More Economics from a Dummy

The following has existed as an unpublished draft for more than a year with the second half added a few months ago.  Most of it is probably not relevant anymore.  Enjoy!

As I explained previously, I know just about nothing about economics and my interest in it is nearly non-existent as well, to the extent that I would rather learn about the cell biology of how grass grows or the quantum physics of how paint dries than about economics. However, I have been thinking a little bit about some of the things I put forth in my economic theory, and I think I need to add to it. Like most sequels, this is not as good as the first one.

Fun with Flat Taxes

One of the disjointed parts of my theory involved a flat tax for all. Recently, flat taxes have been the topic of ridicule via the ridicule of Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan. I learned about that plant from a chart someone posted on Facebook, and some googling I did later (though I apparently didn't save the links I learned from). It seems that Herman Cain would charge a 9% income tax for people and corporations, and a 9% national sales tax to either replace or add to state taxes. I’m not clear on the latter because I’m not clear on the difference between the apples and oranges he keeps talking about in the clips of debates I’ve seen on The Daily Show and/or Colbert Report (like this one). Herman Cain would also remove all tax deductions. Based on other clips of things I’ve seen on The Daily Colbert (here's one), it seems that Rick Perry also has a flat tax plan where he would charge 20% taxes for all while keeping tax deductions in place.  (Herman Cain and Rick Perry were Republican candidates who lost the primaries for the 2012 presidential election.  These now-obscure references are partially what render this blog posting no longer relevant.)

Obviously, Herman Cain and Rick Perry got these ideas from my blog, because there is simply no other possible explanation of how one could think of a flat tax or simplifying the overly complicated tax code. I spoke of a flat tax, as part of my three-disjointed-pronged economic plan that could easily make me president, and they took that idea and added some stuff that I do not approve of and never intended for. Please note: I am not crazy (at least in this respect), nor am I serious about having any part in Herman Cain’s or Rick Perry’s plan making.

Lots of people (well, at least one person) feel that Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan is a terrible idea, and I agree for the reasons those people state. Someone at the Huffington Post explained that it would end up taxing lower income people a bit more than they are currently taxed, and it would drastically reduce taxes for corporations and the very wealthy by a lot. I haven’t googled Rick Perry’s plan, but it seems like it might be an improvement on Cain’s plan.  Clearly, that’s quite an endorsement, since it is coming from my uneconomical brain via my blog-typing fingers, I mean digits (because digits are economically related!).

While Herman Cain’s flat tax plan is clearly not fair and good, I still believe that my flat tax plan could be fair and good. My plan is extremely vague, which leaves it open to suggestions from people who know about the economics. If you don’t feel like going back and reading about my plan, I will re-state it and de-Cain it here: We should pick some percentage, and charge that percentage of tax to all people. I don’t know what that percentage would be, but I would want it to be a fair one for all. Furthermore, this would only apply to taxable people, and says nothing about how to tax corporations. Despite what the Supreme Court says, I cannot include corporations in the semantics of “People”; my brain simply won’t allow it. Thus, how to tax corporations is another thing that is left vague in my tax plan for people smarter and more knowledgeable than I to handle when I become president. I’m kidding of course -- I still won’t run for president. Anyhoo, my tax plan would not have anything to do with sales tax, since I would never have thought of changing the way sales tax is, and after reading the Huff-Po article, it’s clear that it would be wrong to give the power of sales tax to the Federal Government. Regarding Herman Cain’s removal of all tax deductions, I think I would leave that vague also, because I think some deductions are good, so long as they don’t allow people to screw over the government via loopholes and abuses and such. Yes, I think that is sufficiently vague to ensure success.

Speculators are Evil! Eeeeeeviiiiiil!

One of the other disjointed portions of my theory states that commodities trading is wrong and should be eradicated. Later, it occurred to me that there is a precedent for my proposed illegalization of commodities trading: insider trading! Like insider trading, commodities trading hurts the whole economy while benefiting a few traders. I assume that is why insider trading is illegal, and so, commodities trading should be too.

Political Predictions

This does not in any way bring me to another disjointed, unrelated point.  This point is so unrelated, in fact, that it has very little to do with economics.  Jon Stewart delineated the bizarre doomsday-like predictions Republican presidential candidates make and have made in the past regarding the horrors that would befall this great land if Obama was/is (re)-elected.  He highlighted the bizarreness of these predictions by emphasizing that the previous predictions have not come to fruition.  This brought to my mind the predictions I made about what could happen if George W. Bush were elected president.  The difference, however, is that my predictions came true, except that W. was not actually elected (the first time anyway).

