Mathematics After The Fall

Birthdays, Logistics, and Deathdays

I had my birthday on Thursday, another one, for which I’m thankful. (Thanks for the messages.) If I hadn’t, this piece wouldn’t be written. I’m not yet ready for death. Someone found it strange that one of my common morning prayers is Thank You for the day, even the ones with a futile meeting and two classes and homework to grade. Yes, even the mediocre hand scribbled, copied, piles of homework.

As I woke up for my birthday, people were dying. They always are. Sometimes it’s massive and sudden. For instance, did the people of Port-au-Prince think about an earthquake two weeks ago? Likely not. There is no possible way to bring relief quickly enough. PAP airport has one runway, space for about a dozen planes, and no normal tower. From less than 20 daily planes, it now handles 140.

It doesn’t surprise me that people have complained from afar. It’s the French way. Occupation? Why would the US want to invade Haiti? Seriously? What would we want? I’m also angry with people like this
Huffington Post idiot who somehow imagines that logistics happen. Looking at his biography explains things. He’s worked as a policy analyst, not on the ground!
He has a degree in Economics, where people believe that men are rational and the market is efficient! We’d be better off listening to George Clooney, who has shown how to organize something. And we’d be better off reducing the number of reporters and government leaders. Quit talking and transport water filters and Plumpy’nut!

Haiti is an example of terror and death. Maybe it will improve American preparation. I’m checking my supplies. Today I recharged my powerpack. I have a water filter- do you? – but my stock of prepared liquids are a little low right now, so I’ll add another case of water. Stuff like that.

At the same time as the large events, I don’t want to neglect simpler deathdays. Again, as I awoke Thursday, one of my former students was on the road. Maybe she was in a hurry to get to a 9:25 class. Noel crashed, and as this short Courier-Journal article notes, she died.

I had Noel in the fall for Math 200. Though she and her buddies were not particularly enthusiastic about statistics, she was pleasant in our interactions. And I know she was happy with the grade she earned. I remember her jeans. Apparently, now ripping the knees out of jeans is somewhat fashionable. I never understood why people would want to look sloppy and poor, but some do, like Noel did. I wouldn’t call Noel the most memorable student I had. She wasn’t. She was one of many stories. Now, on this earth, she’s no more.

There will be some memorial at Bellarmine, which I’ll likely attend. As with Haiti, maybe this will spur people to individual action. We’ll appreciate our birthday mornings, and all the other mornings, a little bit more. Maybe my Thank You prayers will be a little longer. Eventually, they’ll run out, just I hope not yet.

Round-the-world ticket guide

I got the idea for a round-the-world trip by looking at my summer schedule. In July, I’m scheduled to be in central Europe at a conference. Two weeks later, another meeting is in Vancouver. After teaching summer school, I’m open from roughly July 1 to August 15. Since I have friends who teach and work in China, Korea, and Austrlia, I thought about taking the long route. I thought I’d share the round-the-world information I gathered. As a statistician, I can make it through the tedium of data entry. I was watching gridiron football all day and wanted something to do. Since I’m a young professor, that makes me primarily a budget traveler, though I also included higher fare information.

For people in a hurry, here’s the summary on trips from the USA:

• Buying a ticket is not cheap. Except for special restricted fares, expect to pay US$4000 to 5000 in economy, and about $10,000 in business class. You’re getting a lot of travel for this, of course.
• The cheapest options almost never begin in the USA. A “positioning” flight to start the circuit will cost little to nothing, sometimes even saving you money, plus can give you a bonus visit to your starting city.
• If you want to visit Great Britain, South Africa or southeast Asia, and Oceania, there are special tickets out of London.
• SkyTeam has limited southern hemisphere coverage and the worst booking class, making it somewhat less effective. London is the best starting place, though you need a local agent.
• oneworld has the Continent pass xONEx, which gives you more flexibility within continents. It’s especially good in South America. For South American journeys, start there; otherwise positioning may or may not help. You need either a local agent or a Canadian agent.
• Star Alliance has the largest number of partners, no local agent requirement, and great worldwide coverage except South America. From the US, your best positioning options are the middle east, northern Africa, and South Africa.

Here’s the list of choices, from lowest ticket price to highest. Costs I provide were found in late November 2009, for tickets beginning in July 2010. I list US dollar estimated total cost, base cost plus a non-trivial amount of taxes, fees, and “fuel surcharges”. Why fuel is not a normal part of the ticket is beyond my pay grade. A spreadsheet of cost by country is also available.

• Restricted Economy ($2500 + 900 US positioning): There are a couple single carrier options, like Singapore Air. Then there are small alliances, particularly for trips beginning from London that include Australia or New Zealand. See, for example, the Great Escapade and World Walkabout Plus. Though restricted in airlines, for a trip with London, Oceania, and either South Africa or Asia, this is likely cheapest. One gets 29,000 travel miles, plus a free bonus trip to London. I’ll explain more below.
• Special Economy ($4000): Star Alliance, Skyteam, and Oneworld offer a 26,000 mile option, with between 3 and 5 stopovers. By sticking to major cities with nonstop service, there are plenty of good options. For example, Louisville-Rome-Istanbul-Beijing-Sydney-Vancouver-Louisville works on Star Alliance. Smaller cities, however, have to be added through separate round trips from a permitted stopover, or a longer ticket.
• Economy Mileage ($4500 to 6000): The major alliances also offer 29,000, 34,000, and 39,000 mile options, with up to 16 flight segments and thus 15 stopovers. For Skyteam and Star Alliance, from the US, flying a positioning flight to somewhere else (London for Skyteam, Mideast or South America or South Africa for Star Alliance) will get you an extra trip at almost no extra cost.
• Continent Based ($4500 to 7000): Oneworld offers the explorer ticket xONEx that restricts the number of continents, not miles. If you want to travel between multiple places on three or four continents, this is the best option. Positioning will help with Southern Hemisphere trips, and in some other cases.
• Business ($8500+) and First ($13000+): At this level, I suspect that alliance preference will be most important. In all cases, positioning can help. If you’re in the US or Euro Zone, and are willing to take a economy class flight to a different start point, that flight will cost negative dollars. Star Alliance Business class is substantially cheaper from Japan or the Middle East. Skyteam is cheaper from India. On oneworld, the Middle East is cheaper.

Positioning: The cost of any round-the-world ticket is based on the country where the trip begins, and sometimes on the country where the ticket is booked. Some differences are sizable. For instance, YRWSTAR1 (Star alliance, 29,000 miles, Economy class) is $4861 beginning in Canada, but $2684 beginning in South Africa. You could pay separately for a ticket to South Africa, start the circumnavigation there, and then fly back, all for less money.
With positioning, you can also create an extra trip. Round the world tickets generally have a 12 month window. Good booking gives you a second trip to the positioning city, several months after the main trip. Here’s an example. In July, I start in the US and position to London. Then I circle around to the US, then stop. In December, I complete the round-the-world booking to London. Then, after an extra holiday, I return on the second half of the positioning flight.
There are a couple caveats. For oneworld and SkyTeam, you will need someone in the other country to book the ticket, else you pay home country fare, though Star Alliance and special fares do not have this requirement. Though I have no recommendation, you should be able to find a reputable agent. To be safe, you might also book the positioning flight on another alliance, because add-ons and end-to-end combinations are generally not permitted. Now, for notes by program.

