Any idea why we continue to reward top executives with stock options? We accept it, nowadays, as a given, but why do we have that practice in the first place?
You might say �because it constitutes performance-related pay; through them, you financially reward top managers for their achievements�. Fair enough. Because for many of us mortals our pay depends to some extent on our performance. However, do realize that for CEOs, for example, this component is often as high as eighty percent. Eighty percent! Do you know many people (employed in the same large corporations that these executives head) whose salary is eighty percent dependent on some measure of their achievements? Not many I suspect.
But, in theory, these large corporations that reward their top managers through stock are right � and I am saying �in theory� for a reason. This practice � of offering CEOs stock-based pay � is a recommendation straight out of something called �agency theory�. It is one of the few academic theories in management academia that has actually influenced the world of management practice. It is basically a theory that stems from economics. It says that you have to align the interests of the people managing the firm (top executives) with those of its shareholders, otherwise they will only do things that are in their own interest, will be inactive, lazy, or plain deceitful. Yep, these economists have an uplifting worldview. But that is why we have such a huge performance-related component in the pay of most top executives.
But are you really sure you want people like that managing your firm? People who will be lazy and only operate in their own interest if given a chance? Do you really want a CEO who really needs performance-related pay and who otherwise, if put on a fixed salary, wouldn�t do much and just hang about? In case you missed it, I intended this as a rhetorical question�
But anyway, we give them stock � and lots of it � to incentivize them. But the question still lingers: why stock OPTIONS? And that�s a story in itself.
Agency theory doesn�t only say that people will be lazy and deceitful if given a chance; it also says that managers are inherently risk-averse; much more risk-averse than shareholders would like them to be. And the theory prescribes that you should give them stock options, rather than stock, to stimulate them to take more risk.
More risk!? you might think. Do we really want CEOs of large corporations to take MORE risk?! Is it not, given recent events in the world of business, that we would like our top executives to be a little less risk taking for a change�? Ah, that�s what you might think now, but it is not what agency theory thinks, and it is not what the incentive structure of most public corporations nowadays is geared to do.
Because stock options do stimulate risk seeking behavior, as we know from academic research. Options, as you might know, represent a right to buy shares at a certain price at some fixed point in the future. If you are given the right to buy a share in company X for $100 in January 2010 and by then the share price of X is $120, you will have made 20 bucks. However, if the company�s share price by then has dropped to $90, your option is worthless; we say it is �out-of-the-money�: you�re not going to exercise your right to buy at 100 when the market price is merely 90.
In that situation, if the CEO of X has many stock options, it stimulates him to be very risk seeking. For example, if by August 2009 the share price is 90, he will be inclined to engage in risky �win or lose� moves. If the risk pays off and the share price rises well above a 100, the stock options will become worth a lot of money. However, if he loses, and the share price plummets even further, say to 60, no worries; it doesn�t matter. The stock options to buy at $100 were worthless anyway; whether the stock trades at 90 or at 60.
And, as said, research by for example Professors Gerry Sanders from Rice University and Don Hambrick from the Penn State University showed that these things work. They examined 950 American CEOs, their stock options, and their risk taking behavior. They found that CEOs with many stock options made much bigger bets; for instance, they would do more and larger acquisitions, bigger capital investments, and higher R&D expenditures
However, they also showed that they weren�t always very good bets� The option-loaded CEOs delivered significantly more big losses than big gains. That�s because they didn�t care much about the losses (their options were worthless anyway); all they were interested in were the potential gains.
Moreover, Professor Xiaomeng Zhang and colleagues, form the American University, examined the relationship between stock options and earnings manipulations; plain illegal behavior. They investigated 365 earnings manipulation cases and showed that CEOs with many �out-of-the-money� options were more likely to misrepresent their company�s financial results (and get caught doing it!).