At the time of my correct predictions, this blog did not exist.  Instead, I had a verbal blog, i.e. I occasionally told people what my thoughts were.  Thus, I verbally pre-blogged (or “told”) at least one family member or friend (but probably more than one) that if George W. Bush became president, we would undoubtedly go to war, and the economy would suffer.  Obviously both things happened.

The economy thing could have happened anyway.  From what I barely understand, it seems that it is possible that the economy simply goes through cycles, and whoever is president at the time either gets credit for a strong economy, or is blamed for a bad economy.  However, I’m pretty sure President W. Bush caused all these economic problems we have now that I am trying to fix via this blog.  I know this because I heard during Mr. W. Bush’s campaign that he ran every business he had ever owned into the ground, so I naturally deduced that he would therefore run this country into the ground, since its economy is but a giant business (or so I assume).

I knew that Present W. Bush would bring us to war because he stated during his campaign that if anyone, in any way, attacked us or harmed us or whatever, we would go to war.  He said this in such a way that sounded to me as if he were looking to go to war, and would react to any trigger with war.  Clearly, that made me nervous.

So, to conclude, I was right, but I wasn’t making crazy predictions based on nothing; I was making accurate predictions based on things I heard during a presidential campaign.  Furthermore, I am a predicting genius!  But I sill won’t run for president!

Economics from a Dummy

**DISCLAIMER: If any of the following appears strange or offensive in any way, please assume that it is intended as exaggeration or hyperbole.**

Although I know almost nothing about economics, I shall present my economic theory here. Thusly, it shall, quite literally, be an idiot’s guide to economics, in that I am the idiot.

My Lack of Credentials

I was forced to take an economics course in high school – a whole semester of a course! I was told at some point in my life that I should love economics, for it is a social science infused with math, and these are two things I have been known to enjoy, excluding of course, my K-12 (minus 8th and 11th grades) difficulties with actual social studies courses. However, not only do I not love economics, I rather detest it. I find it painfully boring, and I find myself unable to grasp most economic concepts. It’s very possible that the former is causing the latter; in fact, I would argue that it most certainly is, as evidenced by my love of hardcore neuroscience and hardcore physics despite my inability to grasp things in those fields of knowledge. This is evidence because my lack of understanding with interest feels entirely different from my lack of understanding without interest. Furthermore, even when I do understand something in economics, I am still intensely bored by it, and I think it might be impossible for me to have any real interest in it.

Anyway, the point is, I don’t understand much of anything that involves economics, and I think I got a B or less in that economics class I was forced to take. Thus, I am by no means, an expert or qualified in any way to postulate any kind of economic theory or even thought.

My Theory (or Quasi-Theory, or really Non-Theory)

My Non-Theory has three nearly unrelated parts.

Part One: It’s All a Gamble

Something suddenly occurred to me today that I am quite sure no other human on Earth has ever realized before. In fact, I am so sure of this, that I am not even going to Google to confirm my statement.

It occurred to me that the whole stock market is nothing but institutionalized, society-encouraged, legal gambling. One is expected to invest money in something with the hope that that money will grow, but it’s very possible that the money will shrink significantly. One is expected to continue gambling that money, and decide at what point the stock should be sold, which is also a gamble. One is then expected to continue this never-ending loop of buying and selling stocks, and thus, the gambling never ends.

One of the few things I remember from that economics course that was forced upon me in high school was the claims of the importance of investing, particularly in the stock market. I believe it was a guest speaker that explained that it is best to start early, and that our parents would likely help us. Clearly, these stock-pushers wanted to get the kids started young on their new legal gambling addictions, and clearly they wanted to get as many of us involved in it as possible, while we were young and impressionable, by having an authority figure that we were to inherently trust to tell us of all the wonderful things that might happen if we invest early. This very clearly indicates the degree to which our society encourages stock market gambling.

Since I couldn’t help myself, I did Google, but I will just pretend that this wasn’t the first Google result of many that indicates that the stock market being a form of gambling is a commonly held belief.

Part Two: Commodity Stocks will be our Downfall

Some time ago (I don’t know how long ago, hence the use of  “some time ago”), I saw a video on the interwebs that explained commodity stock trading. I don’t know what that video was, and I am far too lazy to find it for you. As you should expect if you read the beginning of this blog posting, I failed to understand the bulk of what the video explained. However, I did understand one thing (that might or might not have been explicated in the video): The commodity stock trade will be our downfall.