• Great Escapade: Unlike large alliance programs, the fare depends on the time of year. Economy fare is usually under $2000, plus fees; Upper class fare is $8376, not a discount. There aren’t many airlines, just Virgin Atlantic VS, Air New Zealand NZ, Singapore Airlines SQ, and Silkair MI. For mileage junkies, Singapore and Air NZ are part of Star Alliance; the other two are mostly avoidable.

  For the base 29,000 miles, you can include South Africa or Asia along with Oceania, but going to both is difficult. Extra miles are available at about $200 per 1500 miles, up to 4500, if you want that. Also note that Delhi is almost exactly on the route from London to Singapore. It costs 5 extra miles. Really, that’s a single digit, making it hard to pass up.

  I believe this ticket is best for someone who wants to see London, Southeast Asia, and Oceania. This fare does not need a British booking agent. (The World Walkabout Fare from Qantas is cheaper but more restrictive.) A booking like London-Delhi-Singapore-Bangkok-Singapore-Hong Kong-Sydney-Auckland-Los Angeles (stop) London even has room for a flight within New Zealand.

• SkyTeam: Flying from London is cheap on SkyTeam, cheaper than almost everywhere else. OK, Pakistan is less. From the US or Europe, starting from London is the only way to make economy fares competitive. India and London are the options for business class. You will need a local agent.

  SkyTeam tickets have weaknesses. One is a relative lack of connections in South America and Oceania. The other, perhaps more troubling, is a low booking class. Economy fares are listed as class L and business fares as class I. These are fairly heavily discounted on SkyTeam, thus tougher to find than on Star Alliance and oneworld. Overall, I believe this ticket only makes sense for primary SkyTeam customers.

• oneworld: In business class, the Global Explorer offers 34,000 miles at the same price as other 29,000 mile products. That said, the continent Explorer passes are more interesting; the oneworld website routes them. Availability is better than SkyTeam because booking class L is less restricted. Also, because of the lack of mileage limits, hopping around continents is easy. For instance, Buenos Aires-Madrid-Rome-Helsinki-Stockholm-London-Beijing-Tokyo-Bangkok-Sydney-Auckland-Santiago-Easter Island-Buenos Aires is legal, at 4 continents and almost 40000 miles.

  People in Europe do not have to travel to London, as the fare difference is small. People in the US who want to visit South America should start there. I suggest Buenos Aires, which also has nonstop flights to Europe. Then you can see South America, Europe, Africa or Asia, and Oceania on a 4 continent pass. The key flights involved are Sydney-Buenos Aires and Auckland-Santiago.

  Otherwise, a US positioning flight will depend on the cost of the extra flight and the route desired. Auckland, New Zealand, can be attractive. According to the sales restrictions, you will need a booking agent in the starting country, otherwise you will pay your home fare if higher, except if you book in Canada OR you book in the European Common Aviation Area and start there. Really. I don’t make these things up. Overall, I believe oneworld is great for trips involving Oceania and South America. It’s the only option for Easter Island. Around the rest of the world, except Africa, oneworld has a solid network.

• Star Alliance: With the most airlines, this network is largest, and except for South America has great coverage. This leads to relatively few mileage-sapping detours. From the US, the Star special economy YRWSPCL gives 26,000 miles and 5 stopovers, for under $4000 including fees. The booking class is moderate. For more destinations within a region, Star Alliance offers a regional pass add-on. For a simple non-positional circumnavigation, it’s the best deal.

  Above that, the booking class is a fairly unrestricted M. Unfortunately, prices out of the USA and Canada are high. A positioning trip not only adds an extra stopover, it saves money. For instance, the US 29,000 mile fare is $4775. A trip to Casablanca, plus a 29,000 mile circuit, totals about $4200, and includes a second trip to Morocco. From reading the Sales Restrictions of the YRWSTAR1 fare, Star Alliance tickets do not need a local agent.

  For positioning, you can bring out the usual suspects, such as Israel, Jordan, and Dubai, plus Casablanca. South Africa costs more to get there, but you can arrange an additional stopover in transit. For business class, Tokyo’s rates are attractive.

I hope this information is helpful. All in all, despite the frustrations and tiny seats, airline travel is a marvelous gift. Have fun!

Harvard Beats Yale 14-10: A blog

College football, or should I really say minor league football, has a lot of problems. Fortunately, I went to a university that does not award athletic scholarships. That school, Fair Harvard, is facing its rival today. Like last year, I’m not attending; instead I’m blogging while watching Versus. This will include commentary on The Game, as well as college football. Here we go.

• It’s good to see that Harvard and Yale understand the singularity of the word Captain, unlike the NFL. The Yale Bowl looks surprisingly clean today; they must have chased out the vermin and washed off the graffiti. Seriously, Yale Bowl is really nice. The field is dug out, so you enters through a tunnel, and break out into the middle rows. I think it’s prettier than traditional Harvard stadium. That said, I am not restrained from teasing.
• The front of Yale’s helmets say Yale. For some reason, the front of Harvard’s helmets say Crimson. I wonder if this was true back in the day. Of course, back then there weren’t helmets. And there were many, many more deaths. In 1905, 18 young men died playing the game. Nowadays, if ONE person dies it becomes a major event, with lawsuits and everything. Having double digit deaths would be inconceivable.
• 7:18 remaining, 1st quarter: Harvard’s quarterback is stripped of the football, and Yale recovers. Having scored a field goal the first time, Yale has the ball in Harvard territory again. (Some comments will actually refer to the game.)
• The color commentator is from Princeton. I like him. Here’s a quote – “If there was a betting line on this game in Wall Street between the Harvard and Yale guys …” Actually, Harvard was favored by 6 1/2 points. But it doesn’t look good, as Yale goes ahead 10 to 0. To make things even worse, Harvard drops the kickoff and must start around its 5.

Let’s examine other college football news for a bit. Apparently, Kansas football coach Mark Mangino motivates his players with quotes like this: “He wanted to be a lawyer,” Brown said in a telephone interview from his home in St. Louis. “He messed up, and Mangino said to his face, in front of everybody, ‘You want to be a lawyer? You’re going to be an alcoholic just like your dad.’ ” Great, eh? Mr. Mangino makes $2,300,000 a year to be a bastard like that.