Hence, even if as a board member or shareholder you�d want to stimulate your CEO to take more risks � and I guess that is a big IF � I am not so sure that stock options will get you the kind of risk you�re after�
PJTV: Psychology and Politics
Many people do not trust psychologists and with good reason. They exclude half of the population or more due to their leftist politics. Barbara Oakley, author of Evil Genes,
shares her insights on the American Psychological Association (APA) and their discrimination and stereotyping of any of us who do not agree with their leftist views. Is the APA a non-partisan 501(c)(3) or an organization of partisan hacks? Listen to the show and decide for yourself.
You can see the show here.
The Rorschach exposed
The New York Times has an interesting article entitled, "Complaint Over Doctor Who Posted Inkblot Test" (thanks to the reader who emailed this):
Psychologists are bound by ethics to protect test security. The doctor who put the Rorschach cards up on Wikipedia along with other information is apparently not a psychologist but I believe that he has damaged test security and made it harder for those of us who rely on the Rorschach to understand clients and others. He believes otherwise. But in the age of the Internet, it's hard to keep secrets. That's good and bad.
What do you think?
The doctor who helped Wikipedia publish the 10 inkblots of the Rorschach test is being investigated by his local doctors� organization after it received complaints that his actions were unprofessional.
In a letter Wednesday from the group, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan, the doctor, James Heilman, who works in an emergency room in Moose Jaw, was notified that two psychologists had filed complaints.
Psychologists are bound by ethics to protect test security. The doctor who put the Rorschach cards up on Wikipedia along with other information is apparently not a psychologist but I believe that he has damaged test security and made it harder for those of us who rely on the Rorschach to understand clients and others. He believes otherwise. But in the age of the Internet, it's hard to keep secrets. That's good and bad.
What do you think?
"Fascists everywhere will love this article, anyone in favour of democracy will shake their head and sigh."
So says a commenter in response to this Guardian article: "In control? Think again. Our ideas of brain and human nature are myths:"
The author of the article seems to imply that all self-autonomy is a myth--that we are social creatures who conform to group norms. Could it be that it is just the fad now to conduct research that shows people are "collectivists" to justify the government telling us what to do more?
Perhaps some people are just lemmings but take a look at studies like the Ashe experiment that showed some people could not be persuaded to conform like others to endorsing incorrect information no matter what (about 25% of them never gave an incorrect response). How do we figure out how to teach people to be more accurate in spite of so many lemmings endorsing incorrect information? Because these types of non-conformists are the people we need to keep freedom flowing.
The notion of individual autonomy underpins our society, yet new research suggests this guiding principle is an illusion.
It was browsing in a bookshop that got me started. I was confronted by a bank of bestsellers on the brain: how it works and how we think. There were the books which have attracted huge attention, such as Nudgeand Blink,
but there were others popularising the new insights of a range of academic disciplines � social sciences such as evolutionary psychology as well as neuroscience � which are radically challenging the most fundamental assumptions on which human beings operate.
The author of the article seems to imply that all self-autonomy is a myth--that we are social creatures who conform to group norms. Could it be that it is just the fad now to conduct research that shows people are "collectivists" to justify the government telling us what to do more?
Perhaps some people are just lemmings but take a look at studies like the Ashe experiment that showed some people could not be persuaded to conform like others to endorsing incorrect information no matter what (about 25% of them never gave an incorrect response). How do we figure out how to teach people to be more accurate in spite of so many lemmings endorsing incorrect information? Because these types of non-conformists are the people we need to keep freedom flowing.
When knowledge hurts
Over the last decade or so companies have been told till it was a nuisance that their knowledge is their ultimate (if not only) source of competitive advantage. They have been encouraged � by management gurus, academics, and ample management consultants alike � that they should invest in knowledge development, protect it, and makes sure it gets identified, codified, and even put on the balance sheet.
The advice was to carefully identify best practices and make sure that you have systems that help these practices to be shared throughout the organization. This way, you will make optimal use of the great good and surely a healthy return will follow � or so the preachers said.
Many companies responded, as advised, by setting up internal systems that could be used to store and access all sorts of documents, as well as systems to aid the identification of experts in the organization and ways to contact them for advice.
But have these knowledge management systems turned out to be as good as was promised to us? Well� let�s say that a few caveats have emerged.
