Ancient Economic Thought: Money

Name of Movement:  Ancient Economic Thought, the origins of money Principle subscriber & other followers:  The Babylonians and other ancient peoples Main Thesis (4 or 5 sentences "be concise"):  The concept of money and interest rates Context:  post-Agrarian Societies

"Economic organization in the earliest civilizations of the fertile crescent was driven by the need to efficiently grow crops in river basins. The Euphrates and Nile valleys were homes to earliest examples of codified measurements written in base 60 and Egyptian Fractions. Egyptian keepers of royal granaries, and absentee Egyptian landowners reported in the papyri. Historians of this period note that the major tool of accounting for agrarian societies, the scales used to measure grain-inventory, reflected dual religious and ethical symbolic meanings. The Erlenmeyer tablets give a picture of Sumerian production in the Euphrates Valley around 2200-2100 BC, and show an understanding of the relationship between grain and labor inputs (valued in "female labor days") and outputs and an emphasis on efficiency. Egyptians measured work output in man-days. The development of sophisticated economic administration continued in the Euphrates and Nile valleys during the Babylonian Empire and Egyptian Empires when trading units spread through the Near East within monetary systems. Egyptian fraction and base 60 monetary units were extended in use and diversity to Greek, early Islamic Culture, and medieval cultures. By 1202 AD, Fibonacci's use of zero and Vedic-Islamic numerals, motivated Europeans to apply zero as an exponent, birthing modern decimals 350 years later.

The city-states of Sumer developed a trade and market economy based originally on the commodity money of the Shekel which was a certain weight measure of barley, while the Babylonians and their city-state neighbors later developed the earliest system of economics using a metric of various commodities, that was fixed in a legal code. The early law codes from Sumer could be considered the first (written) economic formula, and had many attributes still in use in the current price system today: codified amounts of money for business deals (interest rates), fines in money for 'wrong doing', inheritance rules, laws concerning how private property is to be taxed or divided, etc.

Earlier collections of (written) laws, just prior to Hammurabi, that could also be considered rules and regulations as to economic law for their cities include the codex of Ur-Nammu, king of Ur (ca. 2050 BC), the Codex of Eshnunna (ca. 1930 BC) and the codex of Lipit-Ishtar of Isin (ca. 1870 BC)."

Discussion Points:

The concept of money has been around for some time, and it wasn't started by the Jews (although likely expanded and improved). It does appear that money has been around nearly as long as civilization itself. Is it possible to have a society without money? What is the impact of money on the interactions between individuals and then relating to the society as a whole? I think we'd like to believe a society without money is possible, but it probably is not. Money afterall, is a measure of consequences, and on some basic level, a great deal many people need to be threatened by consequence to be motivated into useful endeavors.

I am going to propose that we split the remaining sections of unit 1 (Ancient Economic Thought) among the other three bloggers. Indian Concepts, Muslim Concepts, and Chinese Concepts remain. After that we can move onto Greco-Roman, the Republic, and Aristotle. Use this article as reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_economic_thought#Ancient_Near_East

Book Review: The Colony

Title

The Colony

The Harrowing True Story of the Exiles of Molokai

Author

John Tayman

Publication Information

Simon & Schuster: 2006

318 pages

Reason for Reading

I was thinking about doing a paper on the quarantining of people living with HIV/AIDS for a class last fall (which ended up changing to something completely different). While I was doing some background research on the topic, I happened upon some information related to a leper colony (aka Hansen's Disease) in Hawaii that was enforced for over 100 years ending in 1969. The story intrigued me and I started reading this book over the semester break last Christmas. I didn't finish it when the semester started, so I re-read it this summer.

Synopsis

The book details the entire history of the colony on the island of Moloka'i, located on the island between Oahu and Maui. Throughout this time, it details the key people involved in the formation and maintenance of the colony, as well as notable people living in the colony itself. The most famous of these appears to be Father Damien, who essentially became known worldwide as the healthy white man who ventured to live alongside the lepers to do God's work, for which he was eventually honored as a saint. He follows through the end of the colony's official status as a place of exile and through the early 2000's when a few remaining exiles still maintained residence on the island.

Review

I very much enjoyed the book. Writing the history of something like this could prove difficult to write in a manner that doesn't occasionally get bogged down in details, but I never found that to be the case. The author made it quite easy to keep track of the figures he decided to include in the history so the book is a relatively fast read.

Quotes

"For 103 years, beginning in 1866, the Hawaiian and then American governments forcibly removed more than eight thousand people to a remote and inaccessible peninsula on the Hawaiian island of Molokai, and into one of the largest leper colonies in the world. The governments did so in the earnest belief that leprosy was rampantly contagious, that isolation was the only effective means of controlling the disease, and that every person it banished actually suffered from leprosy and was thus a hopeless case. On all three counts, they were wrong." (1)

"Hawaiians of the era had several descriptive phrases for leprosy, but perhaps the most apt was 'the sickness that is a crime.' " (8)

"Although Leviticus contains no explicit moral diagnosis, scholars have determined that priests likely viewed any skin disorder as a sign that someone had offended God, and had been punished with a sinful mark. In the context of the Bible, this blurring of boundaries between medical and ethical diagnoses had one critical consequence: almost all skin conditions became stigmatized." (97)

What is the proper course of action for past transgressions?

