Blogs: Leveling the playing field of debate?
Something I’ve been thinking about is how blogs equalize the debate. Sure, some bloggers like to write about blogging impacting media and reporting (which some blogs do but not most; hence the impact on media is grossly overstated when it happens). However, I mean on a fundamentally personal level. To illustrate this, I’m going to pick on two of my favorite bloggers. Why these two bloggers? Because I’ve met them in real life. Don’t get me wrong, they’re both super nice guys and I am not trying to insult them. And I’m going to pick on myself some.
About me: My speech is rather monotonous. I have a deep voice and my voice naturally doesn’t fluctuate in pitch or volume very much. I appear, I’ve been told, rather stoic and sort of unaffected by my environment. This causes me some problems: 1) I am a terrible public speaker because I’m monotonous; 2) I can’t tell jokes (seriously, I am quite deficient in my ability to deliver a punchline); 3) Because of my monotonous voice, my comments come across as inappropriate when I’m actually joking (even though I realize that I am joking, those listening who don’t know me often think I’m rude); 4) People have difficulty hearing me unless I speak loudly. And I interrupt people – a lot. I’m getting better about that last one though. I don’t do it on purpose but sometimes I’ve just gotta blurt something out.
Victim number 1: South(of)KnoxBubba is a very soft-spoken, polite, professional person to talk to in real life. He’s a very intelligent guy who won’t hesitate to tell you what he thinks, but he’s polite enough to let you finish what you’re saying. He won’t butt in and interrupt you and likely won’t call you out when you interrupt him. In fact, after the last time I saw SKB, the Mrs. pointed out to me later that I interrupted him quite a bit (sorry ’bout that). He’s a good listener. Bubba is a class act.
Victim number 2: tgirsch has a very powerful voice. When he speaks, people listen. They can’t help it. He’s clear, articulate, and composes himself well. And he can get very loud without appearing rude.
Now, in a real life debate between me and Bubba, I could out-rude him in a manner reminiscent of the first Gore v. Bush debate. Mind you, that doesn’t mean I’d win any debate based on the merits of my argument, just that I’d be a bit louder than him and would appear to control the debate.
tgirsch would kick my ass. He could run for office. Don’t know that I’d vote for him, but he’d level his opponents in a debate. He has that kind of presence about him that make people listen. Also, he’d be the guy you’d want yelling fire in an emergency because people would hear him quite distinctly. If I interrupted him, he could just talk over me. And he could interrupt me and I’d be powerless to stop it unless I pulled a Ross Perot Can I finish? and threw a tantrum.
When we’re typing away, we take our turns. As a bonus, we can even do some research. It does level the playing field. Tom, SKB, and I have engaged in debate. We’ve each had our shares of wins and losses. We’re all equal in terms of presence on-line and our wits are what matter at the keyboard.
Maybe Kerry and Bush should do their first debate in an on-line chat room? That would have helped Gore.
May 12th, 2004 at 1:28 pm
“And he could interrupt me and I’d be powerless to stop it unless I pulled a Ross Perot Can I finish? and threw a tantrum.”
Generally, I use “Stop talking” with tgirsch. I have been known, though, to have to resort to throwing things at him. ๐
Good overall point, too.
May 12th, 2004 at 1:32 pm
Actually, I’ve been there, and I can tell you that Kevin just repeats “No. Stop.” over and over again until you actually do stop. ๐
May 12th, 2004 at 2:12 pm
Interesting points. The great equalizer of online debate is Google. If Bush and Kerry went at it, you’d have to make sure neither could get to Google. Especially Bush.
Either way, the advantage would go to Kerry, unless you fell asleep waiting for him to finish typing something like you do when you’re waiting for him to finish a sentence. If you take away Bush’s aw shucks affability or his cockshure get tough demeanor, there isn’t much substance.
May 12th, 2004 at 3:05 pm
OK, here’s a preview:
JFK: I propose to create new jobs with manufacturing tax credits and providing incentives to stop the outsourcing of jobs and offshoring of corporations overseas.
