Monthly Archives: September 2010

An Evangelical emphasis on extrovertedness

Posted on by

If you have ever gone to church and felt left out because you are quiet, reserved, or introverted, you are likely not alone. Adam McHugh argues that Evangelical churches tend to privilege the extroverted and equate faith with outgoingness:

Even more dangerous is the tendency of evangelical churches to unintentionally exalt extroverted qualities as the “ideals” of faithfulness. Too often “ideal” Christians are social and gregarious, with an overt passion and enthusiasm. They find it easy to share the gospel with strangers, eagerly invite people into their homes, participate in a wide variety of activities, and quickly assume leadership responsibilities. Those are wonderful qualities, and our churches suffer when we don’t have those sorts of people, but if these qualities epitomize the Christian life, many of us introverts are left feeling excluded and spiritually inadequate. Or we wear ourselves out from constantly masquerading as extroverts.

This is insightful. This may be linked to the typical Evangelical church presentation: generally loud music, brashness about the message, highlighting people in the church who are doing things.

I’ve often wondered why churches don’t feature more testimonies/stories/insights from “average” or “typical” congregants who have often lived rich lives of faith full of troubles and triumphs. These would be people that others could relate to. Congregants can learn from ministers and church leaders but they can also learn from the people sitting next to them.

How much income one needs to be considered rich

Posted on by

Americans tend to think of themselves as middle-class, even wealthy and poor Americans who objectively are in the upper or lower ranks of income. So this question occasionally arises: how much income does one have to be earn to be considered “rich”?

The current case in the news:

Todd Henderson feels like he’s barely making ends meet. He’s a law professor at the University of Chicago. His wife’s a doctor at the school’s hospital. Their combined income exceeds $250,000. They have a nice house, a nanny, kids in private school, a retirement account and a lawn guy…

“A quick look at our family budget, which I will happily share with the White House, will show him that, like many Americans, we are just getting by despite seeming to be rich. We aren’t,” Henderson wrote on the blog “Truth on the Market.”

While Henderson meant for his posting to encourage a debate about taxes, it turned into a public flogging, characterizing him as out of touch or arrogant. More broadly, it has provoked a discussion about what it means to be rich, particularly in an economy where many people are suffering.

Henderson’s no longer part of the conversation, though. The firestorm of online hostility compelled him to delete his essay and declare on Tuesday that he will no longer blog. He declined to comment Thursday. Even his wife is angry at him, he acknowledged in a follow-up blog post.

A few thoughts on this:

1. The Chicago Tribune article cites someone saying earning $250,000 a year is in the top 3 percent of American incomes.

2. At the same time, incomes can vary in their purchasing power in different areas. A $150,000 income living in Manhattan can lead to different things than living with that income in Atlanta.

3. Is this a microcosm of how Internet “discussion” works? It seems like a perfect storm of bad economic times plus widespread attention leads to a bad outcome for having made this argument.

4. Perhaps the real issue is whether people making $250,000 feel like they can live the lifestyle that is associated with such income levels. If they feel like they have to pinch pennies or a lot of the money is taken out in taxes, they might not “feel rich.” From those with lower incomes, this seems absurd: just think what could be done with that money. But having certain incomes leads to certain ideas about what that level of income looks like or how it is to be experienced.

UPDATE 9/24/10 3:36 PM: A piece from the Wall Street Journal fits in with my idea about the income and lifestyle not matching up. The overall idea seems to be that people who make this kind of money may not think they have to or don’t want to reign in their spending.

Both parties disliked by a majority

Posted on by

Coming up to the fall elections, a poll from AP-GfK finds that both parties are disliked:

Yet Democrats trying to exploit the GOP’s unpopularity in hopes of hanging onto control of Congress face a problem: People who dislike Democrats seem ready to vote in greater numbers than those with little use for Republicans.

In an Associated Press-GfK Poll this month, 60 percent disapprove of the job congressional Democrats are doing — yet 68 percent frown on how Republicans are performing. While 59 percent are unhappy with how Democrats are handling the economy, 64 percent are upset by the GOP’s work on the country’s top issue. Just over half have unfavorable views of each party.

