THE NATION’S BEST PARTY SCHOOLS—THE I’S HAVE IT…AGAIN!!!

8/15/15

I wrote the following missive to the Chicago Tribune; the Trib published it on Wednesday, 8/12 in slightly redacted form.   Their editing was largely mild and understandable, but they did drop the last sentence, which I thought was the best line in the letter.     

With all the bad news emanating from my alma mater of late, one would think the administrators at what remains one of the world’s great universities would have more to bewail than an award that should be far from a source of shame.

ILL--!

Thanks.

8/8/15

As a long ago graduate of the University of Illinois and a continuing financial supporter of my alma mater, I am bothered not a whit by the Princeton Review’s designation of the Big U as the nation’s Number 1 Party School.  The wailing and gnashing of teeth emanating from the school’s administration in response to the “award” is not only silly but also demonstrative of the pusillanimous attitudes that pervade modern day academia.

Who in the world thinks that my alma mater is “…a place where people can just goof off,” as a university spokesperson lamented after the Princeton Review’s pronouncement?   Illinois and its students consistently rank in the top five universities in the country by employers.  UIUC’s business, agriculture, and especially its engineering, math, and science programs, are among the best, if not the best, in the nation.  22 Nobel Prize winners are, or were, associated with the Big U as either alumni or faculty members.  If you are an Illinois resident, Champaign is perhaps the best bargain out there in higher education.  And if you a resident of South Korea or China, you know the U of I; much of the technological infrastructure of both countries, and of others, has been built by U of I alums.

Students at my alma mater work very hard under intense pressure just to keep up with their hyper-achieving colleagues.   Is it any wonder that they also play hard when given the opportunity?   Do we wish that some of the students would play hard in less destructive ways?   Certainly.   But kids are kids and temptation is temptation; attempts to keep our kids in cocoons can ultimately be as destructive as the activities about which the U of I administration is currently wringing its hands.  Part of going to college is learning how to deal with the stress and temptation that will be our near constant companions as we proceed through life.

Yes, students at the U of I work very hard and play very hard.   Is the latter so terrible?  The world is not run by people who spent their Saturday nights in college in the library, even so magnificent a library as those on the Urbana campus.

Mark M. Quinn

Naperville

CHINESE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS: TYING CHINA MORE TIGHTLY TO NORTH KOREA…OR TO KOREA?

6/8/13

Yesterday’s (i.e., Friday 6/8/13’s, page A8) Wall Street Journal featured an article by Jeremy Page entitled “China Builds Up Its Links to North Korea.”  The article discussed Chinese construction of an extensive infrastructure network, including roads, railroads, an immense power cable, and a high speed railroad line, linking northeastern China with North Korea.  The article reports that the infrastructure program indicates a continuing desire of China to not only sustain North Korea but also to integrate North Korea even more deeply into the Chinese economy.   This massive undertaking contradicts China’s stated claims that it is cooperating with the  U.S. strategy of isolating and pressuring North Korea.   Such activity indicates, according to the article, that China not only believes that the Kim dynasty will remain in power in Korea but also that it is taking steps to insure North Korea’s vitality, or at least continued existence, as a buffer against what it considers U.S. encroachment in northeast Asia.

A thought occurred to yours truly as I read this piece, however…

Could the Chinese be taking these steps to integrate not the NORTH Korean economy with that of China but, rather, to integrate the KOREAN economy with that of China?  Perhaps the Chinese, being long range thinkers and having a firmer grasp on reality than most of the people who inhabit our government, are giving up Kim Jong Eun and the entire concept of Communist North Korea for dead and are anticipating a reunification of the peninsula with Seoul, rather than Pyongyang, in charge.   The Chinese are tying their economy into that of North Korea with hopes of being firmly wrapped up with the new Korean government.

Remember German unification.  After a very troubling decade, roughly coinciding with the calendar ‘90s, the Germans eventually integrated the former East Germany into the larger German economy, resulting in the second German economic miracle.   A reunification of the Korean peninsula would be at least equally troublesome at its start, but, eventually, one has to bet that the very resourceful, and very rich, South Koreans would integrate the former north into a vibrant Korea, creating a kind of Asian Deutschland, an economic juggernaut that, while not quite on par with Germany, would be a formidable force on the regional and world economic stages.   The Chinese would do well to be closely tied to the new Korea, just as countries like Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary have done well being closely tied to Germany.

Further, the Chinese always think politically as well as economically.   It would certainly be in China’s interest to be firmly tied to a unified Korea in order to counterbalance the influence the United States would have on the new power on the peninsula.

Anybody who thinks about the Korean situation at all carefully cannot believe that the North is sustainable.  North Korea in its present form is finished; its fall is assured and the only question is time.  And the Chinese have shown a remarkable ability to think in terms of longer periods of time than does the West.

