to me. In 2001, I won a City Council election by two votes. Any individual voter who had decided to vote for my opponent instead of me would have caused a tie, and I believe the election would then have been decided by a simple coin toss. During my first four-year term on the Council, I was constantly reminded by constituents that their vote (or the combined votes of a husband and wife) had gotten me elected. Whenever a voter had a gripe, I had to listen.

If you don’t believe that coin flips decide elections, then think again. Just a few years later, a County Board primary here was, indeed, decided by a coin flip. A simple Google search returns numerous stories about elections being decided this way. At least two recent elections in Michigan (this one and this one) have been decided by tosses of coins.

The hitch in Michigan is that the winner of the coin toss doesn’t necessarily win the election. He or she only wins the opportunity to choose first from a box containing two slips of paper, one that says, “elected,” and another saying, “not elected.”

None of this discussion addresses the argument by many astute political observers that local elections are more important than state and federal elections. Local laws and policies most directly affect citizens. Think about your taxes. A huge chunk of what you pay is determined at the local level. Specifically, property tax and sales tax rates are often determined by local politicians or in local referenda.

Levitt and Dubner have a point in the sense that the converse of their argument is very telling and important. The smaller the number of votes cast in an election, the seemingly greater the odds that it will end in a tie. So get out and vote. The quality and the curriculum of your schools, the zoning of your property and the one across the street, how many police patrol your streets, and where or whether you can smoke in public are all at stake.

The Floods: Whose Fault?

Ken Pirok — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:29:17 GMT

The recent flooding in Iowa and in my state of Illinois has been tragic. But, I am getting sick of hearing people (and media like CNN) blame the government for the floods and the fact that most homeowners didn’t have flood insurance. This was supposedly a five hundred year event. It was an “act of God.”

If we required building standards and insurance that covered every event that might only happen twice per millennium, then we would have to spend a fortune on construction costs, public works projects, and insurance. The same people who are blaming the government now would criticize the government for these onerous and expensive requirements if they were to be enacted.

Now, I don’t know whether this was really a five hundred year event or not. Maybe it wasn’t, or it won’t be in the future. But, I do know that if you live near a river or next to a levy, then you should anticipate that flooding is within the realm of possibility.

And, it is completely false to say that the government told these property-owners that they didn’t need flood insurance. Just because the government didn’t require it, does not mean that flood insurance was not available or that these people were precluded from getting it. In fact, just the opposite was true.

One Decision Changed the Election

Ken Pirok — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:11:40 GMT

Because I believe that issues and substance should drive elections instead of style and strategy, I don’t usually write about politics for politics sake. But, I keep going back to a single moment in the Democratic Presidential primary campaign. A decision was made, probably as long ago as last fall, when Clinton was significantly ahead in the national polls, and it seemed her race to lose. Barack Obama went one way and Hillary Clinton went the other way, and the result of the entire election was determined by their choices.

Barack Obama decided to target Iowa, believing that he could win the first state to hold a contest. Obama and his troops devised a system of grass roots, feet-on-the-ground, door-to-door campaign tactics. This Time article does a great job of detailing Obama’s strategy and supreme effort in Iowa. Their campaign actually called me a few times and offered a meal and a trip on a bus to Iowa to canvass for the day.

Hillary Clinton just didn’t put forth the same type of effort in Iowa; here is a Boston Globe article that criticizes her early campaign strategy. Even after all of the work by Obama and the lack of interest from Clinton, the Iowa Caucus was nearly a three-way dead heat between Obama, Clinton, and Edwards. The delegate count was virtually even, with sixteen for Obama, fifteen for Clinton, and fourteen for Edwards. The vote totals were a bit more lopsided, with 38% for Obama, 30% for Edwards, and 29% for Clinton.

But, the point is that with minimal effort and organization, Clinton could have achieved an Iowa victory in delegates and maybe even in votes as well. She had money, and she had supporters. If she had merely edged out Obama, instead of the other way around, then the entire succeeding set of election results probably would have been much different.

