Why the Calls for an Academic Boycott of Israel are Fallacious

The proposed boycotts of Israeli scholars by some members of UK teachers’ unions have always seemed wrong to me. I oppose them on two grounds:

1. they are anathema to academic freedom, which I prize very highly no matter how much some “scholarly” research offends me, and
2. it seems so unfair and unreasonable to single out Israel when that country has so much more freedom than any other country in the middle east and there are so many other countries (China, anyone??) that restrict freedoms so much more seriously.

Recently I re-watched the 1960 movie, Exodus. (Actually, I much preferred the book). I was struck by how much, during the 1960s, the entire liberal left supported Israel then in contrast with their views now. What has changed? The main thing that has changed is that Jordan, Syria, and Egypt lost two wars and the Israelis took steps to protect themselves against future possible attacks. Odd, isn’t it.



And while we’re on the topic, why haven’t the UK leftie academics called for a boycott of Arab academics because of the treatment of Jews and Christians in so many Arab countries?



.

The CBC: Why No Broadband Telecasts?

If one of the goals of the public funding of the CBC is to help inform the rest of the world about Canada, surely a mandate of the CBC should be to telecast everything they can (I realize there might be contractual barriers with some programming) via broadband so that anyone with a computer anywhere in the world can watch CBC programming. And yet, the last time I scoured their website, I could find nothing about broadband telecasts from the CBC. This just smacks of more misplaced priorities within the CBC.



The next time they need a chairman, I nominate myself.

Our Cats Are Not Allowed to Walk on the Kitchen Counters

Right. Mystery claimed she never went on the counter to get to the top of the cupboards:







But I think I did hear electronic controls on the stove beeping as she climbed up there.



She taunted me from the top of the cupboard, reminding me that she is much like KoKo from “the cat who…” books:







But here she is, climbing down, via the fridge:







The Cat Who… books make great summer cottage/beach/backyard/airplane/whatever reading. I started with this one and then read them in the chronological order in which they were written, an order I recommend.



. . ,

The Canadian Health System: Jumping the Queue

In essence we have prices set equal to zero for health care services in Canada. Couple those zero prices with a policy-induced reduction in the number of physicians trained in the 80s and 90s, and we have a typical shortage. We could reduce the size of this shortage if we allowed physicians to extra-bill, if we trained more physicians, and if we encouraged more physician immigrants. [digression: When I made this last argument 35 years ago, a physician called my home and yelled, "Do you really want some Korean working on you?" My response, "Yes, if she's any good. I'm not a racist, are you?"]



Since the price system is not being used to ration who receives medical services, other rationing schemes must be put in place. The most obvious one that we seem to think is in place is “first-come, first-served.” We call for an appointment, we see a general practitioner, we get put on a list, we wait our turn.



But of course it is possible for more serious, needier cases to be moved up in the queue. Apparently the following things will help move one ahead of others in the queue:



Become a major-league professional athlete. Have you ever noticed that they seem to be able to get MRIs in no time flat while the rest of us wait months in the queue? Failing that I have been led to believe the following might help.



1. Go through the emergency room (i.e. wait for something to become serious enough that it is considered an emergency??). But maybe not on weekends if that’s when the new recruits are put on duty.



2. Do not downplay your symptoms. Stoicism will only hurt you in the long run.



3. Get to know the various physicians in your area. They have a harder time turning down people they know once they are already in the emergency room.



4. Know your symptoms and ailments. Research things on-line. Be prepared.



From WSJOpinion a couple of years ago,

Politicians can’t wave a wand and provide equal coverage for all merely by declaring medical care to be a “right,” in the word that is currently popular on the American left.



There are only two ways to allocate any good or service: through prices, as is done in a market economy, or lines dictated by government, as in Canada’s system. The socialist claim is that a single-payer system is more equal than one based on prices, but last week’s court decision reveals that as an illusion. Or, to put it another way, Canadian health care is equal only in its shared scarcity.

When I moved to Canada, these things were not a concern. We had provincial health insurance in Ontario, but we also had extra billing: physicians who wanted to charge more than the provincial standard were allowed to do so, and many (especially specialists) did so. The idea of not having a family doctor or of waiting hours or months for treatment was beyond our comprehension.



I loved having a safety net for those who didn’t have supplementary health insurance. But the extra billing meant that we had a supply effect: more physicians providing more services in total. Would that we could return to those halcyon days of yesteryear.

When to Retire?

Several years ago, the gubmnt of Ontario eliminated mandatory retirement at age 65. The result has been that professors at my university can continue to work beyond the age of 65, drawing their usual salaries, with only minor reductions in some benefits beyond the age of 65 (less life insurance and no additional university contributions to the defined-contributions pension plan).



