Chinese men vs. endangered species

Tigers, bears, reindeers, leopards, wolves, cobras and boas, and now the African rhinos (Economist subscription required) are on the list too.

What do those animals have in common? They are probably all endangered to some degree, and most of them are protected by international laws against poaching. Additionally, all of them are also being hunted because a huge underground Chinese market demands paws, antlers, bones, organs and other parts from those animals. The afore-linked Economist article talks about the African rhinos being sold in China despite regulations sought to protect them.

Of course the claimed medicinal benefits all have something to do with the male sexuality. The Chinese believe the animals parts either have aphrodisiac effects or can cure/alleviate male impotence.

This is obviously no old news to most of us but I hear it so much now that I feel ashamed that I'm Chinese. China, a rapid advancing society with a long civilization is still fascinated with stupid myths and beliefs. How is this possible? Did Confucius have impotence problems too??

I recall at a very young age, images of tiger parts soaked in rice alcohol being sold at morning's farmer's market. My mom used to tell me how those "tiger bone medicine wines" were fake. The sellers apparently used cow bones, glued on dyed cowhide to make them look like tiger bones.

Are Chinese men more genetically prone to sexual dysfunction and impotence? This really puzzles me. I haven't been able to find any scientific studies on this. It does seem to me that whatever the problem those guys have, they sure make a big deal out of it. To the degree that they want to stuff themselves with exotic animals.

People who are always talking about why Asian girls date white guys in the US. If Chinese men have problems getting it up, why shouldn't Chinese women marry non-Asian men? I don't pity those guys at all if innocent animals are being slaughtered in vain.

Another amazing entrepreneur under 30

While poking around on Wikipedia today, I started reading the page on facebook. I vaguely remember being invited to join the site in 2004 while in graduate school at U of A.

It's funny that something seemingly so amateur and collegiate to me then has spung into a mainstream media outlet with million dollar deals involved in keeping it running. I felt the same way about LinkedIn when my classmate Srini first invited me to join, circa 2004 as well. There were only 2 people that I knew on that site! These days, I'm averaging a new contact almost every day.

What really amazed me was the profile of a major player currently at thefacebook, Matt Cohler. (see LinkedIn) I found his page on Wikipedia and started reading it immediately. It detailed Matt's adventures betweens getting Yale degrees, launching marketing plans at a pioneer IT company in Beijing, playing Jazz professionally as well as being a consultant at McKinsey, funding LinkedIn and now strategizing for Facebook. And all that accomplishment before the age of 30, I reckon? Holy crap!

I guess it did make me feel severely underachieved. This happened before trust me. Most recently it was stumbling upon Steve Jurvetson's Flickr account after being captivated by an interesting photo. I later realized he was a million dollar venture capitalist! In his 40's perhaps, he's lived almost a lifetime of an industry.

I gotta leave work now, but had to write down those thoughts before driving. Time to figure out my lifeplan after 30. Too little too late and/or not even possible with today's economy and success stories?

Econ stats from China

As usual, I was glossing over my favourite econ blog Marginal Revolution this morning. I came across this article on the validity of econ analyses and statistics from China. Can I just say "wow!" It gave backings to my frustrations with the western world's Chinese infatuation really nicely.

It is hardly surprising that corruption and nepotism plague most developing countries. China, even after drastic reforms in the market, it is still a very artificial kind of place to do business. Many of the economic principles don't apply directly. The author notes that the statistics western economists are collecting under the restriction of not offending the Chinese Communist Party are not reflective of the true nature of the economy. The sentence about high-up party cadres' children controling a large of the commerce is no news either.

I'm pretty happy to stumble upon this, an educational read.

The Ethanol Buzz

Renewed interest on ethanol, a grain alcohol, dominated the news coverage of President Bush's visit to Brazil recently. It was on NPR every 15 minutes during All Things Considered when I drove home

Is ethanol green? Is ethanol good for us? The answer largely depends on what you consider to be part of the equation. The primary economic motivation of ethanol fuel is to rid of dependency on oil, mostly the imported portion in the United States. Ethanol is also touted as "clean burning" because of its low pollution.

However, the environmentally challenged drivers should think twice before jumping onto the ethanol bandwagon. As I have understood it, producing ethanol can be quite an ethical dilemma.

Brazil, the largest producer of ethanol in the world, makes ethanol from fermented sugar. Where does sugar come from? Sugar canes. Although the majority of the Amazon Rainforest deforested has been turned into grazing land for cattle, I would not be surprised if the same is and will be done to clean out land to grow sugar canes. According to Wikipedia article, ethanol releases 30% less energy than gasoline per volume.

This means we need to grow more corn and sugar cane in order to produce enough ethanol to fully replenish the current consumption of gasoline. There just simply isn’t enough land for growing those crops right now.

Obviously, deforestation has had a dramatic effect on earth climate. It also has had a positive effect on the rural economy of Brazil. It’s just funny to see the media jumping on something “cool” just because it seems like a nice alternative to gasoline fuel. The harsh fact of going true green is you simply cannot accomplish this without an implicit negative effect on the environment while also steering clear of negative economic effects. It is a give-take dillema politicians don’t want to talk about and that the media has a hard time conveying.

Ethanol may give us a buzz in the head, but it is still not worth the hangover for me.

Tour Groups Wanted

My boyfriend, his sister and I are going to Washington, DC for a weekend trip in April. So naturally, I started looking to see if we could get tours of government buildings while visiting the capitol.

Back in 1995, on my first day of immigrating to the U.S., my Dad and I visited the White House. It was a great day. I hadn't even had a chance to eat at McDonald's and yet I was already inside the building where the American president worked and slept.

Fast forward 12 years, things aren't as simple. According to the White House website, tours are only given to groups of 10 or larger. Plus, I have to contact a congressman 2 months prior in order to get a reservation to go in. Not going to happen for us.

I then checked the Pentagon website to see if we could go inside. Its website states you must be in a group of 5 and larger, and with an educational, governmental or military institution. And get this, also church groups? Anyone up for joining the Church of Cecily? I'll be glad to take my parisoners on a tour inside the American military headquarters.

When did government buildings become so inaccessible to the common people? My guess is 9/11. Is it because the government functions more efficiently with less "disruption" from the outside? Sounds awefully untransparent to me. I feel now I have less chance of seeing the American government in action as a U.S. citizen compared to a decade ago when I was just fresh off the plane from China. Weird? Definitely.