• Harvard mounts a drive, and decides to go for it on 4th and 11 from Yale’s 24. In the NFL, this is not the optimal option, but Harvard’s kicker is nowhere near as good. The pass fails. On offense, Yale tries a double pass, but it’s an Ivy League moment. The first lateral is dropped, leading to a very humorous second pass. There will be several more messes like this.
• The Yale kicker crushes a punt. From where he kicks it, the ball travels over 80 yards. Did the scientists concoct something?
• Harvard runs a shotgun spread offense this year. The quarterback is at full shotgun depth, 6 to 6 1/2 yards behind the center. The best known spread shotgun, Florida with Tim Tebow, sets the quarterback at 5 yards. This may not seem like much, but it changes the focus. In both offenses, the running back is about 5 1/2 yards behind the line. In Harvard’s offense, the running back is in FRONT of the quarterback. This is better for passing. In Florida’s offense, the running back is BEHIND the quarterback, better for running. Given the rushing play calls today, the Florida formation would be better.
• 6:41 2nd quarter: Harvard advances to the 12 yard line. On fourth down, the Crimson attempt a fake field goal. It almost works. The receiver is open, but a charging lineman tips the pass. Sigh. The man – Yale #32 – has a giant wrapped cast on his hand. I didn’t think that was legal. It’s extra blocking power, though he hit the pass with his other arm. I guess it’s OK, though it seems like typical Yale nefariousness.
• 5:10 2nd quarter: Yale runs a sneaky no-huddle quarterback sneak, gaining 9 yards. From this point forward, I see no need to continue adjectives like “sneaky” and “nefarious” for Yale. It goes without saying. On the next play, Yale tries a fake snap. That is more than sly; it’s a penalty.
• 3:15 2nd quarter: On the same drive, Yale goes for it on 4th and 1. Good for them! The statistician in me is happy, though the Bulldogs convert, which makes me more sad. Later, with 1:03 left, Yale attempts another 4th and 1. Hey – they put a Y on the football! It’s a fullback dive, which is a play I respect in that situation. A quarterback can’t get a good start, but a fullback gets a two step running lead. Of course, the fullback fumbles the ball. It’s the Ivy League.
• Yale ends the half with a failed 63 yard field goal attempt. The camera angles on Versus are really weird, again; they use a field level camera for an attempt in the air. The game doesn’t get a sideline reporter, so Yale’s coach, Tom Williams, grabs a headset for the halftime interview. He’s cool. I’m not supposed to like him! He’s having fun, and asks if the announcers are. Asked about the fourth downs, he replies that “We’re trying to win the football game.”

At halftime, “imagine the net worth in the Yale Bowl today.” It’s the only tailgate I’ve seen where people wear bow ties. Since it’s time for a break, let’s look at much less competent coaches.

Example 1: Notre Dame hosts USC on October 17. Notre Dame is down by 7, but driving with under a minute to go in the 4th quarter. It’s fourth down and 10 on the 29. The Notre Dame receiver breaks open, the quarterback throws well, and there’s a completion. There’s also a penalty, because the USC safety dove in and injured the receiver on the ground. Trainers rush onto the field, and the game is stopped.

Notre Dame’s head coach is Charlie Weis. Notre Dame pays him at least $600,000 a year, plus speaking fees and endorsements. If the online compilations are true, Mr. Weis gets total compensation of roughly $4,200,000 per year. The total cost of attendance of all 83 Notre Dame football scholarships is $4,257,900.

Mr. Weis should know that according to the official football rules, FREE in PDF form, the clock will start on the referee’s signal. It’s Rule 3-3-2-e on page 70. Given the length of the injury break, Notre Dame should be ready to snap the ball quickly. Instead, after the clock started, the offense huddled, taking about 15 seconds to get to the line. A few plays later, time expired after 3rd down, with Notre Dame 4 yards away. Really, the clock easily could have expired after 2nd down, but Notre Dame threw a quick pass and got a break. By poor coaching, Notre Dame lost a down and before that had to run a fast developing play that didn’t even throw to the end zone. Maybe the players don’t convert, but the coaches didn’t even give them a chance.

Example 2: USC at Ohio State, September 12. Mr. Jim Tressel coaches the Ohio State University. Mr. Tressel gets around $3,000,000 annually to make optimal decisions. Plus he keeps a job at Ohio State if he wants, even if he steps down. He has tenure!
After this game, ESPN showed video where he actually got questioned about some choices, like kicking a field goal at the 2 yard line instead of trying for a score. “I think your percent chance of making fourth-and-2 probably doesn’t weigh as well as getting your three points,” he said. What does that say about his offense? Also, he’s wrong probabilistically. Quite wrong.

In addition to bad statistics, I want to point out a key play, with 1:14 remaining and USC driving. On earlier short yardage plays, USC has used a quarterback sneak. The way to make that more difficult is to place people on the line. For third and 1 on the Ohio State 5, how many players does Mr. Tressel put near the ball? Five? Six? No. Two. The ESPN link has the play, about 2:40 into the highlight. Unsurprisingly, USC gets the key yard. These types of errors are faults of the coach. I wish I could make tenure with a performance this lousy, as this much smarter commentator deconstructs.

The Harvard coach, Tim Murphy, is not as amusing in his interview. He’s right, though; Harvard needs to convert near the end zone. Let’s get back to the second half.

