The Liberal Order

A Good Lesson On Political Philosophy

At the end of the last Harry Potter series of movies (and the book), Harry finds himself in possession of the Elder Wand. After Ron Weasley makes some reference to Harry now being invincible since he possesses the wand, Harry breaks it and throws it off the bridge. (In the book, Harry returns the Elder Wand to Dumbledore's tomb.)

If you found yourself in possession (and in control) of the Elder Wand, knowing that it could be taken by someone else in the future who had nefarious intent, regardless of your intent, given the power the holder of the wand possesses, would you, too, break the wand?

This line is nearly as good as Gandalf's line from Fellowship of the Ring.

Thoughts on the movie "Lincoln"

Overall it was a good movie and Daniel Day Lewis will certainly earn a nomination for best actor. It depicted well the animosity and acrimony present in the U.S. Congress at any time, but especially before, during and right after the Civil War. It also includes at least two scenes where main characters (Lincoln and Stevens) compromise their positions (and principle in the case of Stevens) in order to obtain enough votes to pass the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Lastly, it also exposed well the lobbying and rent seeking prevalent at the time and with any political enterprise.

My complaints, however, include the following:

1. Had it not been Spielberg, the film would not have received the overwhelming positive reviews it has received. It's a good movie, but it's not great.
2. It was too long; Spielberg could have cut at least 20 minutes from the film and not have made a difference. 
3. The whole focus of the movie was on the racial issue and none on the other issues of the day, including the economic issues and balance of power that were also major causes of the Civil War.
4. Other than Lewis, and possibly Jackie Earle Haley and Gulliver Mcgrath (but kids are rarely nominated for Oscars, much less win), the acting was largely mediocre with a bit too much overacting (Hello Sally Field!).

I wish I had waited for it to come out on DVD. 

Here's an example of a meaningless statistic.

This was the wording on the Twitter feed:

"Hunger Games Trilogy Beats Harry Potter Series To Become All-Time Bestselling Book Series" 

Wow! That's an amazing feat given the popularity of the Harry Potter series and the fact that the Hunger Games, though captivating at first, apparently petered out. (I only read the first book and was greatly impressed with the writing and story until about two-thirds of the way through, and then got bored. Other people who have read all three said the second book was better, but that the third was terrible. DC told me to not even read the second because that would force me to read the third, which was a total waste of time.)

Anyway, the following are the first two paragraphs from the story linked to in the Twitter feed. 

Although author Suzanne Collins only wrote three books, her Hunger Games trilogy has been able to zap the magic out of J.K. Rowling’s seven-part Harry Potter franchise on Amazon.com,. Taking into consideration print and digital Kindle book sales combined, The Hunger Games, which are much shorter reads than the Potter books, have captivated a wider range of fans around the globe. All of the books in the Hunger Games and Harry Potter series are available for Kindle owners with a Prime membership to borrow for free in the Kindle Owners’ Lending Library.

“Since debuting in 2008, Katniss Everdeen and the Hunger Games have taken the world by storm, much as Harry Potter did a decade before,” said Sara Nelson, Editorial Director of Books and Kindle, Amazon.com. “Interestingly, this series is only three books versus Harry Potter’s seven, and to achieve this result in just four years is a great testament to both the popularity of the work and, we think, the growth in reading digitally during that time. Customers love these books and all three titles are consistently on our Top 10 lists in both print and Kindle formats, and The Hunger Games is also the most-borrowed book in the Kindle Owners’ Lending Library.”

Got that?!? It's only from sales of both physical books on Amazon.com and Kindle sales, as well as the free loans of Kindle books to Amazon Prime members that are included in the count. The first Harry Potter book was published in 1999, far before the average reader bought their books from Amazon, and the Kindle wasn't even around. Since then, the largest bookseller (Borders) has gone out of business.

Many of the Harry Potter books were also purchased at bricks and mortar stores because people wanted to purchase the books at midnight the day they were released. There wasn't that same excitement for the Hunger Games books. 

Lastly, Kindle and the Amazon Prime free lending were not even available for many of the HP books, which offered a more convenient and less expensive forum for reading books like the Hunger Games. 

Let's compare sales of all books from all retailers, not just one. I would also like to see the total real sales from all books in both series. My guess is that J.K. Rowling wins hands down.

Advertising when the Google car comes by.

A very funny - though grossly under-appreciated - movie was Dick, released to limited success in 1999. It spoofed the Watergate scandal, making it of little interest to younger people. But it starred Kirsten Dunst, Michelle Williams, Will Ferrell and that other guy, making it unappealing to older people who thought it too juvenile and a movie geared for a younger crowd. 

Essentially, Betsy Jobs and Arlene Lorenzo (played by Dunst and Williams, respectively) befriend Nixon and become his official dog walker. They soon discover the ways of "Tricky Dick" and turn against him. During the final scene, Jobs and Lorenzo decide to show Dick Nixon what they think about him by flying a banner from the rooftop of Jobs' Georgetown home just as Nixon passes overhead on his way out of office. The banner read, "You suck, D***." (Notice the placement of the comma.)(It shows up about the 1:53 mark in the trailer below.)

It appears that we may see more of this kind of activity thanks to Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY). You see, Google and Apple are racing to become the leader in 3-D navigation maps for PCs and handheld devices. In doing so, the two companies, especially Google, plan to drive and fly by areas they are mapping, as well as using sharply focused satellite imaging. And in doing this, they are apparently catching people unaware.

Schumer's great idea is, along with a few other things, to make Google and Apple advertise when and where they will be imaging a specific location.

All right, maybe a nice effort to prevent me from being photographed in my pajamas while retreiving the morning paper and ultimately to protect individual privacy. I'm on board with Schumer on that count. Unfortunately, the unintended consequence is to create the incentive for morons hoping to make it into Google Maps naked or making obscene gestures or flying banners that say, "You suck, Chuck." (Wow, this doesn't have the same comedic appeal.) 

 

Danny DeVito Explains the Morality of Companies Like Bain Capital

In a speech that offers one of the best (though of course rare) defenses of capitalism (sad that we have to constantly defend it), Danny DeVito explains the social benefits of what companies like Bain Capital do.

Setting the scene: Danny DeVito plays Lawrence Garfield, chairman and CEO of Garfield Industries. He's earned the name "Larry the Liquidator" because the objective of his investment firm is to purchase companies with asset values that exceed the stock capitalization of the firm and sell off the assets. So if a company's market cap is, say, $1 billion and the assets are worth, say, $1.2 billion, buy controlling interest in the firm and sell off the assets, reaping a 20% return on your investment.

Garfield Industries has targeted New England Wire and Cable, a cable manufacturer that is struggling in light of creative destruction - fiber optics. The speech is at the shareholder's meeting, where Larry the Liquidator is seeking to convince the other shareholders to vote for his slate of directors. On the opposing side is Andrew Jorgenson, CEO of New England Wire and Cable and the grandson of its founder, played by Gregory Peck. He pleads with the shareholders to protect labor and the existing mission of the firm.

If you haven't seen this, it's worth watching.