The man in the video and people that I have seen on the TV after I saw the video explained that commodities are things like oil, sugar, coffee, and most importantly, cocoa. From what I gather, it seems that Wall Street people make presumably psychic speculations about the future of these commodities and then pretend to trade them via the stock market. Their pretend trading causes real things to happen to the prices of these commodities in our real economy, and I am therefore quite sure, will inevitably cause real problems and our real downfall as a society that once had a real economy.

The gambling of the commodity portion of the stock market is far worse than the normal stock market gambling. It’s a game involving imaginary trades that result in real changes that affect real people and real chocolate. I therefore suggest, with my complete and utter lack of credentials and nearly complete lack of economic understanding, that we abolish the commodity stock trade, and that alone will fix our economy. I’m sure of it – as sure as I am of the originality and pure novelty of Part One of my Fabulous Non-Theory of Economics.

Ultimately, I felt bad that I didn’t look for the video that first taught me about commodities, so I tried to find it, but I could not. While unsuccessfully searching for it, I saw several snippets that seem to agree with me in that commodity speculation is damaging, and I won't pretend those don't exist. Here are some French people talking about the need for regulation of it. This suggests that I might have understood this better than I thought I did. I go girl!

Part Three: Simple Taxes for Simple and Also Not Simple Folk

A few months or a few years ago, I had a brilliant thought. Instead of arguing about different groups of people being taxed different amounts, and instead of having horribly confusing tax laws and forms, why not have a simplified theory on taxation. Since I’m playing fast and loose with my misuse of the word “theory,” I figured I should continue with that trend. Anyway, my simplified taxation non-theory is as follows:

Pick a percentage, and require all the people to pay that particular percentage of their net (or would it be gross? I'm not entirely sure what these things mean) income to the government as their sole taxes. That way, the wealthier people will end up paying higher taxes, the poorer people will pay lower taxes, and no one will complain because it will be 100% fair. Perhaps a few tweaks here and there would be necessary, but I think this could work really well.

For someone who knows nearly nothing about economics, I sure am smart, with my brilliant ideas! But I won’t run for president, and you can’t make me.

Eat Less without Being Hungry

Yes, it’s true, assuming my experiences reflect what other people might experience, you really can eat less – a lot less – without being hungry. Well, that’s not entirely true; you might be hungry the first day, or the first few days, but after that, you won’t be left hungry, and when you are hungry, you will eat, and that will be ok, because you will be eating a lot less.


Eat breakfast, and make sure that breakfast doesn’t contain too much sugar, but does contain protein and fiber. Protein and fiber are filling, so they will reduce the likelihood of your getting hungry before your next feeding. Sugar makes you hungrier after you eat the sugar, as I’ve learned from the TV and other places. From what I’ve heard and/or read, it seems eating sugar raises your blood sugar too abruptly, which means your blood sugar will also drop abruptly. When the dropping happens, you will probably get hungry again, as well as tired and crashy. I was eating a yummy Thomas' whole wheat English muffin with Smucker's strawberry preserves every morning (along with my coffee and sugar), and I would eat an awful lot during the day. At some point, I discovered that the preserves contain high fructose corn syrup; feeling betrayed, I angrily shunned those tasty preserves and all its jelly brethren (I now will eat such things again, but only if I crave it, but not in the morning). I don't believe the English muffins contain any of the evil high fructose corn syrup. I now eat a slice of delicious Costco 8 grain toast with a little bit of Smart Balance Buttery Spread, crushed walnuts and toasted sesame seeds on it. It is absolutely delicious. I also drink my morning coffee with honey and cinnamon, because I read and heard that both honey and cinnamon don’t make your blood sugar spike the way sugar and syrups do. This is also delicious. After making these changes, I found myself eating a lot less during the day, without being hungry when I wasn't eating.

Quit or cut down on soda and other things containing massive amounts of sugar and/or high fructose corn syrup. I gradually and almost accidentally cut down on soda until I eventually quit, almost unintentionally. I now have soda very occasionally if I have a craving for it, which happens very rarely if at all. As I mentioned above, I’ve heard and read in various places (for example, I think I heard this from Dr. Oz) that consuming sugar without fiber or protein attached to it will make you more hungry later on, so that’s another reason, aside from just cutting down on massive amounts of sugar in general, for why cutting down on soda could help you lose weight. I’ve never been a fan of diet soda; I think I’m allergic to the fake sugar or probably more accurately, sensitive to the aspartame, so I can’t speak from experience regarding those. However, I have heard (I don’t remember where) that the fake sugar has a similar effect on people as real sugar in that it makes you hungrier later. I don’t know if that’s accurate, but it’s something to keep in mind.