• Harvard receives the kick and begins to drive. Against Harvard’s spread, Yale’s using primarily a 3-3-5, with three linemen and three linebackers a few yards back. This is good for running, since Harvard has five linemen and a tight end that can block. Unsurprisingly, most of the plays are successful runs.
• 9:25 3rd quarter: On 3rd down and 2 on the 8, the quarterback audibles to a handoff. He had a better option, though; he could have thrown a pop pass to the second receiver, who was uncovered. At least the run converted.
• 7:40 3rd quarter: Yale adds more linemen closer to the goal line, leading to 3rd and goal from the 1. For some reason, Harvard goes under center and tries a running option. Nothing happens. Coach Murphy then calls time out to think of a play, but it’s a stupid one. Instead of the spread option, Harvard runs an tight I formation with the quarterback under center. An off tackle run fails.
  Why was this stupid? Because it allows Yale to win the numbers game. Even the Princeton man is smart enough critique this call. In this formation, the quarterback is not going to block, nor the ballcarrier. That leaves 8 Harvard blockers (+1 receiver) against 10 Yale defenders (+1 cover back). Harvard ran to the strong side, which is 5 against 6. The other side is 3 against 4. All the Yale people had to do is stand put, and let the extra player make the tackle. They succeeded. As an alternative, look at the Florida spread. With three receivers out, and the quarterback as a serious threat to run, the potential 7 (+ ballcarrier) against 8. One of the two sides will not have an extra defender. Going that way with successful blocks means a touchdown. That’s preferred.
• 5:08 3rd quarter: So far, the Yale staff is winning the coaching battle, and thus the scoreboard battle. They’re not completely winning, though. A strange punt formation leads to a delay of game and a 5 yard penalty.
• 15:00 4th quarter: Yale goes again on 4th down and 1. The referee examines the spot carefully and gives them the first down. After an injury timeout later in the drive, Yale makes a curious decision. As I mentioned above, the clock restarts after the injury, with a 25 second play clock. Ahead by 10, Yale wants to clock to expire, yet they snap the ball after only seven seconds. On the next play, after another injury break, Yale snaps after about 6 seconds. They failed to run off about 30 seconds here. While it likely won’t matter, it’s still a mistake. Oh yes, Yale missed the short field goal, too.
• They showed footage of Quidditch! Bellarmine needs a Quidditch team! Unfortunately, Slytherin won.
• Yale #10 makes a spectacular hit on a failed jet sweep, as the lead back failed to block him. Unfortunately, he verbally taunts the Harvard player on the ground (watch his head movements). Then, he decides to taunt Harvard receiver #85. Sadly, the officials do not call a penalty. This isn’t Kansas! To the Yale coach’s credit, I do not see Yale #10 on the field for the next play.
• 7:50 4th quarter: Harvard calls a draw on a desperate 4th and 4. Fortunately, Harvard #22 makes a video game spin-a-rama to get the first down. Two plays later, it’s an Ivy League moment. The snap rolls on the ground to the quarterback, who calmly picks it up and fires a long touchdown pass. Yale 10, Harvard 7. Wow! The camera finds two cute Harvard coeds! Wow! I like the sweatshirt: No one ever says, I want to go to Yale when I grow up.
• 2:40 4th quarter: Into a slight breeze, Yale tries a fake punt. This is not unusual, except that they had 22 yards to go. It’s a really cool play, a direct snap end around. Almost everyone was fooled. Fortunately, despite a slip, Harvard #27 recovers, and Yale winds up 6 yards short. The problem with this play is that at 22 yards, the returner will be able to race up to defend. Therefore, you need to assign someone to block him. Yale did, the kicker. That means, though, that there’s a free man, 9 (+ballcarrier) against 10. Somebody has to get fooled. Harvard was not trying for a block, so the linebacker was able to get there. Overall, this was like a 16 yard punt. That’s not very good.
• 1:34 4th quarter: Despite poor footwork on the throw, the Harvard quarterback makes the completion to Harvard’s wideout, who beat the cornerback on a post route. It’s 13-10. Harvard fumbles the point after attempt, in an Ivy League moment, but one Yale man was offsides. With another chance, Harvard converts for the 4 point lead.
• At least Yale didn’t waste those 30 seconds earlier, with about 90 seconds and three timeouts and 80 yards to go. Yale begins their drive. After two completions, the quarterback is hit on a throw! It’s an interception! And Harvard #45 is smart enough to fall down and prevent a fumble!
• Harvard does something smart by running two spread runs that take extra time, but not three. A first down was always unlikely. With 38 seconds left, Harvard must punt. Yale brings all 11 people to the line, which is a mistake. I’ll explain why in a bit. The line holds, and the kick is away. Harvard lets the ball die, and the officials stop the clock. The Princeton man commentator commends Harvard for not picking up the ball. He’s right about that, but there’s a better option. Harvard can bat the ball around as much as they want. It’s a violation, not a penalty, Rule 6-2-3-2-a on page 89 says that Yale just gets the ball at the best possible spot. Harvard ran off 3 seconds by not picking the ball up, but they could have had more by batting the ball across the field. If a Yale player didn’t come to pick it up, Harvard conceivably could have run out the clock.
  The problem with football is that people don’t think about these situations. Yes, Yale gets the ball at the 8, with 25 seconds left. Win Probability is High. But Harvard could have made Win Probability even higher! I wonder if those multi-million dollar coaches, like Mr. Mangino, Weis, and Tressel, have thought about that.
• After a sack and a spike, a crazy two-lateral play ends in a Harvard recovery, Crimson storms the field. Though I’m sure Mr. Williams will be pilloried for his 4th and 22 choice, and I agree that it was a suboptimal call, the commentators are correct – it’s not just one bad choice.

Thus ends another football blog. Though it was dicey, Fair Harvard has triumphed. Since my testosterone levels should be elevated now, I think it’s time for the gym.

Zombies: A Good War

What makes a good novel? Zombies? Well, not necessarily. We can look at results, first. There are plenty of lists of best fiction works, at least in English. There’s even a meta-site than combines 10 different lists, some popular, some literary, some juried. Only one book, George Orwell’s 1984, appears on all ten lists. Though I very much like that book, it’s difficult to call something The Best. Looking through, some of the Top 25 I really enjoy, some I find decent, some I haven’t read, and some I find poor.

The point of this essay is not to critique top books, though. It’s to think about what makes a good fiction novel. I agree with this summary:

In fiction, the writer’s job is to entertain, to draw an emotional response from the reader. The reader is often looking for suspense, action, and to go on a journey they have not been on before, one they will not easily forget. Readers want to get drawn into and experience the story for themselves. They want characters they can relate to and form a personal connection with. But most importantly, they want a good book. One that leaves them anxiously awaiting each turn of the page.

J. K. Rowling did well in the Harry Potter series. I own all seven novels in hardback, and attended release night parties for books four through seven. People flock to her believable otherworld, her website comes in six languages, and she might be a billionaire. That’s a lot of believability.

Nevertheless, I wouldn’t call the Harry Potter books great fiction. Great fiction makes an additional leap. It becomes questioning, moral, problematic. It can transform. It’s a dangerous leap, though. Setting out to write a meaningful novel often leads to contrived situations, undeveloped characters, and the loss of immersion. The idea becomes a mediocre parable. This type of book gets taught in high schools quite often, but it’s not great. I consider Lord of the Flies an archetypal example of moral as story. It just hammers away. For me, it lost credence.

The hot theme for potential immersion, and perhaps that transformation, is another transform – the Zombie. Today’s entry into the genre is An Oral History of the Zombie War, World War Z, by Max Brooks. Mr. Brooks has said that he enjoyed a book about World War II, The Good War by Studs Terkel, and decided upon the same format.

It works. Combined with his earlier, more humorous work The Zombie Survival Guide, this is an immersive world. The role playing scenarios for All Flesh Must Be Eaten practically write themselves. For more casual readers, the characters feel different. The Chinese doctor sounds different from the American warrior, who differs from the Russian priest, and so forth. None of the interviewed has the full picture, so we get little pieces. That’s interesting.
The stories vary, too. Some, like escaping the first Cape Town rush, are typical horror. Others, like North Korea, are straightforward development. They’re fun, but not noteworthy. The better stories show the fruits of Mr. Brooks’ research. I was fascinated by the underwater fighting suits, which are apparently in service today. The combat scenes, both in defeat and reconquest, are cool too. There are several little jokes, like about LaMOE survivalists.
Things start to get really good when we reach psychology and how people respond. This makes the book more than a set of war stories, though I’m afraid that the movie adaptation might lose these scenes in favor of more Whiz Bang Kaboom! Unlike, say Independence Day, the American Big Speech doesn’t lead to slow universal applause. Some people just, well, give up. I’ve seen things like ADS eternal sleep, not as severe, but I understand. Other folks make errors in panic, even though they should know better. The military, for instance, suffers from the sin of pride.