Because what we sort of forgot in the torrent of knowledge euphoria is that this stuff can also come at a cost. The cost of actually finding it, for example, in the jungle of corporate databases, but also the cost that comes with the fact that re-using prior knowledge doesn�t necessarily make you very original. And that�s a problem, especially when you need to stand out from the crowd.
Professors Martine Haas from the Wharton School and Morten Hansen from INSEAD, for example, examined the use of internal knowledge systems by teams of consultants in one of the big four accountancy firms, trying to win sales bids. They measured to what extent these teams accessed electronic documents and how much they sought personal advice from other consultants in the firm. They figured that, surely, accessing more knowledge must be helpful, right?
But they proved themselves wrong; to their surprise they found that the more internal electronic databases were consulted by these teams the more likely they were to lose the bid! Likewise for seeking advise from colleagues. This effect was especially pronounced for very experienced teams. These guys were much better off relying on their own expertise than trying to tap into experiences by others, whether it was in the form of electronic stuff of external advice.
Haas and Hansen figured that the opportunity costs of accessing all this prior knowledge must be huge; big enough to offset any potential benefits. Searching through the plethora of documents and soliciting advice from colleagues actually withheld the teams from making substantial investments into putting together a truly original and suitable proposal.
Things were even worse in situations in which competing firms were simultaneously bidding for the same lead, and being able to differentiate yourself from these rivals became crucial. In these cases, utilizing prior knowledge seemed to lead teams to develop cookie-cutter solutions when being original and innovative was what was really needed. As a result, they lost the bid.
The only times that a team benefited a bit from accessing internal knowledge sources was when it concerned a very inexperienced team. In such instances, talking to a few internal experts improved their chances of putting together a winning proposal. However, the internal document databases were always useless at best. The more these rookies tried to tap into the mountain of electronic documents available to them, they worse their chances of coming up with the winning bid.
The advice to derive from this research? Shut down your expensive document databases; they tend to do more harm than good. They are a nuisance, impossible to navigate, and you can�t really store anything meaningful in them anyway, since real knowledge is quite impossible to put onto a piece of paper. Yet, do maintain your systems that help people identify and contact experts in your firm, because that sometimes can be helpful. But make sure to only give your rookies the password.
The advice was to carefully identify best practices and make sure that you have systems that help these practices to be shared throughout the organization. This way, you will make optimal use of the great good and surely a healthy return will follow � or so the preachers said.
Many companies responded, as advised, by setting up internal systems that could be used to store and access all sorts of documents, as well as systems to aid the identification of experts in the organization and ways to contact them for advice.
But have these knowledge management systems turned out to be as good as was promised to us? Well� let�s say that a few caveats have emerged.
Because what we sort of forgot in the torrent of knowledge euphoria is that this stuff can also come at a cost. The cost of actually finding it, for example, in the jungle of corporate databases, but also the cost that comes with the fact that re-using prior knowledge doesn�t necessarily make you very original. And that�s a problem, especially when you need to stand out from the crowd.
Professors Martine Haas from the Wharton School and Morten Hansen from INSEAD, for example, examined the use of internal knowledge systems by teams of consultants in one of the big four accountancy firms, trying to win sales bids. They measured to what extent these teams accessed electronic documents and how much they sought personal advice from other consultants in the firm. They figured that, surely, accessing more knowledge must be helpful, right?
But they proved themselves wrong; to their surprise they found that the more internal electronic databases were consulted by these teams the more likely they were to lose the bid! Likewise for seeking advise from colleagues. This effect was especially pronounced for very experienced teams. These guys were much better off relying on their own expertise than trying to tap into experiences by others, whether it was in the form of electronic stuff of external advice.
Haas and Hansen figured that the opportunity costs of accessing all this prior knowledge must be huge; big enough to offset any potential benefits. Searching through the plethora of documents and soliciting advice from colleagues actually withheld the teams from making substantial investments into putting together a truly original and suitable proposal.