Instead, Obama made a truly inspiring victory speech that night, and the rest is history.

Dear Hypermiler,

Ken Pirok — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:00:03 GMT

Yes, I’m writing to you, the guy in the white car who has been driving around my neighborhood at fifteen to twenty miles per hour. I found you driving this way the very next day after the CNN story about “hypermiling,” which is the practice of saving gas by anticipating stops and avoiding breaking, accelerating, and idling at all costs.

YOU ARE NOT SAVING ANY GAS BY DRIVING SO SLOWLY! When you drive around in first or second gear, your car actually uses MORE gas. Your car is most efficient in the highest gear. Here is an article from Car Talk where they provide legitimate ideas for saving gas and wherein they specifically advise you NOT to drive so slowly.

There are two more reasons not to drive this way. First, it is unsafe. When you drive that slowly, you force people into the lane of oncoming traffic to pass you. Some drivers might also assume that you are stopping or turning and make bad decisions. Secondly, it is extremely annoying; you are not making any friends in the neighborhood this way.

By the way, the Car Talk article has some great ideas. I, myself, have saved a lot of gas recently by simply driving five miles per hour more slowly on the highway. This move has been measurably successful in reducing my gas mileage and consumption.

One more thing, you should NOT open your windows when you’re driving on the highway. This doesn’t save gas either, because the wind resistance overcomes the effect that your air conditioning has on fuel consumption. If you have air conditioning, then use it on the highway instead of opening windows.

Happy driving...

What is the Chance that it Won't Rain?

Ken Pirok — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 14:32:30 GMT

“Let’s go to the lake today.”

“No, I heard on the radio that there is a thirty percent chance of rain.”

“Then aren’t the odds seventy percent that it will not rain? The chances are that it won’t rain at all, so let’s go.”

“No, I’m not going. I think it usually rains whenever there’s a thirty percent chance. I wonder how they calculate those chances anyway.”

Who is right here? Are the odds really seventy percent that it will not rain when there is a thirty percent chance that it will?

Not necessarily. According to the National Weather Service, the probability of precipitation is actually calculated for a twelve-hour period, ending at either 6am or 6pm local time. In other words, the probability is actually thirty percent that it will be raining at any given time during the twelve-hour period. So, the odds that it will rain at all during that twelve-hour period seem pretty high.

Now, just because precipitation is likely, doesn’t necessarily mean that it will actually be horrible. The National Weather Service considers a precipitation event to be anything that is at all measurable (so it needs only to be greater than a hundredth of an inch.) Also, the probability is that precipitation will occur anywhere within the forecast area. Some spots may get downpours, while others receive nothing at all during the forecast period.

So, here’s the bottom line, according to Dr. Jim Angel, State Climatologist at the Illinois State Water Survey: If there is a thirty percent chance of rain, then plan for it; pack an umbrella or a raincoat. If there is a fifty percent or greater chance or rain, then go to the mall instead of driving all the way to the lake.

Today's Helpful Hint

Ken Pirok — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:44:24 GMT

Check out our other websites:

www.kenpirok.com if you're starting a business
www.financialstatementschool.com if you're learning about financial statements and financial analysis
www.commercialloananalysis.com if you're a credit analyst or a commercial lender

Dear Keith Olbermann,

Ken Pirok — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:04:24 GMT

You are turning into a joke. You emulate your arch-enemy, Bill O'Reilly. The only difference between you and him is that he is conservative, and you are liberal. I just can't stand to watch your show anymore. You should try to talk about items that are in the news or political issues that are important to peoples' lives. You might consider commenting on how the candidates' views differ from one another and how this translates into whom you or others support in the upcoming election.

Instead, tonight for example, you dedicated nearly an entire show to trashing Hillary Clinton for her comment about the length of the campaign and for invoking the assasination of Robert Kennedy.

According to a news story by your own network, "Robert Kennedy Jr., son of the slain senator, said in a statement, 'It is clear from the context that Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June.'"