I TEST DROVE A KIA TODAY…

5/20/13

And why, one might ask, would I test drove a Kia Rio today?  It’s Kia’s smallest and least expensive car, what is called a B-body car, two sized down from my trusty 2007 Accord.  Why would I even consider what some might call such a drastic downsizing?

First, I don’t know if I’m considering buying a new car; in fact, I’m probably not.   But I am never completely out of the car market (back in the old days, when I was making lots of money and had far fewer financial responsibilities, I owned, consecutively, 4 cars in the space of 16 months.  I guess we all do dumb things, and if that were the dumbest thing I’ve ever done (It’s not.), I would be in good shape.   Dumber than owning 4 cars in the space of 16 months was that one of them was a Saab (“Sure ain’t a Buick,” as a guy who sold both Buicks and Saabs once told me), but I digress.

Second, I love to test drive cars.  It’s fun, it keeps me up to date on what’s going on in the car market, and, in the past when I traded car stocks with some frequency, helped me make some considerable money on those positions. 

Third, Kia offered me a small inducement to test drive one of its cars and I had the time on this beautiful afternoon to stop by my local Kia dealer (Gerald in Naperville) and take one for a spin.  Further, I did so during the week during the day, so the salespeople were not busy with customers, as they would be on a Saturday or in the evening; I don’t want someone indulging my habit of test drives for fun when they have actual, want to buy that day, customers, and the potential to make some dough, waiting for them.

Fourth, I am, as regular readers know, frugal beyond the point of fault.  And though the Rio is, by and large, an inexpensive car, the Kia Rio, in its most expensive guise, the SX, has most of the features I look for in a car…a manual transmission and some decent equipment; more on that later.

Fifth, as I wrote in my 4/3/13 post, “R-E-S-P-E-C-T, FIND OUT WHAT IT MEANS TO (KIM JONG EUN)”, I am a great admirer of the South Korean people and might want to indulge that admiration by buying a Korean car, to wit…

The South Koreans and, yes, their formerly authoritarian regimes under Syngman Rhee and, to a greater extent, Park Chung Hee, took the types of risks, and engaged in the type of hard work, that the North Koreans are too timid to undertake.   They are to be congratulated.   The North Koreans, and their pudgy ruler, are to be ridiculed.   Only they don’t appear to know it.

With that having been written, I think I’ll go out and buy a Kia or a Hyundai.

Roughly equivalent sentiments point me in the direction of a Volkswagen (BISMARCK’S DREAM, MERKEL’S VICTORY, 5/1/13), but that is another issue.

So what’s the point of this screed?

I was amazed at the car.  I wasn’t amazed so much at the car itself, but at what is available in new cars, even at lower price points, nowadays.   Yes, I keep up on the industry, and I know intellectually that x, y, or z is available in certain cars, but until you get in the car and drive it and experience all the gizmos (and, more importantly, the ride, handling, and driving experience), you don’t realize how far cars have come.

Here I was, driving a car for stickering for just under $20,000 (Rios can be had for a lot less money; I drove the fully loaded SX, as I said above.) that handles like a sports car of not too many years ago with a six speed manual and plenty of power.  The car has satellite radio, Bluetooth (I have only a vague notion of what “Bluetooth” is, not being a regular celphone user.), all kinds of gizmos for streaming music in the car, backup camera, navigation, power folding mirrors, one of those keys that enables you to not only start the car but also open the doors with the key only being in your pocket, eight air bags, stability control, hatchback utility, a 5 year, 60,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty, 10 year, 100,000 powertrain warranty, 28/36 city/highway fuel economy…again, for under $20 grand.   It is amazing how far cars have come in the six model years since I bought the venerable and trusty Accord.

Since I am sure some of readers will point this out, I, too, can remember when you could buy two fully loaded Cadillacs for less than $20 grand.  But by latter day standards, this Kia Rio is just an amazing achievement, testimony to how great and dynamic the world auto industry, and, more importantly, the competitive, free market system, is.

Not that I would want to trade-in the greatest, and, in at least one sense, most unusual car I have ever owned, my 2007 Accord EX-L manual.   Nor would I necessarily trade it in on the Rio; the Rio lacks a few things I would like in a car and could be quieter and have tighter steering.  But the drive I took today really opened my eyes.

“R-E-S-P-E-C-T, FIND OUT WHAT IT MEANS TO (KIM JONG EUN)”

4/3/13

I mentioned in my earlier post today (SOUTH KOREA:  “MR. PRESIDENT, WE CANNOT ALLOW A MINE SHAFT GAP!”) that the current bout of saber rattling by North Korea should be providing plenty of grist for the Mighty Quinn mill for some time to come and, sure enough, even today the story is bearing more fruit.

The Wall Street Journal put it succinctly in the continuation of page A8 of today’s (4/3/13’s) front page story when it reported

North Korea has repeatedly asked the U.S. and other major countries to recognize it as a nuclear-weapons state and negotiate with it as an equal partner.