Eat fiber. As Dr Oz says, colonics aren’t necessary to clean out your insides, when you can do the same thing with fiber -- I mean eating fiber, with your mouth. But be careful to introduce fiber gradually to your diet, because (as I think one of my doctors told me) sudden large amounts of fiber can actually swell in your tummy and make you constipated, and that wouldn’t be good at all.

Drink water. Sometimes, I think I’m hungry, but it turns out that I’m actually thirsty. Drinking water, or sometimes a little bit of fruit juice or tea or coffee makes the alleged hunger go away. I’ve also heard this somewhere, but I have no idea where. Furthermore, I’ve also heard somewhere (maybe on the John Tesh Radio Show?) that drinking water before you eat a meal can reduce the amount of food you end up eating during that meal. I think that intuitively makes sense, however, I haven’t intentionally or consciously tried it.

I have some other tips about eating less, such as eating consciously, at this blog posting, the very blog posting that inspired this one.

Good luck in your reduced eating endeavors, and don't forget to look at the disclaimer on the right.

Lose Weight While Eating Anything You Want

In the theme of writing blog postings that might appeal to larger populations (pun intended as always, and also no offense intended), I’ve decided to provide some tips on losing weight. Unlike my blog posting about how to make money, this one has actual tips that might actually help people lose weight. Seriously.


First, my credentials. I was fat for many years until my early 20s, occasionally yo-yoing, but for the most part, remaining chubby at best. Then, beginning in my early 20s, I lost 40 pounds over several years, consistently either keeping the weight off or losing more weight until my mid-to-late 20s. Then I started to gain some back, and now I can’t seem lose it. I think that’s partially due to my old age (I’m approaching 30 at an alarming rate), and also I probably don’t exercise as much as I used to. I probably should exercise even more than I used to because of the old age I just told you about. Anyhoo, my tips might only apply to people in their early-to-mid 20s, and people who exercise sufficiently.

How It Began

I’ll begin my tips with how I lost the initial 15 pounds that got me started on losing weight. I got very sick, with some kind of cold-like thing that lasted for a month one summer. I think it resulted from switching from an oral steroid for some crazy asthma issues I had to an inhaled steroid, which apparently left my body less able to fight infections (I learned that from a Flovent commercial several months after I recovered).

During my month-long cold, I had no appetite, so I only ate to survive. So I lost 15 pounds by eating very little.

As I recovered and my appetite began to return, I decided to take the opportunity my sickness had given me to change my eating habits.

I think a big problem people (well, I) had with losing weight is changing life-long bad habits. My month-long sickness forced me to temporarily change those habits, so as I recovered, rather than lapsing back into my old habits, it was just as easy to create new, better habits.

I’m not suggesting that people become sick to lose weight; I am suggesting that you take or make opportunities you might come across to help you change your bad habits if you have any. Or just use your will power to change your habits the old-fashioned way.

Getting back to my weight loss success story…

I had previously been quite the piggish one; I would eat lots of junk food and other fatty foods frequently. I also drank a lot of soda, and generally didn’t have a healthy diet.

I consciously decided that I would only eat when I was hungry, and I would stop eating when I was full. I learned while doing this that I had to be sure to eat enough food during the day, because I found that I wasn’t always hungry when I should have been, and I didn’t want to become anorexic.

Don't become anorexic. Seriously, be careful, because as strange as that might sound, I really think insufficient eating can occur if you're not careful. Perhaps it might help if you decide how many meals is right for you, and make sure you eat those meals each day. I used to forget to eat all day because I wouldn't be hungry, and I would wonder why I became grumpy and headachy; both symptoms would miraculously disappear when I would finally eat. Just make sure you eat enough to be healthy.

No Deprivation -- Eat Anything You Want

I could eat anything I wanted to, as long as I only ate while hungry. No food was off limits; it was only excessive eating and eating that resulted from boredom or attempts to fill some other void that were to be avoided. This method of weight loss was perfect for me, since I’m incapable of sticking to an actual diet, because I can’t handle being deprived of anything; the second that I can’t have it, I want it desperately. This was a change of habit, a lifestyle change; but there was no deprivation of anything at all.