So, how is this an issue, instead of a waste of my time?

Today's Helpful Hint

Ken Pirok — Tue, 20 May 2008 17:17:43 GMT

"You can't stop what you can't end."

-Andrew W.K.

The Politics of Happiness

Ken Pirok — Wed, 14 May 2008 15:43:00 GMT

Check out this entry in a series of posts by Arthur C. Brooks on the Freakonomics blog.

His studies have found that conservatives tend to be more happy than liberals and that those on the political extremes tend to be more happy than moderates. He also explores how happiness relates to religion, country of origin, and worldview, etc.

Fascinating!

Today's Helpful Hint

Ken Pirok — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:10:56 GMT

There is no "X" in the word, especially. (There isn't one in "espresso" either.)

What AT&T Video Service is Really Like

Ken Pirok — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 12:48:32 GMT

For those of you who have so vehemently argued that AT&T should be afforded special treatment in order to create competition for the cable company, here is how they treat local government channels in California:

How to Pick Lottery Numbers

Ken Pirok — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:38:11 GMT

Do you play the lottery? How do you pick your numbers? You could just pick one, two, three, four, five, and six. After all, the odds of these balls being chosen are exactly the same as any other six “randomly” chosen numbers. You could also pick numbers the numbers you just saw on a TV show or inside a fortune cookie. You could even use your kids’ birthdays, expecting some good luck. But, the fact is that every one of these strategies is a loser.

The primary reason to avoid picking numbers using these methods, is that if you win, you will likely get stuck sharing the bounty. A bunch of people are using these same strategies. Yes, the odds of one through six hitting are the same as any other “randomly” chosen set of numbers. But if the balls numbered one through six are chosen, you’ll be splitting the prize money with twelve other geniuses who had made the same argument. Shared winnings actually diminish your odds, which are measured by the ratio of the expected payout to the cost to enter the drawing.

This New York Times article describes an instance where this situation actually happened. A group of people who picked their numbers using fortune cookies all shared the prize. The article even mentions a study from the seventies showing that you could actually gain an advantage in the lottery by avoiding popular numbers. For example, picking numbers above thirty-one (since people have a tendency to use their birthdays,) was a beneficial strategy.

You know, there’s another good reason to avoid birthdays. If you play the lottery on a regular basis, and you usually choose the same numbers, how are you going to feel if they finally do hit on the week that you were too busy to buy a lottery ticket? You’ll be sick for the rest of your life. Either use the quick pick option, or pick a different bunch of numbers (that include high ones) every time you play. Good luck!

Is a tomato a fruit?

Ken Pirok — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:07:26 GMT

Is a tomato a vegetable, or is it really a fruit? It seems like a simple question, but it turns out that there is quite a bit to consider. The correct answer depends upon whom you ask…

If you ask a botanist…

He or she will tell you that a tomato is a fruit. Anything with a ripened, mature ovary containing a seed or seeds is technically a fruit. By this definition, pumpkins, peppers, and even eggplants are also fruits. If you look "tomato" up in the dictionary or on Dictionary.com, you will probably also find it defined as a fruit.

But, horticulturally speaking…

The tomato plant, itself, is classified as a vegetable. It is an annual as opposed to a perennial woody plant or a tree from where most of the things we consider fruits such as apples, cherries, and oranges come.

And, according to the federal government…

The tomato also seems to be considered a vegetable. In 1893 the U.S. Supreme Court actually ruled in the case of Nix v. Hedden that the tomato is a vegetable (at least, that is, within the meaning of the Tariff Act of 1883.) You see tariffs had been placed on vegetables, and domestic growers of tomatoes wanted the same import taxes to apply to tomatoes that applied to other vegetables coming into the country.