As I stated in my post of a few days ago (KIM JONG EUN:  “I’M SMART, NOT LIKE EVERYBODY SAYS, LIKE DUMB.  I’M SMART AND I WANT RESPECT!”, 4/1/13), this craving for undeserved respect is the essence of this, and every, North Korean bout of bluster and bravado.  North Korea wants respect, and its new young leader needs respect not only from “the U.S. and other major countries” but also internally, especially from the military.   Hence the empty threats to nuke Seoul, Hawaii, Washington, and other places Mr. Kim can perhaps find on a map.  Being treated as “an equal partner” is impossible, given the military, economic, and geopolitical realities, but respect can indeed be achieved.

The problem is that getting respect the right way, by developing one’s economy, engaging the world, and giving one’s citizens a decent chance at a better life, the way that South Korea has done it, is difficult, expensive, and risky.  It takes time, patience, and investment.  Achieving respect in this manner also might lead to one’s citizens making outrageous demands for, among other things, a say in the way things are run.   People have a funny tendency to demand input into their own lives, and into their communities, when they have something at stake.  

Kim Jong Eun and the people who pull his strings cannot take the risks, or do the hard and expensive work, necessary to earn respect in an enduring way.   Developing a bomb and threatening to use it is far cheaper, easier, and less fraught with peril, from the regime’s standpoint, than undergoing the type of economic miracle that has been achieved by South Korea.  In fact, miracle is the wrong noun to describe what has happened in South Korea.  The South Koreans and, yes, their formerly authoritarian regimes under Syngman Rhee and, to a greater extent, Park Chung Hee, took the types of risks, and engaged in the type of hard work, that the North Koreans are too timid to undertake.   They are to be congratulated.   The North Koreans, and their pudgy ruler, are to be ridiculed.   Only they don’t appear to know it.

With that having been written, I think I’ll go out and buy a Kia or a Hyundai.

SOUTH KOREA: “MR. PRESIDENT, WE CANNOT ALLOW A MINE SHAFT GAP!”

4/3/13

My thoughts on North Korea’s saber rattling were neatly encapsulated in my post of a few days ago entitled KIM JONG EUN:  “I’M SMART, NOT LIKE EVERYBODY SAYS, LIKE DUMB.  I’M SMART AND I WANT RESPECT!”.   The situation keeps developing, however, and this story promises to provide nearly as much grist as the Redflex speed camera scandal in Chicago politics; see only my latest post on that treasure trove, 3/26/13’s REDFLEX’S EXCELLENT CHICAGO ADVENTURE:  EDDY BURKE ENTER(ED) THE FRAY.

Now we learn that South Korea wants to renegotiate a 1972 treaty under which the United States provides the South with nuclear fuel and technology for its electricity generating and research reactors.   The South would like to increase its own skills in enriching uranium and reprocessing the spent fuel.   The South Korean government, through a spokesman, insists

“This government has no intention at all of pursuing nuclear capabilities in terms of weapon.”

So in the wake of North Korea’s restarting one of its reactors and threatening to obliterate Seoul and, now, Washington, D.C., it suddenly becomes urgent for South Korea to enrich uranium to generate electricity.   I know we are dealing with international relations here and we have to speak diplomatically, but just how naïve are we supposed to pretend to be?   This is the nuclear equivalent of the growing enthusiasm for hemp products among people who just happen to enjoy smoking pot.

Leaving aside the hypocrisy that masquerades as diplomacy, one has to ask one’s self just how much more dangerous the world would become were South Korea to produce its own nuclear weapons.   Yours truly, for one, would rest much easier knowing that Kim Jong Eun would be losing sleep pondering the possible retaliatory actions of a nuclear armed South next time he wants to rattle the nuclear rattle to get a little attention.   A nuked up South Korea might even permit us to bring out tripwire troop presence home from the Korean peninsula.

There is no logical reason why responsible countries, like South Korea, should not have nuclear weapons should they choose to acquire them.   Some might argue that allowing responsible countries to have nuclear weapons would eventually lead to irresponsible countries having nuclear weapons.  But having such horrific weapons tends to sober up countries quite quickly; one’s neighbors’ having such weapons has an even more immediate and permanent sobering effect.   Note that it was the presence of nuclear weapons have kept the peace, or at least have kept things from getting completely out of hand, since the dawn of the nuclear age, despite many countries we once regarded as crazy having their hands on these awesome (In this case, that adjective is used properly, but I digress.) weapons.

A better question is where the United States and other nuclear powers get off deciding who should have nukes and who shouldn’t, who is sufficiently responsible and who isn’t.  Why should the South Koreans, or anybody else, have to come to us and beg to acquire the means to defend themselves?    Why is it any of our business?  As the sisters used to say back at St. Walter School in my youth, and usually to an often obnoxiously precocious yours truly, “Who died and left you boss?”