Exercise

I also started exercising more. I began walking for the sake of exercising. To fulfill my PE requirement in college, I took the easiest PE course available, Walking for Fitness, where I was required to walk two miles two mornings per week. After I completed the two-semester requirement, I took the course again, and I think I ended up taking that course every semester until I graduated. It was the easiest course I ever took, and it had an enormous impact on my life, by getting me to exercise in what for most people is the easiest way possible: walking.

Anyway, after I started walking for the sake of exercising, I lost the next 15 pounds within a year, or maybe a few months (I really don’t remember how long it took). And it only required that I be consciously aware of whether I was hungry and Walking for Fitness.

Maintaining My New, Healthier Lifestyle

After that, I maintained the lifestyle of eating when I was hungry, not eating when I wasn’t hungry, stop eating when full, and eating enough to not be anorexic. I also exercised a bit more, adding crunches to my walking, and also I think I was walking more than I had been previously. Over the next year or years, I lost another 10 pounds.

I would occasionally gain a bit of weight back, and when that would happen, I would evaluate what I was doing, and what kinds of habits I had formed or reformed. I would always find something I was doing wrong: eating even if I wasn’t hungry, continuing to eat when I wasn’t hungry anymore (this has been my biggest weakness), eating s’mores everyday just because I had all the ingredients, drinking too much soda just because it was there, etc. So I would simply stop whatever it was, and go back to the mantra of eat when hungry etc. It was surprisingly easy to go back to that and to stop the new or re-emerged bad habit.

Some Other Little Tips

Eat what you crave, but only real cravings. I learned this from some friends who had joined WeightWatchers™. If you don’t eat what you’re craving, you will eat everything else until you eventually end up eating what you craved anyway. So just eat what you’re craving, but not a massive amount of it. Also (and this is coming from my experience), make sure it’s a real craving. It should be something you’re craving for a long time, not just on a whim that might pass, or something you saw one the TV that looked tasty (though that can become a real craving, in my experience).

Analyze your cravings. Sometimes, I crave extremely fattening food, but if I think about it, I’m not really craving the specific food, but rather a quality of that food. For example, I might crave greasy potato chips, but what I really want is something salty, or something crunchy or crispy. Some baked chips, toasted pita, or a few thin crackers might satisfy that craving for crunch, and an extra shake of salt on healthy food, some olives, some hummus, or a pickle might satisfy the salty craving (unless you have high blood pressure or other reasons to avoid salt). Another example is cheese; in my experience, a cheese craving might really be a calcium craving, a salt craving, a protein craving, or a fat craving. This might be satisfied with a calcium supplement, some low-fat yogurt, a few nuts, or some olives. Bear in mind that nuts and olives are also fattening obviously, though the unsaturated fats are better for you than the saturated ones. Of course, I usually just eat some cheese to fill a cheese craving.

Eat chocolate. Yeah, you heard me. This goes along with eating what you crave, so if you don’t crave or like chocolate, then don’t eat it. However, if you’re like me, and love chocolate and can’t live without it, have fun-sized or other small chocolates available at all times, and have one or two little pieces whenever you crave it. I find that if I don’t have chocolate constantly available, when I finally get my hands on it, I end up eating way too much of it. However, when I have it available, that doesn’t happen; it becomes very easy to only eat the one or two pieces that I’m actually craving and then stop.

Drink lots of water, but don’t drown yourself from the inside out. People always say you should drink lots of water, which seems reasonable. If it doesn’t help you lose weight or eat less, your organs will still thank you.

Moderation is the key. Don’t over-do anything -- don’t completely cut out anything. As Rachael Ray always says, "Everything in moderation."

One bite might be enough. I learned that somewhere on the TV and subsequently realized the truth of this in my own experience. The first bite of many tasty foods is often the best bite, and often the only bite that really gives you that “OMG this is so unbelievably yummy” feeling. When this is the case, the rest of the bites try desperately to match that first bite but never do. If you’re eating something that is not healthy or that is overly fattening, don’t bother continuing to eat after the intense yumminess is gone; it won’t come back until the next time you eat it. This is particularly true of most steaks and most cakes, in my experience. Of course, sometimes things are yummy the whole way through, but you’ll know when that’s the case.

Eat consciously. I learned this from the TV as well. According to the TV, if you eat mindlessly, for example while watching the TV, you end up eating a lot more than you would if you would pay attention to what you’re eating. In other words, you wouldn’t be aware of whether you’re not hungry anymore.