Things were even worse in situations in which competing firms were simultaneously bidding for the same lead, and being able to differentiate yourself from these rivals became crucial. In these cases, utilizing prior knowledge seemed to lead teams to develop cookie-cutter solutions when being original and innovative was what was really needed. As a result, they lost the bid.
The only times that a team benefited a bit from accessing internal knowledge sources was when it concerned a very inexperienced team. In such instances, talking to a few internal experts improved their chances of putting together a winning proposal. However, the internal document databases were always useless at best. The more these rookies tried to tap into the mountain of electronic documents available to them, they worse their chances of coming up with the winning bid.
The advice to derive from this research? Shut down your expensive document databases; they tend to do more harm than good. They are a nuisance, impossible to navigate, and you can�t really store anything meaningful in them anyway, since real knowledge is quite impossible to put onto a piece of paper. Yet, do maintain your systems that help people identify and contact experts in your firm, because that sometimes can be helpful. But make sure to only give your rookies the password.
Are gamers really "old," fat and sad?
I just read an article from Reuters entitled, "Average gamer is 35, often overweight and sad: study." The tease for the article was at another article I was reading and read, "Are gamers old, fat and sad"? From the article:
First of all, 35 is not that old. And second, what's wrong with being an introvert? Some of us are introverts, some extroverts, and frankly, I don't think one is better than the other. Finally, maybe playing video games is better therapy than sitting around ruminating about one's problems or doing something destructive. Maybe games are one way that introverts can exert some control over their environment. Maybe digital "self-medication" is not such a bad thing. Who is to say playing videos is harmful? Especially after this study showing that games are not related to violence.
Frankly, given the way that our society treats those who are considered "old, "fat" or not as extroverted as others would like, maybe video games are not such a bad idea.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Video games might be regarded as an obsession for youngsters but in fact the average player is aged 35, often overweight, introverted and may be depressed, according to a U.S. study.
Researchers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention looked at the behavior of 552 adults aged between 19 to 90 from the Seattle-Tacoma area.
They found 249 of these, or around 45 percent, were video-game players, with men accounting for 56 percent of these.
The researchers found that the men who played video games weighed more and used the Internet more than other men.
Women who played video games reported greater levels of depression and poorer overall health than non-gamers with researcher James Weaver and his colleagues suggesting video gaming for adults may be a form of "digital self-medication."
They said women in particular may immerse themselves in brain-engaging digital environments as a means of self-distraction.
First of all, 35 is not that old. And second, what's wrong with being an introvert? Some of us are introverts, some extroverts, and frankly, I don't think one is better than the other. Finally, maybe playing video games is better therapy than sitting around ruminating about one's problems or doing something destructive. Maybe games are one way that introverts can exert some control over their environment. Maybe digital "self-medication" is not such a bad thing. Who is to say playing videos is harmful? Especially after this study showing that games are not related to violence.
Frankly, given the way that our society treats those who are considered "old, "fat" or not as extroverted as others would like, maybe video games are not such a bad idea.
"People see a naked woman and they smile," he said. "They see a penis and they freak out."
This is a quote from a photographer who is snapping pictures of nude models around NYC (caution, nude model at the link):
Apparently, it's harder to photograph naked men in public to be included in this "free show":
I am going to play a little naive here and ask you, dear readers, why you think this is so?
A strip club isn't the only place in town you can see a pole dance -- amazed passengers on an L train watched in awe as a naked young woman competed with straphangers for space on a pole.
The performance by actress Jocelyn Saldana, 19, lasted just 30 seconds, and some of the passengers probably thought they were hallucinating or dreaming.
Most were blas�. But one woman started screaming and an elderly man next to her got the shakes.
That free show in mid-June -- as well as similar ones from Times Square to Chinatown -- were the creation of photographer Zach Hyman, 22, whose portraits are never under-exposed.
Apparently, it's harder to photograph naked men in public to be included in this "free show":
Alex Reisner, a 20-year-old Columbia student, had a very appreciative audience when she disrobed in Chinatown.
When Hyman snapped her jumping in the air in the middle of the street, the crowd burst into applause.
