Electoral stunts and other nice things about the political life

So, I haven't posted for a while, but I'm back. Back to say once again that Mexico is, to say the least, a very peculiar place. A place where the US president can come with 1000 marines and nothing is said about soverignty, but oil cannot be privatized because it would imply a loss of sovereignty. A place where a well respected professor becomes Secretary (in this case Education) and is now the strongest card for the next presidential election for ruling party, PAN.

And it is mostly on Lujambio's designation as Secretary of Public Education (SEP) and his action taking on his first days on the job that this post will be about. After being named to the cabinet, his political abilities were questioned (could he step up to La maestra Elba Esther Gordillo, or would he be a pushover for her?), as well as his well known friendship to President Calderón.

Just today classes (and along with them prueba ENLACE's application, which meassures school quality) were cancelled because of the spread of a porcine (made human) flu epidemic in Mexico City and in neighboring Mexico State. Is this an electoral stunt? Was it made to position Lujambio? Is it an electoral stunt for upcoming July's intermediate elections (and maybe take away the headlines from theever growing concern on drug traffic and security and to show that the Federal government is in charge of pressing situations)? Hopefully, only time will tell.

The US's fault?

According to Hillary Clinton the US is to blame for much of Mexico's violence?

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed1/idUSN25429486

Is she right? Probably so, if the US could control its demand for drugs then probably Mexican druglord would not have the power they do. Moreover, drugs being a black (i.e. illegal) market present a great price markup from the marginal cost of producing them. If they were made legal then they could be regulated and drug lord would lose their monopolic power.

Maybe drug legalization should become an issue in both Mexican and US political agendas...

Makes you kinda think

Have you ever thought how much a million bucks looks like?

http://deliveriesgalore.com/2009/03/18/one-trillion-dollars/

its pretty interesting

Some more interesting books...

Sorry for not posting lately, but I've been pretty busy...

some books that although I've not been able to read but that sound pretty interesting are:

1. Predictably Irrational, Dan Ariely (on humans not being as rational as economic theory would predict?
2. In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government, Charles Murray (this one's pretty old but seems really good - on how government may affect happiness, that if you've made a habit of reading this blog you may have realized is a topic that interests me very much)
3. Classical Liberalism: The Unvanquised Ideal, David Conway

I hope you enjoy them!

It's evolution, baby...

Such sings a song by Seattle rock band Pearl Jam: "It's evolution, baby..." Nowadays, the topic is getting a little bit trite, since this year we are celebrating Charles Darwin's 200th birthday and the 150th anniversary of the first publication of his most (in)famous book, The Origin of the Species; as well, world famous biologist Richard Dawkins has been campaining for evolution (and against intelligent design or creation) in the past few years.

I am a strong believer, and had always had had a hard time putting together evolution and creation, and I think that I've finally accomplished it. Here I must take a pause to thank my brother David for hours of illustrative discussion. So the necessary question is how?

As Economics Nobel laurate, Bob Aumann would say, human experience reality on several planes, each orthogonal to each other. Science is one of those planes, Religion is another. What we experience in science is basically not what we experience through religion. Each has is well delimited space. Science should not even attempt to ask itself about the ontology and axiology of things; it should not try to ask the question: "Does God exist?" It is outside its field of study. As well, Religion and Philosophy should not ask themselves for the scientific proof of things. Mixing pears and apples is not intellectualy honest. Here is where Dawkins erres, what AlvinPlantinga would call "The Dawkins Confusion".

Evolution and Creation are compatible. Evolution (despite its many flaws) is the best scientific model we have to explain the way the different species came to be. Creation is a matter of faith. So we shouldn't sit down to endless discussions of whether we evolved or came from Adam, each in its own field are good explanations.

Mexico...dear old Mexico

For more on Mexico being a failed State, check

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1235181025360

and for those of you that understand Spanish...someone standing up to say the truth about Mexican monopolies

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCdOktxWMe0

Enjoy!

Institutions and baseball

What do political institutions have in common with baseball?

Basically nothing...Nevertheless, baseball is a good example of how institutions though existing might not operate correctly. MLB is one of the largest buisnesses in the US; and it is one of the most corrupted ones as well.

I was heartbroken when a steroid consuming player such as Barry Bonds broke Hank Aaron's historical record of 755 career home runs. Nonetheless, I figured that a 'clean' player such as alex Rodríguez was just on track to break Bonds' newly instituted record. I was mistaken. Rodríguez is not clean, he's consumed performance enhancing products as well.

And what does the MLB have to say? Not much. Bonds' record stands, Rodríguez keeps on playing... Players that consume illegal substances should be punished for their actions.

Many times we complain about corruption in governmental instances, but what about out sports leagues?