Confusing Use of Statistics

Earlier this evening I was flipping channels and stopped at one of the local news stations. It was doing a story about the impact of the 150,000 Katrina evacuees who are still living in Houston. (For the purposes of the story, they were talking only about what falls within the Houston city limits, not the "greater Houston area".)

Here's what bothered me: the story mentioned that, in the past year, if you don't take into account Katrina evacuees, the crime rate in Houston "rose by 7%". However, if you do take into account Katrina evacuees, then "that number rises by 25%". I can't remember exactly how the woman worded everything, but she ended up doing so in a way that made it impossible to figure out what the hell she was saying. What number rose by 25%? The number or crimes? Because that's a lot of crime. But because of they way she structured her sentences, she was actually saying that 7% got 25% higher, which is an increase of less than 2%. That's not very much. And if she was actually saying that the non-evacuee crime hike is a 7% increase, and that the with-evacuee increase was higher, did the percentage increase by 25% (for a total increase of 32%) or to 25%???

Normally I would just mention the fact that this was the local Fox news affiliate, and bitch about Fox news. But I would acually like to know what the hell they were talking about. It only took about a second on the internet for me to confirm my suspicions: that the increase in crime rates are definately not less than 2%. One story from a Lafeyette news station's website even said that, since the hurricane and the evacuation, Katrina evacuees have been either the victims or the suspects in 20% of the murders that took place in Houston - more than double their percenatage of the population.

The amount of first-hand, accurate information that I know about Louisiana is negligible. I'm not even going to post what I think, except to say this: I think that, if anything, the post-Katrina events have made it a little more clear that extreme poverty and excessive wealth, and the huge gap in between, are huge problems in this country. Take from that what you will. It's too late at night/ early in the morning.

I blame you, Soroush

Let me begin by saying the following: I never get hit on. And even before I was married and wore a wedding ring, I very rarely got hit on. I do, however, meet a lot of random people when I'm out studying. Most of them are nice, interesting people and we end up having conversations about things like law school or religion. They'll say things to me like "You remind me of my daughter" and "Excuse me, I know this sounds stupid, but what exactly is a tort?"

Unfortunately, this arrangement has been upset. A few weeks ago I visited my eye doctor, who also happens to be my friend Soroush. He is the BEST eye doctor ever. Being that he's a fantastic eye doctor, he recommended that I get a weak pair of reading glasses so that I wasn't putting so much strain on my eyes. Glasses are covered by my insurance, so while part of me thought "What a good suggestion, I certainly don't want to strain my eyes" another part of me thought "Ooh! Free accessories!" Feel free to make fun of me.

I went to place where Matt got his glasses and picked out a really cute pair of kind of smart-looking, but kind of trendy glasses. They arrived just as I started studying for finals, which was awesome because wearing them made me feel smart.

What I didn't know was that, apparently, glasses are code for "I'm a big hoe and you should try to hit on me even though I'm wearing a wedding ring." I am not exaggerating when I say that every single time I have been studying by myself since getting the glasses, I've gotten hit on. It's been so long since anyone has hit on me that I've completely forgotten the art of snappy comebacks. Truth be told, hitting on someone's who's married probably elevates you from deserving a snappy comeback to deserving a kick in the nuts. But that would be a tort.

And let me just remind all of the single men out there that weather-related comments are sucky, sucky pick-up lines. When I was single and a guy would approach me with something like "Wow, it's pretty humid today" I's have to bite my tongue to keep from sarcastically saying something like "My, aren't you creative! You must be an artist!" Let me also say that, even if you seem like a nice guy, jokingly saying "If you ever get divorced I'd love to take you out" is in Bad Form. Bad. Bad. Form.

It's been about a week of this nonsense and today, for the first time, I rediscovered my Withering Stare. Ah, if only you'd seen me back in undergrad! I could freeze a potential suitor from fifty yards away with nothing but a glance . . . those were the days.

As it states above, I blame Soroush for this. Damn him and his professional demeanor. And damn the stupid glasses for being so cute. I should have just bought the adorable Burberry boots. Men never notice shoes.

People have too much money

I'm taking Artemis's advice and making more lists. It's very soothing, and it helps me forget that I have two exams left.

When my friend Hifa and I were teenagers, we got a kick out of the ugly clothes at Neiman Marcus. At the time I probably vowed never to shop there because of how ridiculous it was to spend $6,000 on a dress covered in sequined palm trees, but now that I'm older I have the wisdom not to throw the good fashion out with the bad. For the record: I am NOT advocating designer clothing prices. But I'm not denying that the constant rain has be seriously considering these. (Erin, say your worst. At least they aren't Uggs.)

Sometimes Hifa and I would split up in Neiman's and play a game called "who can find the ugliest item". We got kicked out when we started taking pictures.

In celebration of ugly fashions, I thought I's share some of the stupidest, ugliest, biggest wastes of money that I could find. If the hideousness makes you start to feel nauseous, just think abotu Hugh Laurie's face. You'll feel better.

Anyway, let the fashion-bashing commence:

1. A $6,000 cellphone. You think I'm kidding? Go ahead, click on the link. I dare you.
2. A $2,000 diamond encrusted Hello Kitty watch. I can't think of a single thing to say that would make this any more ridiculous.
3. A $6,000 sculpture OF BUDDHA. Are you KIDDING ME?
4. A $300 pair of men's pajamas. For the record, this item is suggested by the NM website as a "Gift for Him". I can't even imagine Matt's face if I gave him a $300 pair of pajamas. It wouldn't be a happy face.
5. This purse. If anyone clicks on this and thinks "awww, that's cute!" then I don't know if we can be friends anymore. This purse is U-G-L-Y. You couldn't pay me enough to carry it, let alone get me to pay $500 for it.

Let this be a lesson to the people of the world (well, those of them with too much money): just because something is expensive and trendy, that doesn't make it good. You may be able to buy a $900 pair of cufflinks, but you can't buy good taste.

5 Things . . .

. . . that are more fun than studying for finals.

1. Watching a show about lions on PBS. Did you know that you can tell a lion's age by the color of his nose?
2. Making things with the Magic Bullet. You know, like delicious salsa, homemade guacamole, and ten-second nachos!
3. Watching clips from One Man Star Wars.
4. Putting decorative pink jewels all over Matt's phone while he's asleep.
5. Scuba-diving. I've never actually been scuba-diving, but I'm pretty sure it's better than studying for finals.