GWB: MY UPPON^B^B^B^B OPONIN^B^B^B^B FOE DOES NOT UNNERSTAND HOW THE REAL ECONAMEE WORKS. WE NEED MORE TAX CUTS IF THINGS ARE TO WORK RIGHT. THIS HAS BEEN PROVED OVER AND OVER EVER TIME AND AGIN WITH MY POLOS^B^B^B POLAC^B^B^B PROGRAMS. AND DONT FORGOT THE WAR ON TERRIR IS OUR TOP PRYOR^B^B^B PRIORA^B^B^B GOAL ANY WAYS.
May 12th, 2004 at 3:06 pm
This is one reason I think an RTB online radio show, or even a Community Access TV show for the Knoxville contingent would be a hoot.
May 12th, 2004 at 3:13 pm
So bubba, you’re saying they’d bot cut taxes?
May 12th, 2004 at 4:09 pm
Uncle:
What SKB attributes to Kerry appears to be directly from Kerry’s web site. (Expand the “Reviving American Manufacturing tab, near the bottom):
Emphasis mine.
May 12th, 2004 at 4:13 pm
Hey, I’m a good Democrat. I know the party line. (And if you go back through my archives you will see that I was talking about targeted tax CREDITS when Bush was talking about more tax CUTS).
But you’re both missing the point…
May 12th, 2004 at 4:20 pm
I got your point, was just being smarmy. And in this case, there’s likely not much of a difference between cuts and credits. And dubya’s were targeted, toward the rich remember? :^)
May 12th, 2004 at 4:22 pm
SKB:
I didn’t miss the point; I was merely countering Uncle’s line of argument before it started. Wasn’t trying to any particular line of reasoning to you. Sorry ’bout that. ๐
May 12th, 2004 at 4:42 pm
Uncle:
And in this case, there’s likely not much of a difference between cuts and credits.
Just curious, but on what basis do you say this? I’m no accountant, but I was under the impression that tax credits were virtually always preferable to tax cuts. I suppose if you didn’t pay any taxes at all, it wouldn’t make much difference…
May 12th, 2004 at 4:51 pm
You guys tell me what the each of the candidates would say if I asked them the following:
Which part of the Constitution authorizes the President to “create jobs”?
May 12th, 2004 at 5:23 pm
Bush would probably say that the economy is very important & that’s why the framers included economic powers in the constitution. Then he’d go on about why creating jobs are important.
Kerry would tell you that when he was “in-country” earning medals that Bush was too busy ducking service to learn about economics & that his (Bush’s) plan would create an economic quagmire like the one he (Kerry) dealt with in Viet-Nam & the one going on in Iraq.
Of course the SS would quietly but forcefully escort you out of the building right afterwards. mentioning the constitution makes them “nervous”.
May 12th, 2004 at 5:32 pm
Tom,
I’m not a tax accountant but, IIRC, credits reduce tax owed. Cuts reduce the rates to compute taxes. both have the impact of reducing tax burden (if you pay taxes).
May 12th, 2004 at 5:35 pm
Thibodeaux:
I would answer Article II, Section 3, but that’s just me:
After all, that’s all a Presidential jobs creation plan would be, wouldn’t it?
Truth to tell, the President isn’t explicitly granted the power to do much of anything domestically.
May 12th, 2004 at 5:41 pm
Uncle:
That’s my understanding as well. But unless a tax CUT is significantly larger than a tax CREDIT, I would think the credit would be preferable. Certainly a tax credit is preferable to a tax deduction, but that’s another matter…
May 12th, 2004 at 5:43 pm
Oh, and I should point out that with a tax credit, you only get it if you do the thing that qualifies you for the credit, allowing some degree of targeted economic stimulus. With a tax cut, you get it no matter what, and you just HOPE that the recipient uses the extra cash in a way that actually benefits the economy (rather than, say, using it to build a factory in Beijing…).