At this point, we have a good book. What makes this great? What moves it from a 2 or 3, up to a 4 out of 5? The Redeker Plan. It’s been a week since I first read the idea, and it’s still on my mind. I reread the interview last night, the first one of Turning the Tide. At Robben Island in South Africa, the details are given to us by Xolelwa Azania – in translation, Forgiven South Africa. Written by Paul Redeker, the plan begins with a safe zone, protected as possible with natural barriers, to clear and reorganize. (I’m guessing some of the Northern Cape and the northern Western Cape.) The tricky part, well, is that not all citizens are evacuated into that area. Space and resources are limited. Instead, beyond the safe zone, there were other colors. White zones meant infestation; green for military, purple for refueling, red for asset protection. Then there was Blue. Remaining citizens got moved there, with a few supply drops and trainers. No military support, though, as they had to make their own stand. The key was to gain time, as “every zombie besieging those survivors will be one less zombie throwing itself against our defenses.”

It worked, generally, better than the other ideas. The Redeker Plan saved countries, and a large extent of the human race. But how do you write that plan? How do you put it into place? Can you be forgiven? Xolelwa? I’m very unsure that I could. Mr. Brooks considers that question through his characters. It’s not just the Stockdale Paradox, which deals with a person’s life. It’s also more than field leadership. It’s something I just don’t know. The characters struggle, too.

There’s no simple response to the Redeker Plan. In it, World War Z moves from story to problem, the leap that makes this more. That dilemma, as is said, that even in a good war, “God help you, man.” “God help us all.”

The Office of the President

After a summer full of town hall yelling and assault rifle protests, last night we finally reached the point where an elected representative decided to act like a five year old who can’t find a toy. As you likely know,
Representative Joe Wilson of South Carolina made an excited utterance during President Obama’s speech last night. He apologized, and President Obama accepted.

Looking through the commentary, most bemoan a declining civility in public life. Some are more interesting, like a reminder of today’s Morning Psalter, 1 Peter 4:8-11, over at Vox Nova. Others, with a sense of history, have pointed out Preston Brooks, another South Carolinian who beat a fellow Senator with a cane inside the Senate chamber.

The problem, I think, is that we have fused the individual with the office. For instance, earlier this week President Obama gave a speech designed for schoolchildren. Some people demanded an alternative to listening to the speech, fearing socialist indoctrination. A great response was provided by two Forbes columnists. Despite disagreeing on policy, they liked the idea and the speech. As they wrote, “Personally, we believe that our children should learn to respect and honor the Office of the President of the United States of America–no matter who sits in that office or what their politics are.”

During my undergraduate days, I had a conversation with a conservative, not too fond of President Clinton at the time. There was some talk around campus about verbally disrupting a Presidential appearance. He was unhappy at the idea of disruption. Maybe before, maybe after, but during would be wrong. The fact that he led us meant he deserved respect, despite his seemingly wrong policies.

That was very good counsel, which I remembered through the years of George W. Bush. If I had the opportunity to meet him in person, I would do so. I would greet him politely. If he asked me to help the nation, I would. Even an sketchy-serving drunk driving idiot deserves that, not because of him, because of the office.

And I’m reminded of the Medal of Honor. As the highest award available for American military service, any recipient deserves respect. Military conduct strongly suggests that a recipient be saluted first, regardless of rank. This poses a quandary, because a higher ranking militarist should not salute someone lower. How does this get solved? Technically, the general or whoever does not salute the person; he or she salutes the medal.

That’s the proper solution; no matter the person, the rank is still there. I have respected the Office of the President, and will respect it in the future. Even if it was someone reprehensible. Since Representative Wilson served in the Army National Guard, one would think he knew about decorum. Maybe that just got lost, like a toy.

Life and Death and One Second After

It’s been not the best summer in my Louisville. Most people I know in this town are associated with Bellarmine, and in the summer I don’t see them as often. I don’t receive as much invigorating interaction with students. It’s lonely. The pressure of the PhD increases daily. Furthermore, I’m having trouble working because I have an ear infection this week. (That’s why there are three posts in 10 days.) Completely clogged I am, so sleeping is tough, and I can’t research in Chicago. I don’t trust my hearing to drive long distance.

Things could be much worse, nevertheless. For instance, I read a post last week that was both seriously loving and seriously painful. Here it is. It’s from the wife of the Survivalblog founder, and it begins thusly:

I am in a very unusual situation. I’m in my mid-40s, but I’m dying. My doctors have told me that I have less than two months to live. So I have been working on my “bucket list.” One of the items therein is finding a new wife for my husband, to marry after I go to be with the Lord.

What a tough choice, eh? I’ve been thinking about that post since I’ve seen it. One small response, well, isn’t envy, but I wish someone would care enough about me to write an ad for someone “sincerely seeking a life-long commitment with a loving husband”. Plus, I would need enough daily page views to get responses. twelvefruits.com has fewer visits in a year than survivalblog.com has in a day. Despite my hosting company, the very competent Lunarpages, offering $25 in Facebook ad credits, and $25 in Google adwords credits, I think I’d need a bit more notoriety.

Fortunately, most of my thoughts have not been so narcissistic. I pray a lot for them, as I do for couples in trouble. I wish them well.

Because I’ll be flying a lot this month of August, including my first other continent, I’ve also been checking out flyer information forums. At flyertalk, travelers demand upgrades out of coach. “Friends don’t let friends fly coach,” one says. One thread is “New meaning to battlefield upgrades”. They’re wrong, of course. I’m not looking forward to so much time in a small seat, but that’s not This plane is a battlefield upgrade, part of this well written sad tale. I’m crying not just because it might help clear my Eustachian tube.

Then, I can make two clicks on the Esquire.com site and reach pictures of curvy Christina Hendricks. What a strange thing, this Internet.

A strange thing, indeed. Saturday morning I was walking to the bank to pick up my rand for the trip, a little annoyed because I got charged about 10%, worse than the fee at most currency exchanges. I’ll know better next time. Anyway, my path takes me by a church; people were walking out and the bells were ringing. Saturday morning meant wedding or funeral, most likely funeral. Then I saw the hearse. On the way back, the procession headed to the cemetery. I realized that I could figure out who I was silent praying for, via the Internet. William Meredith Pierce it was. 83 years old, married 58 years, a healthcare administrator he was.