Pay attention to what you’re eating, and ask yourself these questions while you eat: Am I hungry? Is this delicious? Is each bite still delicious? If it’s not delicious, is it some nutritious thing that I should keep eating anyway (for example if you hate vegetables)? Am I eating enough to be healthy and not anorexic? If you need to, write these things down every time you eat; that is, keep a journal of when and why you eat, and whether you’re hungry or not when you eat. If you’re eating for non-hunger reasons, such as boredom, depression, happiness, not wanting to waste food, etc, stop eating and try to fix whatever needs fixing. For example, if it’s depression that‘s causing your non-hungry eating, seek some therapy and/or exercise – the serotonin and endorphins might boost your mood. Remember to always seek medical advice from health care professionals, and not from blogs, for blogs, particularly this one, are not your doctor. If you weren't sure of that, my disclaimer on the right tells you that.

I hope these tips and suggestions will help you in your weight loss or healthy eating endeavors! There are more tips on eating less without being hungry at this future blog posting. Don’t forget to consult your health care provider before doing anything!

4 ways to Make Lots of Money!

I read somewhere that when using Google Adsense (I mean Topeka Adsense), the higher paying ads are the ones about money and commerce. This amused me. I guess the old adage is true: You have to [use] money to make money.


So I decided to sell out (pun intended of course) and write a blog posting about making money.

I can think of four ways to get lots of money:

1) Work really hard. This doesn’t always work, but it will probably make you a better person. Unless you become a workaholic, or alienate the people you love and who love you for the sake of working hard. If that’s the case, then it will be your downfall.

2) Be born into a family that already has lots of money. This is the easiest way of going about getting lots of money. But it might make you a worser person (hahahahahaha, get it?) Or maybe it won’t. I guess that’s up to you, if you decide to be born into money.

3) Screw people over, in a Madoffian (Madovian?) manner. You could make lots of money, but you might lose it all and end up in prison for 150 years. Additionally, you’ll be a horrible person. The world will hate you. This is probably not the best route for making lots of money.

4) Be lucky and win the lottery. If you succeed in this unlikely event, this is a great way to make money. However, as with any money-making technique, this can lead to terrible things like greed or the money consuming you, or worse, you could (SPOILER ALERT) end up on some crazy island like Hurley did in Lost after he won the lottery. But then again, maybe that island is a blessing for Hurley and the others, and maybe also the Others.

I imagine there might be other ways to make money as well. For example, you could win a big lawsuit or a big settlement in a lawsuit. However, that would technically require that you (or your lawyer) work hard in the lawsuit, so that would fall under the category of working hard for the money (so you better be treated right). It might also require some good luck, and could thus fall into the “Being Lucky” category as well.

You might think there are ways to make money that require work that is easy, or that don’t require any work at all. However, difficulty is relative, so if something is easy for you, it might be hard for someone else, and so it still fits in the category of working hard. Similarly, if something doesn’t feel like work to you, because it’s so easy or you simply enjoy it, that is also relative – you might not have to put any effort into something, but someone else might struggle with the same thing, and you might enjoy something, but someone else might not,.

Perhaps you might be thinking that another way to get money would be via theft. However, this could fit into two of the categories above: screwing people over and working hard. In fact, screwing people over could itself fit into the working hard category, so perhaps it is redundant. Anyway, with theft, you’re obviously screwing someone over, though not exactly in a Madoffian way, for the latter was probably a bit more creative than simply robbing someone and also the latter involved screwing over a large number of people. I think it’s clear, however, how the two methods fit in the same category.

Both of these screwing-people-over methods of getting money also fit into the working hard category; all the scheming, planning, and preparing for any of the ways to screw people over (Madoffian or more traditional theft) all require hard work. Arguably, it’s not hard work at all, but then we’re back to the relative nature of difficulty. Theft might be easy for some people, but it might be difficult for other people, particularly people who come equipped with consciences. In addition to conscience-ridden people, another example of someone who might feel that theft is hard work would be a shy individual. I imagine it would be rather difficult for a shy person to go up to someone and rob them – they might have to talk to their victim, and if the robber is overcome with stage fright, they might not succeed in their endeavors to screw someone over. Therefore, the robber would have to work really hard to conquer his or her shyness and fears. It’s clear then, the screwing-people-over method of getting money should fall into the category of working hard, and it is therefore a redundant category. However, since I am lazy, I will leave it as a separate category above and continue to claim that there are four ways to make money.

