Today, my professor was discussing the neoclassical, natural law version of the supply/demand model in comparison to the heterodox, socially influenced one. He was criticizing the naturalization of a man-made and man-regulated economy when he said that we should all be wary of anything in the news justified because it is “natural.”

The first thing that came to mind was the argument against global warming as climate change. That kind of thing is exactly the naturalization of a synthetic issue. There’s scientific evidence that the 19th Century industrial revolution had a significant effect on the environment and the ecosystems surrounding the polluted centers. Hell, even without science we can see the way humans have changed the natural world (i.e. the Exxon Valdez, dolphins in tuna nets, animals with their heads stuck in those plastic 6-pack rings, etc, etc).

It makes sense to me now that the opposition to global warming is that it’s a natural thing. The easiest way to justify doing nothing is to say, “nah, it’s cool, it’ll just fix it self like it usually does.”

And THAT reminds me of this old joke from elementary school:

This guy is in a bar and he sees this hot young lady with blond hair. He walks up to her and asks, “Is your hair dyed?” She says, “It’s natural.” and brushes her hair with her hand.
Later, he sees a hot brunette and asks her, “Is your hair natural?” She says the same as the blond.
Suddenly, he sees a hot girl with green hair. He asks, “Is your hair dyed?” She pushes her hand over her nose, covers it with boogers, wipes it in her hair and says, “It’s natural.”

No, it’s snot.

Yesterday, in my economics class, this guy started arguing that people have an intrinsic need to want. That people are born wanting to do nothing more than consume. In this way, advertising and other influences from the media do nothing to make a person want something more. They just want it.

The professor started arguing with him, asking the student how long advertising has been around. Turns out that, in the course of all humanity, advertising has been around for a fraction of the time that people have walked the earth.
He then mentioned that the first people were hunter-gatherers that worked in a team to share everything that they could kill just to stay alive. They didn’t have possessions, they just had relationships and what they needed to survive. He explained that the communal living of early human tribes were the basis of what humans intrinsically need or want.

The whole time this is happening, I’m in the back of the room with my mouth agape. Normally I’m the person who argues with the student who says anything like this in class. Yeah, I’m that douchebag. But this guy, with a doctorate and a nice suit, just completely leveled this kid. At best, I would have kicked him in the shins and run away. At best. His was a completely rational argument based in reality and there was no way to rebut it.
It may not be economics, but I think I can learn a lot from this guy.

I just got done watching John Oliver’s New York Stand-Up Show, and Janeane Garofalo’s bit about flip-flops.

About two months ago, I saw 28 Days Later and decided I had to re-think my choice of footwear. I stopped wearing flip-flops every day as per my usual pedal wardrobe. Instead, I started choosing shoes based on the ability to run from velociraptors and/or the undead.

Now, I have one pair of flip-flops, a pair of boat shoes, checkered slip-ons, running shoes, and two pairs of converse. I don’t have “professional shoes” or high heels simply because living is more important to me than appearance.

Hallucinations for the Everyman.