The Supreme Court agreed, and Justice Gray declared, "Botanically speaking, tomatoes are the fruit of a vine, just as are cucumbers, squashes, beans, and peas. But in the common language of the people, whether sellers or consumers of provisions, all these are vegetables which are grown in kitchen gardens, and which, whether eaten cooked or raw, are, like potatoes, carrots, parsnips, turnips, beets, cauliflower, cabbage, celery, and lettuce, usually served at dinner in, with, or after the soup, fish, or meats which constitute the principal part of the repast, and not, like fruits generally, as dessert."

Perhaps this ruling and its explanation are why the FDA categorizes tomato juice with vegetable juices. People just seem to consider tomatoes to be vegetables, even if they are technically fruit. When you go to the grocery store, you don’t generally find tomatoes next to the apples and bananas. Instead, they are placed with other vegetables.

Maybe it’s actually all about salt…

You might be tempted to put salt on a tomato or on cucumber slices or green beans for that matter. These items are all technically fruits, but we treat them like vegetables. You would never think of putting salt on raw fruit like oranges or strawberries. I guess this is why our cooks, our stores, and even our courts consider tomatoes to be vegetables even though technically they are not.

Today's Helpful Hint

Ken Pirok — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:21:00 GMT

Don't walk on a treadmill in bare feet.

Today's Helpful Hint

Ken Pirok — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:21:29 GMT

If you forget to close your garage door on the coldest night of the year, and your furnace and water meter are in there, then you're in for a rude awakening in the morning.

Can a Hypnotist Control You?

Ken Pirok — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:23:00 GMT

One day you’re at the mall. A stage has been set up, and a hypnotist is asking for volunteers from the audience. He is going to put on a show. Soon, through the magic of hypnosis, some guy is convinced that he is JFK…“My fellow Americans”…Nice accent! Meanwhile, a woman is busy clucking like a chicken and flapping her elbows back and forth just off the stage. Wow! This is powerful stuff. All you want is some help quitting smoking, so you decide to look the hypnotist up in the yellow pages.

You make an appointment, but it turns out that the only thing this demented hypnotist does is play practical jokes and control your actions. He commands that after leaving your trance, every time you hear a phone ring, you will start singing “Another One Bites the Dust,” just like Freddie Mercury. This turns out to be problematic because you work at a funeral home. Could this nightmare really happen?

No, it is complete fiction that a hypnotist could ever force you to do anything you didn’t really want to do. You never lose your sense of values or safety or sensitivity during hypnosis. It just doesn’t work that way. If the experience is not consensual, then hypnosis cannot actually occur. It is possible (although unlikely) that the people imitating dead presidents and chickens were really under hypnosis and were, therefore, more suggestible. But, participants will never do anything they do not really want to do; they did intend to entertain you.

Hypnosis is nothing mystical or scary or dangerous. It is simply the combination of relaxation and focused attention. During hypnosis, you actually lose yourself in the moment or in an activity or even through seriously observing something. So, lots of activities are actually forms of hypnosis. This includes listening to music, reading, and watching television or movies. Similarly, driving or even mowing the lawn can be considered forms of hypnosis as well.

So, can hypnotism actually help solve peoples’ problems? Well, according to Neal Roese, Ph.D. and Associate Professor in the University of Illinois Department of Psychology, “psychologists use experimental methods to test the effectiveness of different treatments. Whatever ailment you look at, from quitting smoking to depression, there are several vastly more effective treatments available today than hypnosis. The published evidence for the effectiveness of hypnosis is remarkably weak, especially when placed alongside other kinds of treatments.”

Does hypnosis have any value at all? Certainly it does. Just like listening to a certain jazz album can really relax you after a long, stressful day (and may even help rid you of a headache,) hypnosis in any form, can be a valuable treatment for stress. Another valuable treatment for stress is watching hypnotist shows (whether they’re real or staged,) because they’re quite entertaining. I’ll never forget the one I saw as a kid at the mall. The guy really did sound like JFK.

Today's Helpful Hint

Ken Pirok — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 13:47:00 GMT

The statement, "My son is a lawyer," does not improve your argument. By the way, my girlfriend is a lawyer, and I took the LSAT once, so I am right.