If this thinking holds up until November, then a majority of individual Americans will be choosing between two parties that they dislike. Perhaps a common response will be to simply not vote – which seems to be what many Americans have done in recent years.

The poll also found that more of the people who disapprove of the Democratic party are likely to vote.

I wonder if this could become a common election cycle: every two years, the current party in power faces a crisis because they tend to get blamed for the issues in the country. Unfortunately for both parties, the issues aren’t going away and many will only get more difficult to deal with as time passes.

Current-day Muslims and 19th century Catholics following same path in America?

Posted on by

A history professor at Northwestern College in Minnesota suggests the position of Muslims in America today may be similar to the position of Catholics in 19th century America.

Opinions on science derailed by poor online sample?

Posted on by

Scientific American and Nature recently joined forces to poll readers around the world about their opinions of science. The findings include opinions about science and politics, climate denial, nuclear power, the flu and more.

While this data seems interesting, it might be questionable due to the sample:

More than 21,000 people responded via the Web sites of Nature and of Scientific American and its international editions. As expected, it was a supportive and science-literate crowd—19 percent identified themselves as Ph.Ds. But attitudes differed widely depending on particular issues—climate, evolution, technology—and on whether respondents live in the U.S., Europe or Asia.

So the findings may really be about the opinions of a more “supportive and science-literate crowd” rather than a true representation of international opinion. This is a common issue with open online surveys: it is very difficult to get a sample that is representative of a larger population.

Trying to give people warm feelings about traffic tickets

Posted on by

I think it is safe to say most people don’t like receiving traffic or moving violation tickets. Could there be a way to help people feel better about receiving these tickets? Cambridge, Massachusetts is trying to improve the image of driving tickets:

But the city of Cambridge, Mass., is looking to cultivate a Zen-like demeanor among parking offenders with the New Age-themed tickets it’s handing out these days.

“It’s trying to debunk the idea that all parking tickets are a hostile action, because I don’t think they are,” Susan E. Clippinger, the city’s transportation chief, told the Boston Herald.

According to the Herald, the parking ticket makeover in Cambridge — home to Harvard and MIT — is part of public art project by the city’s artist-in-residence, Daniel Peltz. In addition to the 40,000 new parking tickets Cambridge printed, the city is incorporating mood-enhancing imagery in its approach to parking enforcement, as the Herald notes: “There are new street signs explaining traffic rules in offbeat ways; ‘10,000 Excuses,’ a mural of excuses given by ticketed drivers; and plush, stuffed ‘soft-boots’ to give the ultimate parking penalty a warmer, fuzzier feel.”

An interesting program. One thing that may work in their favor: changing up the signage and typical protocol might shake people out of their complacent driving behaviors.

What about trying another tact: framing the tickets as part of a larger campaign of public safety. Could drivers be placated a little if the tickets came with an explanation about how driving within/at the rules saved lives, injuries, and money (and tax dollars)? This would give the often solitary activity of driving a more communal focus: we need people to obey the traffic laws and regulations to help everyone get where they need to go safely. If you break the rules, it is not a “victimless crime.”

Slower growth on the edges of suburbia

Posted on by

While many cities struggle with finding money, some suburbs are still growing. On the suburban fringe of Chicago, about 42 miles southwest of the city, Oswego is still experiencing growth though the pace has slowed:

This year, the local school district reported 648 more students for a total enrollment of 16,828, the village expects to issue up to 100 new-home permits and the village’s population is expected to top 30,000.

And sales tax revenue rose 8 percent — to $4.8 million — for the fiscal year ending in April. The village’s top revenue source also appears stable so far in the new budget year…

In 20 years, Oswego exploded from a village of 3,876 to nearly 30,000 and to an even larger market area that includes unincorporated areas in Kendall County, the village of Montgomery and portions of Aurora.

With the slow-up should come increased business for existing firms. But for the foreseeable future, major retail developments that once arrived in tandem with new residents aren’t likely.