May 12th, 2004 at 6:17 pm
Thanks for the warning, Uncle. I turned off my speakers so that I could read skb and tgirsch. How you menfolk do go on! ๐
May 12th, 2004 at 7:15 pm
Oh, and I should point out that with a tax credit, you only get it if you do the thing that qualifies you for the credit, allowing some degree of targeted economic stimulus. With a tax cut, you get it no matter what, and you just HOPE that the recipient uses the extra cash in a way that actually benefits the economy…
Bingo. If you’re going to try to manipulate people’s behavior (and the economy in the process) you’ll have better results if you figure out what incentives will get them to behave how you want and tailor them accordingly vs. the shotgun approach of throwing everthing against the wall and seeing what sticks.
Or something like that.
May 12th, 2004 at 11:12 pm
The purpose of taxation is to manipulate the behavior of the people?
Who’d a thunk it? And here all this time, i thought it was about funding the operation of our government.
And that, folks, is all it should be about.
Social engineering through the tax code is nothing more than blackmail, something that used to be considered against the law.
A brief digression, if I may; in control system engineering, a fundamental design principle is that you need a handle for each parameter you’re trying to control. While there are instances when a single handle can control two variables, (example, level control and flow control using a single flow control valve) if the two variables require separate control actions (level increase opens flow valve, while flow limits require the valve to close), you lose control of the system. One variable is controlled at the expense of the other.
Back to cases. By using the tax code to promote social engineering, you wind up with a system that is inefficient at both tasks.
Which could explain why the printed version of the tax code weighs more than I do.
By the way, the other key difference between a cut and a credit, is that a cut can only bring you down to zero taxes owed. A credit, on the other hand (EIC and Child Tax Credit as examples) can actually reduce your taxes below zero, so that the gov’t owes you money.
My ex pays about $1300 in withholding each year. Her refund over the last 3 years has averaged about $4500, thanks to the increased Child Tax Credit.
May 13th, 2004 at 1:00 am
Taxes can be used to incent behavior. An example is traffic fines. Traffic fines (when used properly) can be used to incent people to slow down, to not park where they shouldn’t, etc. Obviously, they also create revenues for the state as well and are an important part of the budget as a result. In the same, taxation can be used to incent businesses to do whats in societies interests.
Which part of the Constitution authorizes the President to “create jobs”?
It’s quite clearly the part about wanting to get elected and thus its required that the President pander to the voters.
May 13th, 2004 at 9:02 am
This sure got off topic pretty quick, eh? Heh.
May 13th, 2004 at 9:33 am
SKB, that’s the other problem with debate (online and in real life) ๐
May 13th, 2004 at 2:22 pm
“Incent”? Incentivise was bad enough, but I guess it was still too much to pronounce. Oy! ๐
Re: role of the President. It’s not supposed to be much of a role. He’s the Prime Minister of Parliament, but pulled out of that body to provide yet another check on government action. It’s the natural human tendency to look for The One Guy In Charge (the alpha male) that has invested the office with so much over time. Jackson took that into overdrive; then T. Roosevelt; then FRD took it to warp. We’ve been suffering ever since.
May 13th, 2004 at 10:59 pm
Rich:
Wow, you’ve cornered the market on straw, haven’t you… I don’t see where anyone here suggested that the purpose of taxation was social engineering. Some have suggested that you can achieve social engineering by tweaking the tax code.
But you know, I might be able to live with a tax code that doesn’t do social engineering. That way, Bill Gates’ long-term capital gains would be taxed at the full 35% they should be rather than the paltry 15% that they currently are.
May 12th, 2004 at 1:35 pm
My 15 Seconds of Blogosphere Fame
It appears that Say Uncle thinks I could run for office. He never says I could be successful at it,…
January 13th, 2007 at 2:30 am
[…] I’m not a morning person, so I appreciate the fact that my job actually requires me to keep goofy hours.ย That, and I have a very short attention span, and being a DBA provides me with lots of disparate tasks that need to be done.ย I don’t have to focus in on one thing for great lengths of time, which is good, because I’m bad at that.ย I’ve gained enough respect among my peers that many of them look to me for advice, and I’ve even been asked to give presentations on several occasions (which I’ve done, as I’m a pretty good public speaker — ask Uncle).ย Oh, and the pay isn’t shabby, either. […]