Perhaps being lucky is also a redundant category. After all, in order to win the lottery, you have to play the lottery, and in order to do that, effort (to buy lottery tickets) and pre-existing money are necessary. However, if one were truly lucky, then buying a lottery ticket wouldn’t be difficult, rendering the relative nature of difficulty irrelevant given luckiness. Therefore, being lucky shall remain a separate category, irrelevant of my lazy inclinations.

I should mention that these methods of getting money have some degree of uncertainty. For example, you could work really hard, but make very little money, or no money at all, or you could be a really lucky person, but you might only be lucky in more sentimental ways rather than fiscally. (Does that make sense? Should I have said “financially”? I don’t care, “fiscally” sounds more fun.) You could screw people over, but the people you screwed over might not have much money for you to steal. You could be born into money, but your family might be very stingy in life and then not bequeath any of the money to you. Therefore, my methods of getting money are not guaranteed methods. Also, they are void where prohibited. (What? That doesn’t even make sense.)

I’ve been discussing ways to get money, however my list o’ categories does not reflect keeping the money that is gotten. Keeping money is also important; if you use all the money you get, you won’t have anymore. However, keeping all of it is no fun, because what is the point of getting all that money if you don’t enjoy any of it. Swimming in your money like Uncle Scrooge would probably get boring eventually. It’s important to find a nice balance between saving money and using it for nice things and survival – well, survival is also a nice thing, but you know what I mean.

I like money. It’s a good thing to have around. However, it can also be evil – the root of all evil, in fact. Furthermore, it’s dirty – everyone touches it with their germy hands. That’s why credit and debit cards are better: they’re touched by fewer people. I’m a germaphobe.

I hope this has been helpful in your endeavors to make or get lots of money! Good luck, and when you do, share some with me!

DISCLAIMER: Don’t steal things or otherwise screw people over – it’s wrong, there are consequences that are not good, and you will suffer them in some way, even if your just deserts are served later on, or if it’s in the form of guilt, for that guilt will defeat you.

How to Resolve NBC’s Late-Night Woes

(See updates at the end of this posting.)

Apparently the rumors were true – Jay Leno’s 10 p.m. show will be cancelled, and Jay will move back to 11:35 PM in the form of a half hour show, pushing back Conan O’Brien’s Tonight Show and Jimmy Fallon’s Late Night to 12:05 a.m. and 1:05 a.m. respectively, and canceling Last Call with Carson Daly. It’s a shame that Jay should be quasi-cancelled, but I can’t say that I’m surprised. They seem to be blaming the time slot for Jay’s rating loss and Jay’s bringing down of the network (forgive my exaggeration), but maybe it’s not the time slot, maybe it’s Leno.

While I have almost always preferred David Letterman to Leno (I only say “almost” because there was a time when I had no preference), I have always found Leno to be funny and talented. However, since he moved to 10 p.m. – or maybe it started while he was still at the Tonight Show – he’s become less funny, in my opinion. His monologues, based on the few I’ve seen in recent times, contain a large proportion of predictable and unfunny jokes. He’s lost something, perhaps a slight edginess, perhaps in an attempt to cater to larger and earlier audience. Alternatively, perhaps it is my comedic tastes that have changed. After all, I have become obsessed with the refined and highly intelligent hilarity of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. But then again, I still find David Letterman and Conan hilarious, as well as Chelsea Handler and Jimmy Kimmel (whom I unfortunately don’t watch as often as I would like to). So perhaps it isn’t me, after all.

While on the subject of late night comedians who don’t seem funny to me, I don’t understand the appeal of Jimmy Fallon. Sure, he’s cute, he was funny in his SNL days, and he’s likeable. However, I just don’t find him funny on Late Night. In his defense, I’ve only seen about two episodes, but I found both painfully unfunny, with only brief moments of mild laughter, as opposed to my excessive outbursts of laughter while watching the funny shows I mentioned. Jimmy Fallon’s monologues should really be better – a monologue in that format is essentially just SNL’s Weekend Update standing up, and as I mentioned, Jimmy Fallon was funny when he hosted Weekend Update. His monologues are…just…boring.

Getting back to Leno, while I don’t like that NBC and Leno are trying to screw over Conan and Jimmy Fallon by pushing them “deeper into the night” as David Carr said in The NY Times, it would really be a shame to see Leno leave the TV. As I said, he was funny, and I think he still has it in him to be funny again. In fact, I know he still has it in him because traces of his comedic talents are evident in Headlines, and in the interview segments of his show.