So this is what the recession looks like in Oswego: no decline, some difficult in filling in existing retail and industrial space, but still growing tax revenues, some new home construction, and school enrollments.

I’d be curious to see a larger analysis of how suburbs, particularly those that were growing in the last decade, have fared in the economic crisis. Even with the money woes, I can’t imagine many have declined in population or though perhaps business has declined. My guess is that suburbs that were growth areas five years are in a holding pattern or are experiencing slight growth like Oswego.

How much fun should one have at work?

Posted on by

Schumpeter at The Economist takes a look at the idea of having fun at work:

ONE of the many pleasures of watching “Mad Men”, a television drama about the advertising industry in the early 1960s, is examining the ways in which office life has changed over the years. One obvious change makes people feel good about themselves: they no longer treat women as second-class citizens. But the other obvious change makes them feel a bit more uneasy: they have lost the art of enjoying themselves at work…

This cult of fun is driven by three of the most popular management fads of the moment: empowerment, engagement and creativity. Many companies pride themselves on devolving power to front-line workers. But surveys show that only 20% of workers are “fully engaged with their job”. Even fewer are creative. Managers hope that “fun” will magically make workers more engaged and creative. But the problem is that as soon as fun becomes part of a corporate strategy it ceases to be fun and becomes its opposite—at best an empty shell and at worst a tiresome imposition.

A good point: forced “fun” is hardly fun at all.

A question: what really makes work satisfying for people? Having fun? Collegial relationships? Meaningful tasks? Praise from bosses and higher-ups?

Another question: what can’t this “fun time” at work be left up to the employee’s discretion? One might prefer a half hour to quietly read a book while another might prefer a volleyball game. While this means managers may not be able to rave about how their group came together in an activity, it might provide even higher levels of productivity.

How to measure “success” of movements like the Tea Party

Posted on by

In the midst of an opinion piece about the Tea Party, E.J. Dionne Jr. of the Washington Post touches on an interesting social movements question: what makes a social movement successful?

Before you dismiss the question, note that word “successful.” Judge the Tea Party purely on the grounds of effectiveness and you have to admire how a very small group has shaken American political life and seized the microphone offered by the media, including the so-called liberal media.

But it’s equally important to recognize that the Tea Party constitutes a sliver of opinion on the extreme end of politics receiving attention out of all proportion with its numbers.

In this excerpt (and by the end of the article), Dionne suggests two markers of success for the Tea Party:

1. Getting the attention of the media and political leaders. (Dionne says this has been a success.)

2. Having a majority (or perhaps just a large enough critical mass?) of Americans on its side or as constituents. (Dionne suggests this is not the case.)

There also could be other measuring sticks for success:

1. How many Tea Party candidates reach political office. This could be for the 2010 election cycle or for elections beyond that.

2. How long the movement lasts. Is it here just for this election cycle or longer? Is it going to be a permanent party or will it fade away?

3. How much money can be raised in support.

I’m not sure I’ve read that the Tea Party itself has defined what “success” looks like.

Why add this line in interview about Netflix in Canada: “Americans are somewhat self-absorbed”

Posted on by

In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter, the Netflix CEO (and co-founder) discussed the company’s new foray into the Canadian market. Netflix prices in Canada will be one dollar cheaper: $7.99 vs. $8.99 in the United States. But the CEO added another line that seems superfluous to the discussion and may not be helpful to his company’s efforts in the American market:

THR: American services when they enter the Canadian market typically charge the locals more than they charge stateside. Why the discount for Canadians?

Hastings: We want to provide an incredible value for Canadians, and it’s the lowest price we have anywhere in the world for unlimited screenings. And anyone can try it for free for a month. It’s pretty addictive.

THR: Are you concerned that American Netflix subscribers will look north and ask for the same discount Canadians get at $7.99?

Hastings: How much has it been your experience that Americans follow what happens in the world? It’s something we’ll monitor, but Americans are somewhat self-absorbed.

I’m guessing more Americans will pay attention now to this than would have before. Whether he is right or wrong about Americans being self-absorbed, why potentially hurt a large market when he didn’t have to?