"There was so much adrenaline," she said. "I was bouncing around for the rest of the day. I told him I want to pose nude every weekend."
Hyman noted that "photographing females in public is easier than males.
"People see a naked woman and they smile," he said. "They see a penis and they freak out."
I am going to play a little naive here and ask you, dear readers, why you think this is so?
Michelle Malkin has an update on the Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom trial in Knoxville. More here at the Knoxville News Sentinel site.
Ivy league college bubble bust
John Wasik, author of a new book, The Audacity of Help: Obama's Economic Plan and the Remaking of America
has a good article at Bloomberg news up today on the Ivy League college bubble:
The author has some good advice for those who will be going to college during this bubble:
has a good article at Bloomberg news up today on the Ivy League college bubble: A high-priced college may not be worth the price of admission.
As the economy forces more students out of the classroom and graduates into under- or unemployment, a college enrollment bubble may be starting to deflate.
The recession, combined with rising college costs, has accelerated a college affordability crunch that is exacerbated by shrinking family incomes, diminished home equity and reduced household wealth.
As many as one-third of all private colleges surveyed by the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities said they expected enrollment to drop in the next academic year.
The author has some good advice for those who will be going to college during this bubble:
If you are planning ahead, an even more important number to watch is the rate of tuition increase, which has averaged 7.3 percent annually for state universities over the past half- decade. Your college-savings portfolio rate of return will need to match or beat that number if you are going to keep up with the cost of college -- no easy feat over the last few years.
You would be particularly challenged to match the tuition increases in Hawaii and Kentucky, which have averaged more than 12 percent over that period.
An even simpler approach is to shop for a lower-priced college, search for grants and limit your debt as much as possible. That way, even if the job market is sour upon graduation, it will be less of a financial burden while you wait until all of the other financial bubbles have fully deflated.
Washington Examiner: For the Left, war without Bush is not war at all:
I just saw on Drudge that 710 military deaths have occurred in the Afghanistan region thus far, yet the news on this topic currently is rare. It only matters if a Republican is in the White House, it seems.
Not too long ago, some observers worried that Barack Obama would come under increasing pressure from the Left to leave both Iraq and Afghanistan. Now, it seems those worries were unfounded. For many liberal activists, opposing the war was really about opposing George W. Bush. When Bush disappeared, so did their anti-war passion.
I just saw on Drudge that 710 military deaths have occurred in the Afghanistan region thus far, yet the news on this topic currently is rare. It only matters if a Republican is in the White House, it seems.
Why shouldn't white men be angry?
Neo-neocon: "They're white. They're men. They're angry at Obama. Why, they must be angry white men."
And the rest of us who are not men who are against Obama's policies, we're white men too!
And the rest of us who are not men who are against Obama's policies, we're white men too!
Any ideas for a non-allergic pet?
I was shopping at Amazon.com today and noticed that pet supplies were greatly marked down.
The pet supplies on sale ranged from dog beds to multivitamins for reptiles.
I sadly looked at these items and realized that I have no pets as I am allergic to most four-legged animals and even some two-legged animals. We had two wonderful cats but had to find new homes for them after myself and my daughter became violently ill for months on end due to allergies.
I remember growing up with collies and beagles and how much fun it was to have a pet to run around with. Unfortunately, in my household, we are totally pet free. All the other animals I can think of to get seem like no fun or too much trouble. A lizard seems really dull and the last fish we had died. I know this just sounds like a sob story (okay, if this is the worst of my problems, not much going on in my life) but does anyone have any suggestions for allergy-free pets that might be more suitable? Or, if you are pet-free due to allergies, how do you or your kids cope?
The pet supplies on sale ranged from dog beds to multivitamins for reptiles.I sadly looked at these items and realized that I have no pets as I am allergic to most four-legged animals and even some two-legged animals. We had two wonderful cats but had to find new homes for them after myself and my daughter became violently ill for months on end due to allergies.