It seems that Leno is continuing his tradition of screwing over former Late Night hosts who seek to host The Tonight Show. First, he sneakily stole The Tonight Show from Letterman, its rightful heir, and now he and NBC are seeking to push The Tonight Show with Conan O’Brien to 12:05 a.m., which, (according to this NY Post article) as Seth Meyers said on Weekend Update, is “no longer ‘tonight.’”

According to the NY Post article mentioned above, Conan has not yet made a decision regarding what he will do, though he is considering these comical concepts. Letterman also had a fun idea that I saw after thinking of this rather brilliant idea: Perhaps Leno could co-host Late Night with Jimmy Fallon. Perhaps two formerly funny people turned unfunny could together become funny once again. And what better place for Leno to re-gain his hilarity than on the set of Late Night, where David Letterman gave him a platform to showcase his funnies so many years ago. Clearly, the irony and the poetic justice would also be fun, in that Leno would be effectively demoted to Letterman’s old stomping grounds after Leno (from what I recall from The Late Shift by Bill Carter) sneakily and back-stabbingly pilfered The Tonight Show that was rightfully Dave’s.

In all seriousness, the best solution would probably be to leave Conan O’Brien, Jimmy Fallon, and Carson Daly alone, and to leave Jay Leno in his 10 p.m. time slot. The poor ratings could probably be fixed if Jay stopped kissing up to people, stopped catering to what he thinks the earlier audience wants, and just return to his formerly funny self. Instead of fixing the problem with Leno’s 10 p.m. show, NBC is creating more problems and drama that really is unnecessary. As NBC executive Jeff Gaspin stated (according to the same NY Post article mentioned above), a change such as a 10 p.m. comedy talk show will likely take time to obtain the degree of success the network and its affiliates hope for. I learned that from Howard Stern’s rants in years past, when he would point out the idiocy of radio and probably TV executives who have no patience and don’t seem to understand that changes take time to reach success – that success doesn’t happen over night.

UPDATE January 13, 2010: Conan has admirably decided not to accept NBC's demotion to 12:05 a.m., explaining that it would destroy both The Tonight Show and Late Night.

UPDATE January 19-20, 2010: It looks like this is Conan's final week on The Tonight Show, since all that's left are the minor details of Conan's exit from the evil claws of NBC, who will reportedly be paying Conan and his staff a nice severance of $40 million and allowing him to find work elsewhere. Jay Leno will likely get to steal back The Tonight Show (which is nice since Jay likes to steal things). Leno discussed his thoughts on the subject, of course acting as if he is a blameless saint, as he always does, going so far as to encourage people not to blame Conan, which, as David Letterman correctly and hilariously pointed out, no one has been doing. Leno acted similarly in 2004 as well, when he clearly stated that he would gracefully pass on The Tonight Show to Conan in 2009. But at the time, he neglected to mention that he would ungracefully take it back in 2010.

I feel bad contributing to the Leno hatred, even if he is deserving of it due to his continued back-stabbing and sneaky behavior. The fact is, the real problem is NBC and the idiot executives who work there (it seems Jeff Zucker would be the biggest idiot of them all, based on what everyone is saying). If they had just listened to me and 1) asked Leno to be funny again and 2) kept things the way they were, in time, the ratings might have improved, or at least they could then say they tried. If they had given The Jay Leno Show at 10 p.m. and The Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien an appropriate amount of time to settle in, then at least they could say they honored Conan O'Brien's and Jay Leno's contracts...in an honorable way.

UPDATE January 22, 2010: Conan’s severance deal with NBC has been finalized. He will receive $33 million and his staff will receive $12 million. Conan’s final Tonight Show will be tonight, and Leno will return to The Tonight Show on March 1, 2010. Conan will not be permitted to have a competing show until September 2010, and he is forbidden from speaking ill of NBC after he leaves, but Letterman kindly assured us last night that he can and will continue to make fun of NBC.

UPDATE April 15, 2010:  I watched Jimmy Fallon on Late Night a couple of times more recently than when he premiered as well as on The Marriage Ref, and I'm happy to say, he has become funny again.  Also, I like The Marriage Ref, despite people's criticisms of it; I enjoy watching funny celebrities talking and arguing with each other.  Finally, Jay Leno is still not funny.