Saw a program on PBS last night about Detroit called Detropia.  Things still look very bleak even with the auto companies making good profit now.  It talked about mayor Dave Bing is trying to consolidate the city's population to a smaller area and try to use the rest of the land to start urban farming.  The program did not really talk about how these two things can be accomplished.  It seems to me people are not going to willingly move to another part of the city unless there is a benefit, like a tax rebate.  As Bing said, the city is broke so how is it going to pay people to move?  And how is this urban farming to going to work?  What do they do with the land in the winter when things don't grow with snow on the ground?  Are these programs still on the agenda?  All I know is that I don't want to be in Bing's shoes!

This program made me think about the fires in Bangladesh factories recently.  There has been a lot of calling by activists to stop manufacturing in Bangladesh and other countries where safety violations are rampant.  While that is well meaning, I am sure the people of Bangladesh and other countries don't want the manufacturing to stop.  People who are starving are willing to take whatever safety risks to feed their children.  The Mexicans are willing to risk dying to cross over to the U.S. to find a job.  So the people of Bangladesh are willing to work in unsafe factories.  We should demand that companies from the U.S. do a much better job of policing the factories that make their products.  But in reality we are not doing the impoverish people any favor by taking away their jobs.

The truth is there are more and more people competing for limited manufacturing jobs all over the world.  Detroit will not get significant number of jobs back.  The city will have reinvent itself.  But with the poor public education system, I am not sure how they are going to be able to train the next generation in other types of work.  This will not be limited to Detroit but to rest of America as well.  I can see where the gap between the rich and poor will widen.  If you are not educated enough to get a professional job, you will be stuck in the service economy.  The middle class will shrink.  Having said that, I am not a pessimist for America as a whole.  Most of America can avoid what happened to Detroit and other old cities. Will talk about that in the future.

I think for the first time there is no surprising finalists for DWTS.  All four finalists are deserving.  I think anyone of the four can win.  A lot will depend on the performances Monday.  Based on consistency and how I think the fan voting will go, I predict the order of finish:  1.  Pickler. 2.  Jones.  3.  Raisman. 4.  Zendeya.   I would not be surprised if it was backwards!

The action of the  IRS making it difficult for conservative groups such as the Tea Party to get tax exempt status is obviously wrong.  No particular group should be discriminated against when applying for something from the government.  An investigation is needed to see how high  the order came from or was it something that a group of bureaucrats decided to do it themselves. But beyond that, why do any group of people or institution get tax exempt status anyway?

I found 10 major ways to get tax exempt on the internet.  The most troubling to me is religious organizations.  I mean, if we have separation of church and state, then why do we give favor to churches.  I understand that the law does not favor a particular religion.  But then how do you decide what is a reasonable religion and not a dangerous cult?  It maybe reasonable for the money raised for charity work by a church to be exempt.  But what about the money raised to try to get more members?  I don't think the government should be helping any church to increase its membership.  Another way that is just troubling is exemption granted to labor unions for various activities such as "educating members".  This is basically a way of promoting unions which lead to increase membership.  In fact, using money for education purpose seem to be a popular way for an organization to get exempt status.  Again, it is not the business of the government to increase any organization's membership, in my opinion.

There maybe public good that come out of exempting certain organizations.  But I think in most cases the benefits are questionable at best.  Since both the Republicans and Democrats claim that they are for simplifying the tax code, getting rid of the tax exempt status laws would be a good first step.  Why do we let the IRS make judgment calls of what groups of citizens get such a big tax advanatage?

I have just finished reading Jason Collin's article in SI.  I applaud him for coming out but I don't agree with some people who compare him with Jackie Robinson.  When Robinson came to the Majors there was not much movement in the areas of civil rights.  Even some of his teammates were against him.  I think the gay right movement is much further along now and judging by the response Collins have received, I don't think he will face challenges anywhere near what Robinson faced during his time.  That is not to say that he won't be heckled by fans.  Jeremy Lin was heckled even during Ivy League games and those fans are affiliated with some of the greatest institutions of higher education in this country.  But Collins will not be bothered in the locker room or by opponents.  Ironically everyone who has come out against him (and there are very few), has been attacked themselves in the court of public opinion.  Take Chris Broussard of ESPN.  He gave his opinion that as a religious person, he is against gay life style.  He was immediately attacked.  While I don't agree with him, he has the right to what he believes.  If you only have to listen to opinions that is agreeable to you, then you are not living in a democratic society.

Even though Collins is technically an active player in the NBA, he is at or near the end of his career.  In fact, if this article did not come out, the chances of him of getting a contract next year is slim.  So I don't think he will be hurt in terms of staying in the league by coming out.  I don't think you can accuse any team of prejudice for not signing Collins for next season.  It will be more interesting when a player near the peak of his career come out and is a free agent.  Then we will know what teams think.  I bet that most team will act depending more of that player's ability than sexual orientation.

It is interesting that Jason's identical twin Jarron is not gay.  Obviously having identical DNA does not mean same personality.  On the other hand environment do not determine personality either as both Jason and Jarron grew up in the same household, went to the same high school and college.  So who knows what really make up who we are.  Interesting enough of the 4 sets of identical twins I know of in NBA, the skills of 3 sets of twins are about the same.  Tom and Dick Van Arsdale, the Morris twins of Phoenix Suns and Jason and Jarron Collins are all about same in style and skill as each person's twin.  Only Brooke and Robin Lopez are somewhat different with Brooke being a better offensive and overall player whereas Robin is better on defense.  But given that Brooke and Robin have big difference in hairstyle whereas the other 3 sets of twins look exactly the same, I conclude that hairstyle is the ultimate determining factor in skills of NBA twins.