And I remembered that I have to write my will before I head to South Africa.

Today’s book review sort of continues the summer theme of harsh choices (previously including World’s Most Dangerous Places, Patriots, and the Great Influenza). For once, I’m in line with Hollywood, I guess. Right now you can even Choose Your Own Apocalypse.

The book is One Second After, a novel about survival after an EMP attack. The main author is history professor Bill Forstchen. If you’re worried about the other name on the front cover, it’s not so bad. Yes, I know that Dr. Newt Gingrich is sorely misguided, a so-called champion of conservative values despite divorcing twice and carrying on an affair while attacking President Clinton. Apparently, he was this year received into my Catholic Church despite the divorces, affairs, and other nasty stuff. I’d like to believe in transformative power, but then again there are plenty other evil elements in the Church.

That said, it’s alright because Dr. Gingrich wrote just the forward, not the whole book. Main author Dr. Forstchen is a widower, I think.

As for the book, there are a lot of good points. Because the author writes about the area where he lives, including the college where he teaches, geographic detail is excellent. Black Mountain, North Carolina reads like a place I can see. The people, which I suspect are fictionalized real folk, also have interesting qualities. They might show their emotions heavily, bringing up old grudges too quickly, but they distinguish themselves easily. Things seem fun for a bit, then get nastier and nastier. The people are interesting, enough to get me to read the book in one four hour sitting. That’s rare, and makes the book well worth a 3 out of 5. It’s not for everyone, and has a couple flaws, but for horror, survival, or alternate fiction fans, I would recommend it.

Let’s discuss the issues that made me think, EMP and choices. The book assumes a very strong EMP effect. To explain, EMP stands for Electromagnetic pulse. A nuclear device detonated at the right low space height will release a very strong wave of electromagnetic radiation. High voltages passing through the atmosphere will cause electrical equipment to burn out, including power stations and transformers. Is this a real threat? YES! As part of a nuclear test in 1962 called Starfish Prime, a US bomb caused streetlights to fail and other electrical damage in Hawaii, 900 miles away. A different test damaged early communications satellite Telstar 1, and the Soviets also had internal results. Countries built simulators. There’s a government EMP Commission and there was a hearing in 2008.

The problem is knowing exactly how much damage would be dealt by an attack, and at what distance. Unclassified estimates vary widely; I suspect the good stuff is under wraps. In the book, Dr. Forstchen assumes very severe results. Basically everything with computers and electrics is broken, including almost all post-1970 cars and communications equipment. This adds to the desperation of the tale. Unfortunately, it detracts from the plausibility. For instance, there are standards for emergency buildings. The metal shells of cars and buses provide decent cage protection. Even a metal file cabinet is a potential Faraday Cage that might deflect some of the pulse. Don’t get me wrong here. Lots of damage will occur. Long distance power lines are in serious peril. Phones might survive, but the transmission towers will likely be burnt. Things will be a terrible mess. However, the book’s catastrophic mess requires a failure of all communication, including radios and military preparation. That’s a bit much, and a weakness of the text.

The positive counterweight, though, is that the author follows through on consequences. Even in a more moderate scenario, electricity remains unavailable for weeks to months as lines get replaced. People that rely on refrigeration, like those with insulin, will have issues. Phone service does not exist. While the satellites still circle the Earth, we have trouble communicating through them. Things will change. Food delivery will be spotty. Things will change. Cities will have serious trouble. New York and Chicago and Louisville do not exist at this size without transport and electricity. Lots of people would die.

As things fall apart, choices have to be made. Who can enter a community? Who gets fed? How much? It seems strange in a land where we consider taxing soda pop to fight obesity. Yet only 70 years ago, food was not secure. It wouldn’t take long. What about justice?

These are tough questions, and I appreciate how the book ponders these issues. In that way, it’s better than the classic Alas Babylon which has less struggle with government. Things just happened in the 50s; this text has much for political scientists. It’s not easy to read the Day 10 food discussion, or the riots, or the need for communication, or how things degrade. In a year, 80 percent of the town dies. And, as the last chapter points out, that’s not bad. To many people now, when drowned cats merit a big story, this is shocking. For me, it’s not, but if you do fall into the shocked category, you need this more.

It’s dealing with the sadness of life and death, starting one second after.

This was influenza, only influenza.

In case you haven’t heard, there’s a potential pandemic flu floating around now, enough to make the US government have a website. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention publishes alerts like “Interim Guidance for People who have Close Contact with Pigs in Non-commercial Settings.” Really. They do. So far, even though as of last week there were 40,000 American cases of H1N1 flu, we seem to have dodged a bullet. So far.

Back in January and February, I decided to start researching the deadliest pandemic of the last century. Part of that was to teach it in Stochastic Processes. My students enjoyed the topic (even though they didn’t like the course that much; it does take a real interest in mathematical modeling to like this stuff.) I put an H1N1 question on their final exam in late April. Who knew? Well, maybe the hypothetical conspiracy plotters, but nobody else. My preparation included reading a well-regarded book on the 1918 pandemic, The Great Influenza – the story of the deadliest pandemic in history – by John M. Barry. What I was looking for was, well, a disease thriller – the story of what happened, when, and how much it hurt. How did the “Spanish flu” get around the world? Did anything work? What was the cost?

In this book, I got that. Unfortunately, I got another basically unrelated book, as well; a history of medical schools and medical research at the end of the 19th century. This is a shame. If you like biographies, full of reports about this scientist not liking that scientist, or this political fight, the other book is for you. There’s lots, and lots, of that. Mr. Berry claims in the Acknowledgments, “This book was initially supposed to be a straightforward story of the deadliest epidemic in human history, told from the perspectives of both scientists who tried to fight it and political leaders who tried to respond to it. … it didn’t seem possible to write about the scientists without exploring the nature of American medicine at this time.”

He’s wrong. Actually, he wrote that book inside this bigger one. That book, well, would be really, really good. It wouldn’t be spectacular, because there are still problems. One is that Mr. Berry has a catchphrase, the title of this post. He repeats it a lot. It’s not a good catchphrase either, unlike, say Where’s the Beef? Like the commercial, there’s a whole lot of gossip bun around the pandemic beef.

Nevertheless, there is a good bit of beef. (If you like the scientist stuff, you’ll find even more.) One is why the flu is called “Spanish”. As Mr. Berry explains, the flu did not start in Spain; the most valid theory is, of all places, Kansas. During World War I, Spain did not practice press censorship, and let disease reports flow freely. Thus the name. Other places, including the good ol’ USA, hid details as much as possible. Part of this was military as described in this PBS interview, but part was also to “prevent panic”. It was interesting. Additionally, the hypothesis about President Wilson at the 1919 Paris peace conference is Chapter 32 is extremely illuminating. And, as a side note, three Congressmen were taken by the flu. These details, and statistics, are invaluable. You can find some at the Stanford page and through Wikipedia, yet the good book provides more context and a better story.