I remember growing up with collies and beagles and how much fun it was to have a pet to run around with. Unfortunately, in my household, we are totally pet free. All the other animals I can think of to get seem like no fun or too much trouble. A lizard seems really dull and the last fish we had died. I know this just sounds like a sob story (okay, if this is the worst of my problems, not much going on in my life) but does anyone have any suggestions for allergy-free pets that might be more suitable? Or, if you are pet-free due to allergies, how do you or your kids cope?
Ask Dr. Helen on PJTV: Threesome Marriages
Do you think it's hard having one spouse to contend with? Now, imagine having two or more. Sasha, Janet and husband Shivaya were featured recently on their threesome marriage by The Daily Beast. Sasha, a psychologist, and Janet Lessin share more about their story with me in this PJTV interview-- what is polyamory?, why is it popular among baby boomers and how do people react to their non-traditional marriage. I would love to hear your views in the comment section.
But first, you can watch the interview here or click on the picture above.
Update: You can also read more about Polyamory at the Lessin's website at World Polyamory Association.
Childless man released from child support debt
ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- A Georgia man who spent a year in jail for nonpayment of child support -- despite the fact he has no children -- has been cleared of the debt, his attorney said Tuesday.
Frank Hatley, 50, spent 13 months in jail for being a deadbeat dad before his release last month. A judge ordered him jailed in June 2008 for failing to support his "son" -- a child who DNA tests proved was not fathered by Hatley.
Critical thinking suspended
Barbara Oakley, author of Evil Genes, had the misfortune to attend a Democratic--uhh, I mean APA convention. After the experience, she wrote this column at Psychology Today with the fitting title, "Kiss my APA!"
had the misfortune to attend a Democratic--uhh, I mean APA convention. After the experience, she wrote this column at Psychology Today with the fitting title, "Kiss my APA!"
"Forensic science was not developed by scientists"
I read a recent article from Popular Mechanics entitled, "CSI Myths: The Shaky Science Behind Forensics" that is finally up on line (found through Instapundit):
Glenn and I interviewed Bill Bass a while back, who is the author of many books, including the popular Death's Acre.
He spoke to us about the "CSI effect," which often leads juries and other people to expect cases to be solved immediately using the latest forensic science but the truth is, as Popular Mechanics points out, this science can be shaky. TV shows that make solving crimes seem easy are often just plain wrong.
Forensic science was not developed by scientists. It was mostly created by cops, who were guided by little more than common sense. And as hundreds of criminal cases begin to unravel, many established forensic practices are coming under fire. PM takes an in-depth look at the shaky science that has put innocent people behind bars.
Glenn and I interviewed Bill Bass a while back, who is the author of many books, including the popular Death's Acre.
He spoke to us about the "CSI effect," which often leads juries and other people to expect cases to be solved immediately using the latest forensic science but the truth is, as Popular Mechanics points out, this science can be shaky. TV shows that make solving crimes seem easy are often just plain wrong.
Turning girls into geeky boys
Great, now that boys are no longer bothering to go to college, the admissions office at select schools is trying to turn girls into geeky boys. I hope this is just a fad. Kenneth Anderson at the Volokh Conspiracy interviewed someone close to the admissions process at a reasonably select school and here is what they said:
How many girls really fit into this category? And what kinds of boys are "cool" to the admissions office? Since when did being "cool" become a main qualification for getting into college? Is college just the new junior high? If so, yuck, and I hope people bypass it.
Selective schools are not interested these days in girls who like English and history, like to read and are able to write clearly and well. Those skills fill the bell curve for smart girls ... Selective schools have absorbed the folk myths of bobo culture. So cool girls are math smart, genetically destined to be hackers, risk takers, and into competitive sports. Cool girls for selective schools prefer engineering over history, math over English, computer science over political science, and economics over psychology. A touch of Asperger's isn't a bad thing for a girl, either. Actually, it's a great thing. It will be a long time before being able to write well, disconnected from technical skills in math or science, will be a valued skill for its own sake in admissions.
How many girls really fit into this category? And what kinds of boys are "cool" to the admissions office? Since when did being "cool" become a main qualification for getting into college? Is college just the new junior high? If so, yuck, and I hope people bypass it.