The reaction by professors has varied considerably. For example, I have publicly proclaimed that I intend to teach until I am 90.



But I have observed, in limited conversations, that people with children generally expect to work longer than those without children. Perhaps one reason is that we have more debts or smaller net savings because we have spent more on our children and grandchildren. But another explanation offered by one (childless) person is, “I want to spend my retirement savings…. what else am I going to do with it?” which is another way of saying that those of us who plan to work longer have in mind, as one of our objectives, leaving some of our wealth to our children.



This is all ad hoc empiricism, of course. But my hypothesis is that people who have children and grandchildren, because they have interdependent utility functions (with the utilities of their progeny entering with a positive derivative!), will in general tend to work longer than those with no children or grandchildren. They will typically have given more to their offspring and hence want to work longer to have more during their later years and/or they may want to reduce the risk of running low on funds late in life, knowing that anything left over when they die will go to their children and grandchildren.



Those without children may well have other persons or groups to whom they have given or wish to leave some wealth, but my suspicion is that these altruistic sources of utility are, typically and on average, less significant than having offspring; i.e., I am hypothesizing that charities and non-relatives enter most people’s utility functions with smaller weights than do our children and grandchildren. But these speculations are all a priori, based on casual empiricism. Does anyone know the literature on this topic?

Who Wants a Latte That Looks Like a Butt???

We were having coffee in Galway last week at a standard upscale place that serves all sorts of coffees, etc. Ms. Eclectic’s lattee looked really nice, sort of like a flower or tree or something:



But when I looked at our chauffeur’s, I was, well…. taken aback:





But then she and Ms. Eclectic pointed out that I was looking at it upside down, and really it was a heart.

How Much Do You Earn, Professor Palmer?

I am not telling. But here are some median professor salaries, by discipline, courtesy of Newmark’s Door.



The columns probably won’t line up. They are:



Discipline . . . Full prof . . . Assoc Prof . . . Asst Prof . . . New Asst Prof . . . Instructor



Biological and Biomedical Sciences . . .86,612 $62,677 $52,510 $52,275 $41,103

Business, Management, Marketing, and Related Support Services $98,384 $82,347 $75,835 $81,842 $51,939

Communication, Journalism and Related Programs $77,307 $59,549 $50,027 $48,637 $41,230



…



English Language and Literature/Letters $74,040 $57,598 $47,724 $47,357 $37,573

English Language and Literature/Letters: General $73,693 $56,868 $47,405 $47,006 $37,612

Family and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences $78,255 $61,948 $51,238 $50,869 $40,320



…



Social Sciences $81,501 $63,008 $52,826 $52,619 $42,019

Social Sciences: Political Science & Government $79,648 $61,247 $50,207 $50,207 $41,591

Social Sciences: Sociology $78,061 $59,919 $49,935 $49,142 $39,817

Theology and Religious Vocations $66,706 $55,518 $47,310 $45,665 $39,732





The universities do a good job of extracting rent from those who have low opportunity costs (i.e. are not, on average, much good for anything else?). No wonder others are jealous of the salaries earned in law, biz, and economics.



Phil Miller has his usual insightful comments about opportunity costs and professors’ salaries here.



Scoop suggests contrasting economists’ salaries with the salaries of those who declare a double major in theology and the arts.



Does anyone know why newly hired assistant profs in many fields are paid more than “assistant professors”? Surely that type of salary inversion cannot be good for morale or for retention of good faculty members.

Getting to Know You/Me

Phil sent me this in e-mail a few weeks ago. I thought I’d edit my answers a bit for public consumption and post them here:



Welcome to the 2007 edition of getting to know your friends. What you are to do is copy (not forward) this entire email and paste it onto another email that you will send.



Change all the answers so that they apply to you, then send this to a whole bunch of people (Including the person you got this from). Put your name in the subject box. The theory is that you will learn a lot of little things about your friends if you did not know them already.



1. What time did you get up this morning? 3:15AM (we old folks tend to have sleeping “variabilities”)

2. How do you like your steak? Medium Rare

3. What was the last film you saw at the cinema? It has been so long, I can’t remember. Maybe Amadeus.

4. What is your favorite TV show? CSI (Las Vegas)? NFL? Baseball? Law & Order? I’m not sure; I just love television.

5. What did you have for breakfast? McDonald’s Breakfast Burritos

6. What is your middle name? Preston

7. What is your favorite cuisine? Ms. Eclectic’s

8. What foods do you dislike? Cauliflower, Liver

9. What are your favorite chips? Sour Cream and Onion

10. What is your favorite CD at the moment? Steven Reich — Six Marimbas; Miles Davis — Sketches of Spain; Brubeck — Time Out; Nigel Kennedy — Vivaldi’s 4 Seasons

11. What kind of car do you drive? Toyota Sienna; 1993 Cavalier

12. What is your favorite sandwich? Ham, cheese, lots of lettuce and tomato

13. What characteristics do you despise? Assuming an answer and not listening. funny, it’s probably one my bigger faults, too.