Let me give you the chapters for this better book. Read the Prologue, Chapter 6, 11, 13 through 18, 26 through 35, and the Afterward. That book, by itself, would get a 4. However, combined with the extra scientist social club, reduces The Great Influenza to a 2 out of 5. And I very much hope there will be no book about the current H1N1 pandemic of 2009 to top this one.

Top Books

In the spirit of the “15 Books” meme on Facebook, I decided to look at my bookcase and figure out exactly what books would receive a 5 under the Book Rating System.

As a reminder, here’s what a rating of 5 out of 5 stands for:

Outstanding book. If nonfiction, the book made me learn understand something substantial. If fiction, the book is engrossing enough to bring up in casual conversation. When asked, I would make a general recommendation. There aren’t very many at this level, so I feature these on my bookcases. Sometimes I buy them as gifts.

When I say “there aren’t very many”, I mean it. Looking over my bookshelf, there are only eleven books that would receive a 5. Also, I can’t remember any books I don’t own that would get that rating, since I would try to buy such a book, and now I have enough money to do that.

To make it even more fun, I’m going to list them in reverse order. That makes me just like Casey Kasem, I guess. I thought about adding comments, but instead decided to let the list stand on its own.

• 11. The Little Prince, Antoine de Saint-Exupery.
• 10. Bowling Alone, Robert Putnam.
• 9. Gang Leader for a Day, Sudhir Venkatesh.
• 8. The Sunflower, Simon Wiesenthal.
• 7. The Chronicles of Narnia, C. S. Lewis.
• 6. To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee.
• 5. The Complete Calvin and Hobbes, Bill Watterson.
• 4. The Four Loves, C. S. Lewis.
• 3. The Lord of the Rings, J. R. R. Tolkien.
• 2. Obedience to Authority, Stanley Milgram.
• 1. Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury.

When books get added to this list, I’ll make a note here.

Not Good to Great

I’ve mentioned the book Good to Great before, as it was where I read about The Stockdale Paradox. It’s worth quoting again, as great philosophy.

You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end — which you can never afford to lose — with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.

Given my first exposure to the book was this section, I had very high hopes for the remainder of the book. This is the 30th book to get a rating on my book rating system introduced in October 2007. There’s been one top score of 5 in this series, Gang Leader for a Day. Of course, there are other 5’s on my bookcase, like Fahrenheit 451 and The Four Loves. I just read them before this series started.

At the low end, several books have gotten a 1 out of 5, but there have been no zeroes. Good to Great came close, closer than any book beforehand. In the end, though, it squeaks by with a 1 out of 5, primarily because of James Stockdale. I was severely disappointed.

So, what went wrong? Let’s start with the obvious, the decline of mentioned companies. This book was published in 2001, which dates the research to 1999 and 2000. Mr. Collins and his team focused on eleven companies that appeared successful at that time: Abbott, Circuit City, Fannie Mae, Gillette, Kimberly-Clark, Kroger, Nucor, Philip Morris, Pitney Bowes, Walgreens, and Wells Fargo. Let’s look at their performance over the last ten years. I’ll use the same metric, stock price. As a comparison, the S&P 500 index was at about 1328 ten years ago. Unlike the NASDAQ, Dow Jones, and house prices, the broader market had less of a boom. It got up about 1500 in 2000, declined into the 800s in 2003, and rebounded into the 1500s last year, before the crash. Right now the index is in the low 900s. In other words, a broader comparative market has lost about 30%, all in the last year.

1. Abbott: from 43 to 45. Above average, not great.
2. Circuit City: bankrupt.
3. Fannie Mae: from 70 to 0.51. Bailed out by the government.
4. Gillette: from mid-40s to about 50 in 2005, when bought by Proctor and Gamble. Average.
5. Kimberly-Clark: from 54 to 52. Above average, not great.
6. Kroger: from 31 to 21. Average. It made the 2000 decline than never really recovered.
7. Nucor: from 11 to 41. Great, taking off in 2004 along with world steel demand.
8. Philip Morris: from 9 to 16. Very good, EXCEPT that they had to rename their company to Altria because of negative press.
9. Pitney Bowes: from 63 to 20. 1999 was their high point, never reattained.
10. Walgreens: from 28 to 28. Another above average consumer products company like Abbott and Kimberly-Clark.
11. Wells Fargo: from 22 to 22. Above average performance. It took some bailout money, but relatively little. It’s considered strong.

Of the 11 companies, three (Nucor, Philip Morris, Wells Fargo) have excellent performance for their industry group. But one of those three had to rename itself and another took government money. Four have been above average but not great, two average, and two went bankrupt. I wouldn’t call this Great Performance. Thus, we’ve hit the first problem. What they found didn’t transfer. It’s more like Good to Great, temporarily, then basically Average.

Searching deeper, there were two huge problems with their approach. The first, more obvious, one is relying on a flawed metric. The research team used Stock Price, likely because it’s the only thing with sufficient history. Unfortunately, Stock Price makes the ultimate judge the Kapitalist Fundamentalists that I detest. Maximizing shareholder value is not what corporations should do. For a team that conducted dozens of interviews with each “winner”, failing to consider the definition of “win” is a shocking flaw.

The second one is subtler and statistical. Mr. Collins and his team defined success numerically, then tried to find explanations for success. A statistician like myself would call this proof by exploration. They used an exploratory technique, looking backward in an observational study, and then tried to prove things from observation. All my students in Math 200 and 205 should know better than that. Unfortunately, this happens so often in Business books that it gets a name: Survivor Bias. The Freakonomics fellows noticed the problem. Nassim Taleb wrote a book about it. There’s an entire website, survivorbias.com, on this problem.
Survivor Bias is a major failing.

Is most of the advice even complicated? Well, no. Let’s summarize: Make sure leaders delegate and focus on company succession, not personal success. Quality people matter more than product. Understand the Stockdale Paradox (the hardest one). Keep to your plan, slow and steady, with a culture of discipline. Outside high tech, technology accelerates but does not transform. Successes and failures turn a flywheel, not a jumpstart. Like most business books, this is not difficult stuff. Then again, it’s business.

Overall, this was a very disappointing use of my money, even with a coupon. I had started with the best three pages, true philosophy from a Hero. And I don’t mean Mr. Collins. My suggestion is to just listen to the Stockdale Paradox piece and ignore the rest. If you want to learn about people for business, read Gang Leader for a Day. Street boss J. T. will teach you more.

Eco-Smugness goes to eleven

I bought a 2010 Toyota Prius on Saturday. Not just any Prius, either; a silver Prius III with the Solar Roof Package. Why? Environmental snobbery? Well, no. According to the survey, over half of 2007 Prius buyers bought it to make a statement. I didn’t. Actually, that was a negative factor, since I don’t feel the need to increase Smug.

