Cornell Insider

a blog by the writers of the Cornell Review

Archive for December, 2009

Opening Video at Copenhagen Conference

Posted by Cornell Insider Staff on December 9, 2009

In case you haven’t seen it yet, here it is. The best part is around the 2:30 mark. I certainly hope the delegates at Copenhagen can act quickly enough to save the little girl hanging from the tree.

Posted in Miscellaneous | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Contest Over Thanksgiving

Posted by Oliver Renick on December 8, 2009

In the most recent issue of the Review, staff writer Brendan Devine discussed the holiday placards (seen on next page) that were set up in the Flora Rose dining hall around Thanksgiving.  On a related note, the following is the response Jennifer Majka, Assistant Dean of Flora Rose, gave when one student inquired as to the purpose of the tri-fold decorations.

I guess it could be worse (at least the placards don’t condemn the ‘death of Program Houses’), but I still wonder why our dining hall coordinators feel the responsibility to promote a ‘social justice program’.  And even better to know that apparently a single house student is in charge of deciding what is appropriate ambiance for a dining hall! Follow the jump to see the original placards that were on every dinner table.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Campus Insiders | Tagged: , | 2 Comments »

Congratulations! You’ve exemplified laziness!

Posted by Oliver Renick on December 7, 2009

…said the Ithaca Rotary Club as they handed Cornell its 2009 ‘Pride of Ownership’ award.

Cornell receives award for forgetting to mow the lawn. My father usually had a different reaction.

In case you haven’t noticed, Cornell’s legendary Libe Slope has about a 3-acre soul patch growing on the north end – right below its Johnson (Museum of Art).  Apparently, somebody decided earlier this year that a good tourniquet for our financial bleeding starts with cutting mowing costs.  Of course, this makes us all ‘reimagine‘ if the culprit of our financial demise may in fact not be shoddy cinemas, old professors, or triplet business programs, but rather, grass?  So basically, there is a bunch of wildly tall grass growing unabashedly on our school’s front lawn.

Yet the Ithaca Rotary Club (not to be confused with Ithaca Boatery Club) found it necessary to bestow upon our fine University their annual ‘Pride of Ownership’ award, a prize whose name inherently contradicts the reality of the soul patch (past winners of award utilized alternative energy methods, generally absurd architectural designs, and Weill Hall) .  I was always taught growing up that we mowed our lawn because we cared.  Because we took pride. Because we owned. But the commendation for the award says of the patch:

And congrats to the Rotary Club for finding the oldest building in Ithaca, as well as the dullest digital camera currently on the market

The result has not only been a conservation of labor and energy, but a beautifully textured counterpoint to the areas currently mown more frequently and a stunning setting for I.M. Pei’s Johnson Museum of Art. The university is to be commended for such a creative and aesthetically pleasing approach to sustainability and encouraged as they identify more areas to partially or fully ‘re-naturalize.’

I say we ‘fully re-naturalize’ the school bathrooms, as well.  Extract all the concrete, plumbing, amenities and gender specifications, and let the soil take its course as Cornellians everywhere bask in the au-naturel beauty of public, unassisted number two’s.  Of course, the absence of janitorial duties will help cut back on expenses, as well.

Or we could just hope Susan Murphy has made some progress on that Program House review

Posted in Campus Insiders | Tagged: | 4 Comments »

Monday Reading Madness #28

Posted by Cornell Insider Staff on December 7, 2009

As we begin study week, here’s an extra long MRM to assist with your procrastination.

- MetaEzra seems to be optimistic about the idea of a “College of Public Policy.”

Cornell International Affairs Review

- This has to be a joke to make the cash strapped administration feel good, right?

- Let us hope this product does not hit college campuses any time soon. (Via Paul Ibrahim)

- A great feature on the Cornell International Affairs Review.

- “Is Any Rand Bad for Libertarianism?”

- John Fund believes that Democrats are appeasing their liberal base on the issue of health care reform.

- The Economist breaks down the upcoming Copenhagen Summit. Will Climategate affect the outcome?

- Americans care as much as Russians about global warming.

- Obama’s job approval rating holds steady at around 52%.

- For those outside the world of Cornell hockey, the Big Red managed to tie the defending national champion BU at MSG last Saturday (they’re not that great this year, so we really should have won). Here’s Bilmes’ pre-game post and the recap.

- Also in hockey news, there is a new initiative to encourage American hockey prospects to go NCAA over Canadian juniors.

Posted in Campus Insiders, National News | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

New Cornell Review Vol XXVIII Issue 6 Available!

Posted by Oliver Renick on December 6, 2009

For the last issue of the Review this semester, the ‘Contest Over Thanksgiving’ continues, as well our usual bi-weekly coverage of the campus events that other news media conveniently left out.  In addition, we look at the kind of assessments one can make just from examining their professor’s door and hallway bulletin board!

Also in the Issue:

- Victory For Freedom: Editor’s Note on Chi Alpha (p. 3)

- Socialists on the subject of lynching (p. 5)

- Christmas: the Story of Our Foundations (p. 10)

Click the image above for your PDF of the Review!

Posted in Campus Insiders | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

Echo, echo, echo…

Posted by Oliver Renick on December 4, 2009

I’m not sure if this is overall a good thing, or overall a bad thing.