New rules for radicals
David Harsanyi has a good article up at the Denver Post entitled, "Presenting New Rules for Radicals:"
Yes, I've seen them. And not just at tea parties but everywhere I look. These new radicals tend to carry a copy of Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto
under their arm rather than Rules for Radicals.
I now see these people in a number of public places and all over the internet and I must say, it warms my heart and makes me remember what this country is about.
In today's world, the "radicals" are the ones who protest the takeover of a huge swath of the economy by government bureaucrats who have proven they can't even run a program that gives free money away to car buyers properly. It is radicals who want to preserve the pillars of a system that over 80 percent of Americans still believe works � though certainly not perfectly.
In this new world, radicals are the ones who protest adding trillions to our debt and who have the temerity to ask if legislators have read the bills they sign. You've seen them. Those radicals who are ranting and raving about silly things like the Constitution.
Yes, I've seen them. And not just at tea parties but everywhere I look. These new radicals tend to carry a copy of Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto
under their arm rather than Rules for Radicals. I now see these people in a number of public places and all over the internet and I must say, it warms my heart and makes me remember what this country is about.
Many of you have been emailing this story about four women who physically abused a man who cheated on them:
She should be more than embarrassed, she and her partners in crime should be humiliated and put in jail for assault. When you see commercials about men who cheat, they are being punched, had their cars destroyed and other abuses that are just taken in a matter-of-fact manner as if it's no big deal because a woman is dispersing "justice." Female on male assault and destruction of men's property is a big deal. I hope these women get the book thrown at them but with a 200 dollar bail set, probably nothing will happen. What do you think?
That's one tube of glue this guy never thought he'd see.
A married man who planned to rendezvous with one of his handful of lovers at an eastern Wisconsin motel instead got his penis glued to his stomach, according to court documents.
Four women, including his wife, showed up to bind and blindfold the man, plus place the adhesive on his package, all in a bizarre plot to punish him for a lover's quadrangle gone bad, says the Calumet County docs.
Now it's the women who face punishment, perhaps six years in prison, and at least one said Monday the story has gotten twisted and she's embarrassed.
She should be more than embarrassed, she and her partners in crime should be humiliated and put in jail for assault. When you see commercials about men who cheat, they are being punched, had their cars destroyed and other abuses that are just taken in a matter-of-fact manner as if it's no big deal because a woman is dispersing "justice." Female on male assault and destruction of men's property is a big deal. I hope these women get the book thrown at them but with a 200 dollar bail set, probably nothing will happen. What do you think?
Angry voter syndrome
CNBC:
One can only hope...I remember talking to a guy who was working as a freelancer with a cable company who said he was voting for Obama because he would "make a lot of money like he did under Clinton." I wonder what he thinks now or if he even has a job.
In many ways, Obama embodies the American Dream. He speaks of how his mother and grandmother sacrificed to provide him with opportunities they never had.
With unemployment far higher than most economists expected when he took office, Obama will need to convince Americans that the dream is still attainable.
Two groups hit hard by unemployment � unionized labor and college students � were also among Obama's strongest supporters in his presidential campaign.
Jason Harper, 22, can't find a job in his chosen field, advertising, despite a Princeton degree and more experience than most people his age. "I thought that it would be a bit easier than it is to find a job," he said. He's now looking for advertising jobs in Germany.
While younger people still support Obama, the longer they go without jobs commensurate with their expensive educations, the less happy they will be.
A big test for Obama comes next year, when most members of Congress face mid-term elections. High unemployment breeds angry voters, and a normal response is to toss out the incumbent.
One can only hope...I remember talking to a guy who was working as a freelancer with a cable company who said he was voting for Obama because he would "make a lot of money like he did under Clinton." I wonder what he thinks now or if he even has a job.
Is beachgoing becoming obsolete?
I'm at a conference at the beach in Florida. I just read at Ann Althouse's blog that people aren't going to the beach as much this year. But this place seems fairly busy so I'm not seeing much evidence of that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)