My prior car, a 1999 Pontiac Grand Am GT, has been slowly dying. It served me well, surviving a major crash in 2004 (a 18-wheeler clipped my back bumper on the Dan Ryan Expressway). Yet little things kept breaking, like a power window, power mirrors, and weak air conditioning. Things could get bad fast, and I have some summer driving to do. Given my financial and personal situation, it became time to start searching. So I thought about what car would I want today, and in 2015, and maybe 2020.

Reliability eliminates almost everything from GM and Chrysler. Ten years and 89,000 miles was good for the Pontiac, but Nissan, Honda, and Toyota cars routinely run past 100,000 miles. Because Ford has been rapidly improving quality this decade, I left them on the list. It’s not Fix Or Repair Daily anymore, and not surprisingly Ford is the American automaker in the best shape. My driving needs are primarily in the city, and I don’t transport kids, drive on dirt roads, or pull a boat. Since I like quiet and comfort, with some transport needs, I wanted a car that could hold four adults designed for comfortable city life. Driving is not a source of excitement or fun, like a super exotic tour. I’m point to point.

Also, I want to be prepared in case gasoline returns to $4 a gallon, which is one crazy situation away. Like, what if Iran went into disorder? Oh. Oops. The current European average is around 40 MPG, but there are very few choices in America. Diesel engines, popular across the pond, generally don’t come here. Over 35 MPG there are only six options: Toyota Prius, Smart fortwo, Honda Insight, Honda Civic Hybrid, Jetta diesel TDi, Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan hybrid. The smart was out, because I would like to be married in 5 years and thinking about a three person family (and even if I’m not, reviews call it noisy and uncomfortable). I considered the Jetta, but the more relevant city MPG figures were low and diesel didn’t appeal to me.

That left four hybrid vehicles, two hatchbacks (Toyota Prius and Honda Insight) and two sedans (Ford Fusion and Honda Civic). Two of the four, the Prius and Fusion, can run completely on electric power, while the Insight and Civic use electric solely for assistance. Also, the Civic and Insight are smaller cars than the Fusion and Prius. All four cars are well rated, with good reliability ratings from Consumer Reports. There’s nothing wrong with any of them. It depends on what you want.

I first eliminated the two Hondas. I examined the Insight, including a test drive. I would not comfortably fit in the back seat. Also, the finish is not as nice as the Prius or Fusion. On the drive, though it is pretty quiet, the lack of complete engine turnoff when stopped was a relative negative. On the positive side, it drives more like a sports car. Also, the Insight is least expensive, but the cost difference is not as big as advertised. The $19,800 LX option package does not include cruise control. With cruise and a center console, the EX package costs about $21,500 including destination charges. For $1,500 more, you can get a Prius II. I would recommend the Insight for singles or young couples that want a sporty feel and 40+ MPG.

After trying the Insight and hearing the lack of full quiet when stopped, I didn’t test drive the Civic Hybrid; it uses the same engine style. It looks good and comfortable, and gets very good ratings overall. If you’re looking for the sedan style, it’s a serious contender. It’s smaller than the Fusion, but also less expensive at an estimated real price of about $24,000.

I test drove three vehicles of each of my two finalists. The Fusion/Milan wound up as runner-up, but it’s still a wonderful car. An American company has found the future. It will run fully on electric power; I did that at 30-35 miles per hour. Compared to the Prius, it’s more powerful on the road and lets less road noise into the cabin. The seats are very comfortable, and I easily fit in the back seat. Most of the cars come with sunroof and backup camera. The backup camera in the 501A package projects on the rear view mirror, which might be more appealing than on a navigation screen – as in the 502A package and Prius.
There are a few disadvantages. First, because Ford put the batteries between the back seat and the trunk, the seats do not fold down. Second, though not unwieldy, it is about 15 inches longer and has a larger turning radius than the other cars. Third, the mileage is not as good as the Prius; Real world reports are 38-42 miles per gallon, not 48-52.

Also, the Fusion is the most expensive, with the 501A about $29,500. There are discounts, unlike the other cars; one is a US government tax credit of $1700 until September 30, then $850 for six more months. Furthermore, a few dealers will take Ford discount plans even on this high demand vehicle, though they don’t have to. The X-plan offers a fixed no haggle discount of about 6% from MSRP. With the discount and credit, the effective price is about $26,500. You can get a plan PIN from a Ford employee or by working at some companies, but there’s another easy way. Just buy some Ford stock, which costs $5.72 per share as I write, and according to the documents there’s no minimum number of shares. You can spend less than $100 to buy 10 shares, then apply to get the PIN. If you are interested, you can do a Goodle search, or email me and I’ll give you directions. And you should be interested if you’re looking for a midsize sedan. The Fusion hybrid is the best hybrid midsize sedan. It might be the best midsize sedan short of a $40,000 BMW 3-series. Regular options might be cheaper, but the difference between 25 MPG and 38 MPG is 13 gallons every 1000 miles. At 100,000 miles and $3 per gallon, 1300 gallons is $3900, roughly the hybrid premium. I strongly suggest paying now and getting the quieter ride, if you can.

With options, the Prius I bought cost about the same as my second choice, a black Ford Fusion 501A with leather. What tipped the scales? I considered the advantages of the Fusion above. On the other hand, the Prius is smaller and more maneuverable, while maintaining passenger space. The hatchback design provides more flexibility, and Toyota did a great job of maximizing interior space. The interior is still nice and comfy. Power is more than sufficient. Keyless entry and startup is very nice. Toyota has a better reliability reputation overall, even though the Fusion’s rating has been very good. And the extra 10 MPG is substantial.

In the end, it came down to options. The considered Fusion has a fancy radio, Bluetooth phone integration, sunroof, backup camera, and leather. The midlevel $24,000 Prius III has a fancy radio and Bluetooth phone integration. The Solar package adds a sunroof and backup camera. There’s no leather, but there are other things. A navigation screen is nice, but not worth much since there are good voice navigators available for $250. What clinched the deal were two things designed for hot climates, remote AC and solar roof fan. Getting into an overheated car is miserable, as all the glass raises the temperature inside above the outside air. The Solar package adds a 56 watt solar panel, which powers a fan. (And if things go really bad, I can strip it for electricity.) When it’s hot and sunny, the sun provides enough energy to circulate outside air; the inside becomes like the outside. Then, as I approach the vehicle, I can start the A/C remotely. My passengers and I feel less pain. In no way would I claim this is like, let’s say, cholera in Zimbabwe. I realize I’m blessed to have a car or A/C. Things are good, and I need to take advantage of them to change the world. I’m thankful.

At some point I’ll write up what I learned about buying a car, and interacting with 8 dealerships (4 Toyota, 2 Ford, 2 Honda). Despite the radical increase in technology, people, well, are still people.