14. What are your favorite clothes? Tweed suit

15. If you could go anywhere on vacation, where would it be? Hawaii, Big island; Israel?

16. Favorite brand of clothing? custom suits and shirts; otherwise Wal-Mart is great.

17. Where would you want to retire? Realistically, probably here. Sometimes, I wouldn’t mind being closer to London ON, but I really don’t want to move again. In my fantasies? some place warmer.

18. Favorite time of day? 6am

19. Where were you born? Muskegon, MI

20. What is your favorite sport to watch? Live: curling; tv: baseball or NFL

21. Who do you think will not send this back? ????

22. Person you expect to send this back first? ????

23. Pepsi or Coke? Coke — a much rougher, less nicey-nice taste

24. Beavers or Ducks? I have no idea what this is about. Ducks, I guess.

25. Are you a morning person or night owl? morning.

26. Pedicure or manicure? I guess manicure. But when my knees no longer work, I’ll probably be grateful for pedicures.

27. Any new news you would like to share? Not publicly.

28. What did you want to be when you were little? At different times: a football player, a detective, a sportscaster, a teacher.

29. What is your best childhood memory? Playing with my friends; figuring stuff out.

30. Piercings? I’m tempted to lie and say something rude here….

31. Ever been to Africa? No

32. Ever been toilet papering? No, but it’s not too late!

33. Been in a car accident? Yes; it’s pretty much a miracle if people reach my age without even a fender-bender.

34. Favorite day of the week? Sunday — great for TV sports!

35. Favorite restaurant? High End: Red Pump; Medium: Albion?; Breakfast: The Bean in Goderich; anytime: fast food

36. Favorite flower? Peonies; Sunflowers

37. Favorite ice cream? Baskin Robbins French Vanilla

38. Favorite fast food restaurant? I love ‘em all. Godfather’s Pizza; McDonalds; Taco Bell; Dairy Queen

39. How many times did you fail your drivers test? Zero

40. From whom did you get your last email? NYTimes; Spam offering to introduce me to Christian singles in my area.

41. Which store would you choose to max out your credit card? Future Shop for electronic toys; or maybe a travel agency

42. Bedtime? 9-10-11-12; It’s pretty variable.

43. Who would be the most interesting to read about? I still find myself drawn to internet stuff about Milton Friedman

44. Last person you went to dinner with? Ms. Eclectic

45. What are you listening to right now? Hah! I have Law & Order (criminal intent) going in the background

46. What is your favorite color? Blue

47. How many tattoos do you have? None, though again it’d be fun to lie and see what kind of reaction that would get.

48. How many people are you sending this to?

49. Favorite magazine(s)? The Economist

50. What time did you finish this email? 4:15am

Letterfrack Sea Tours

Ms. Eclectic inspects the ship and says, “I don’t think so….”







Interestingly, it appears that the University of Notre Dame moors a ship at the same dock:

More on Health Care Rationing

It is a simple fact that scarcity means society must devise a mechanism or set of mechanisms to determine who gets the goodies. The primary mechanism that we use for most goods and services is the price system, but gubmnt intervention has crippled the effectiveness of that mechanism considerably in the health care industry in Canada.

So other mechanisms must be designed to ration health care. In Canada, we nominally use “first-come, first-served” or queuing, but there are numerous ways that people can and do jump the queue. I wrote about those yesterday.

Today, though, I want to point out a more pernicious form of rationing. A close friend was expressing being upset with some treatment provided by a nurse and was told something to the effect that,

You should watch yourself. You know, your doctor has plenty of patients and plenty of patients waiting to get on the list and doesn’t need patients with an attitude.

This example highlights that when rationing occurs, it must be according to some criterion or criteria. The gubmnt-contrived shortages we observe in Canada mean that people who control the doling out of services sometimes get to pick and choose according their own tastes and wishes. This system opens the door for increased discrimination and reduced responsiveness to patients’ wishes (or, dare I say, “needs”).

Overall, favourtism, discrimination, and the incentives for getting to know the right people are among the more pernicious effects engendered by gubmnt-contrived shortages.