It seems that the writers over at the Daily Stun have taken to my article ‘Staring into the Sun‘ that I published two weeks ago. (My original article was a response to a ridiculous Sun editorial on Chi Alpha’s ‘discrimination’ case).  Since I wrote the article two weeks ago, there have been two editorials, and one letter to the editor, that echo the very same points that I bring up.

What can we conclude from this? 1) The situation is overwhelmingly simple.  2) You should read Cornell Insider more often.  3) Maybe we writers at the Cornell Review aren’t that crazy after all… Here are some examples of the similarities:

The Stun is trying to specify which of a group’s beliefs are compatible with Cornell’s political / social atmosphere

Mike Wacker’s ‘With Us Or…It’s discrimination:’

It is an entirely different argument to say that Cornell should pick and choose a posteriori which religious organizations it will fund based on how socially acceptable their doctrines are. Such discrimination amounts to the state imposing its views on the church, threatening freedom of religion.

Judah Bellin’s ‘Discussing the Multiple Dimensions of Discrimination:’

By forbidding member groups from practicing their beliefs, then, you have precluded their “freedom of expression.” Chi Alpha cannot be said to be privy to this freedom if they cannot make policy consonant with their beliefs.

John Cetta’s ‘Letter to the Editor:’

Freedom of association requires groups be free to limit their leadership to those who belief in the founding tenets of their group, however unsavory those beliefs may be.

My article:

In essence, they oppose a religious group upholding their religious beliefs.  What the writers really find objectionable and regressive, then, are the specific beliefs of the religion.  They believe student groups acting on such beliefs are contradictory to Cornell’s mission and are deserving of castigation. (follow the jump for more examples.)

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Campus Insiders | Leave a Comment »

Book Review, Er, Recommendation: SuperFreakonomics

Posted by Cornell Insider Staff on December 1, 2009

One of the unintended consequences of my decision to take 20+ credits of exclusively economics and math courses this semester was a huge deficit in class reading materials, and, simultaneously, a complete depletion of free time in which I could pursue my own reading interests. I feel that it is only appropriate, then, that I write my first book review/recommendation of this semester about a book that explores this law of unintended consequences in our everyday lives: “SUPERFREAKONOMICS.”

Just like “Freakonomics,” the book is divided up into small chapters with semi-coherent themes. Each chapter articulates some larger observation about human behavior through a presentation of different stories, anecdotes, and research results. Without giving away too much, here are some of the more novel questions and observations that the authors present:

- One chapter is titled “How Is A Street Prostitute Like A Department-Store Santa?”

- It is more dangerous to walk drunk than it is to drive drunk. (I think there’s a huge hole in the logic the authors use to reach this conclusion, but I’ll let you read and decide for yourself).

- Chemotherapy is highly ineffective from a cost-benefit point of view.

- There is a positive correlation between the introduction of television in the United States and crime rates.

- Big floaty inner tubes in the Atlantic Ocean could significantly reduce the damage done by Hurricanes each year in the U.S.

- Monkey prostitution has been recorded in lab experiments.

These are just some random excerpts that I found interesting- hopefully they’ve either whetted your intellectual appetite or at least produced a few “huh?’s.”

I also enjoyed the fact that Levitt/Dubner made an effort to justify their unifying theme at the beginning of the book, especially since this is a popular book read by many laymen and non-economists. In  ”An Explanatory Note,” they lay out the unifying theme of both of their books:

People respond to incentives, although not necessarily in ways that are predictable or manifest. Therefore, one of the most powerful laws in the universe is the law of unintended consequences. This applies to schoolteachers and Realtors and crack dealers as well as expectant mothers, sumo wrestlers, bagel salesmen, and the Ku Klux Klan.

Their choice to include Gary Becker’s explanation of the “economic approach” was also laudable. From the first chapter:

In his Nobel address, Becker suggested that the economic approach is not a subject matter, nor is it a mathematical means of explaining “the economy.” Rather, it is a decision to examine the world a bit differently. It is a systematic means of describing how people make decisions and how they change their minds; how they chose someone to love and marry, someone perhaps to hate and even kill; whether, coming upon a pile of money, they will steal from it, leave it alone, or even add to it; why they may fear one thing and yearn for something only slightly different; why they’ll punish one sort of behavior while rewarding a similar one.

These paragraphs go a long way in both establishing a unifying theme for the book and also explaining the methodology and purpose of economics to people who think that economics is just about understanding things like money, inflation, and unemployment.

So overall, it’s a great book, and I’d highly recommend it is a holiday gift. It’s a true page turner, and fast readers should be able to get through the entire thing in less than six or seven hours.

With that being said, though, I don’t think the book ultimately lives up to its title. The original “Freakonomics” was so popular because of the novelty of the method of analysis (economic analysis applied to ostensibly non-market situations). Good introduction aside, this book fails to bring anything new to the table in that regard. While highly enjoyable and entertaining, it is just an extension of the first book.

One final warning: for some reason this book is not rated “R” on the cover, though it certainly should be. The analysis of prostitution at the beginning of the book is, well, very detail-oriented. I would not recommend getting this book to anyone under seventeen or eighteen years old, unless you’re interested in getting into awkward conversations with younger siblings about why certain types of intercourse have higher prices on different days of the week.

Posted in Reviews: Books | Tagged: | 2 Comments »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.