Wellesley professor unearths a horror: Syphilis experiments in Guatemala

I don't have a lot of time to write this up very formally, but I thought this was a noteworthy article that was forwarded to everybody in SPH by another student.

My question is what is a government to do 70 years after the fact? Obama has apologized for this to the Guatemalan government, but if I remember correctly (I read this a few days ago), there was also a question of possible reparations of some sort. Personally, I don't really see what good it would do. The impression I got was that there were unlikely to be any descendants of these people. In that case, the suffering inflicted can not be undone or assuaged. The horror some may experience now is unlikely to be any higher than you or I might experience reading about this. And with a Guatemalan government complicit in the act at the time, how are the United States any more guilty than they?

What are your thoughts?

Book Review: Polio: An American Story

Title
Polio: An American Story
(Winner of the 2006 Pulitzer Prize in History)

Author
David M. Oshinsky
George Littlefield Professor of American History, Department of History, University of Texas

Publication Date
2005

Publication Information
Oxford University Press; 288 pages

Book Review: The J Curve

Title
The J Curve
A New Way to Understand Why Nations Rise and Fall

Author
Ian Bremmer
Adjunct Professor, School for International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
President, Eurasia Group

Publication Date
2006

Publication Information
Simon & Schuster Paperbacks; 291 pages

Reason for Reading
The author, Ian Bremmer was on The Daily Show on May 13th pitching his newest book, “The End of the Free Market.” In the interview, he seemed to be knowledgeable, thoughtful, and articulate so I thought his book would be worth checking out. While searching, I discovered a previous book of his in the bargain section of Amazon, so I thought I’d try that one first.

Book Review: On the Social Contract

Title
On the Social Contract (Du Contrat Social)

Author
Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Publication Date
1762

Publication Information
Dover (Dover Thrift Edition); 97 pages

Reason for Reading
In keeping with my goal of learning more of the American Revolution and the era in which it took place while simultaneously focusing on political theory to better understand the political system installed at that time, I picked this book by Rousseau discussing social contract theory. Given the time of publication, I would hazard a guess that many of the founding fathers of America (at least those involved in drawing up the new Constitution) would have read this. Whether or not it had any direct influence on either the Articles of Confederation or the Constitution I’m not certain. The little I’ve looked up online seems to indicate its effects on America’s founding were negligible, but it may have been more influential in the French Revolution. Regardless of this, the text remains noteworthy in the field.

Immigration through the eyes of an intellectual (Chomsky per usual)

I'm linking to a talk he gave at Brown where he goes into a history lesson on how NAFTA had the effect to, while helping its creators (wealthy), make the US a more attractive place to the bludgeoned poor of Central and South America economically. Therefore, our own actions during the Carter and Reagan years has made us more prone to illegal immigration.

He goes on to discuss that while since the late 19th/early 20th century, the 14th amendment rights for corporations as people have greatly expanded (due to their intrinsic power applied as legal appeal), the rights of illegal immigrants have been greatly reduced so that they are no longer consider people (slippery slope anyone?). He ties this in with the recent Arizona law where anyone who appears Latino has to carry around documentation of citizenship, in effect purporting a pro-white agenda in that state.

SB 1070

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBfHD2n13OA (50 mins duration)

Book Review: His Excellency

Title
His Excellency: George Washington

Author
Joseph J. Ellis
Professor of History – Mount Holyoke College

Publication Date
2004

Reason for Reading
With all the talk recently about what the Founding Fathers intended for the country, I’ve had an increased curiosity about the American Revolution and the people involved in starting it. I figured Washington to be a good place to start and wasn’t disappointed in my selection. Both Washington as a topic and Ellis as an author were good. Ellis has written a number of books on the period, and his reputation seems to be quite good. He won the Pulitzer for his book Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation.

Supreme Court Case of the Month: Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals

Case

William Daubert, et ux., etc., et al., Petitioners v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc (1993)

Chief Justice
William Rehnquist

Background

A couple children were born with birth defects, which their parents claimed was due to use of the drug Bendectin (used to treat nausea & morning sickness). Merrell Dow's expert witness showed that there were no studies linking Bendectin to birth defects. The plaintiffs' witness showed that there was evidence of birth defects in in vitro and in vivo animal studies, pharmacological studies, and reanalysis of other published studies. However, these apparently were not generally accepted within the scientific community at that time.

Two previous standards come into play. The older precedent is the Frye law, a common law standard from 1923. The second is the 1975 Federal Rules of Evidence. The Frye law held that in order to be admissible as evidence, the techniques must be "generally accepted by a meaningful segment of the associated scientific community." The Federal Rules of Evidence are a broad set of rules that apply to pretty much every aspect of evidence, not just scientific. This is where it gets a little tricky. I'm not sure how exactly these differed from the Frye law. I think they just didn't clearly articulate how expert opinion would be allowed in court and what would qualify as expert opinion.

Synopsis

Both the district court and the Circuit court found for Merrell Dow, so it wasn't a surprise that the Supreme Court found for the defendant as well, but the case established a new precedent for how scientific evidence is allowed. Frye appears to be quite similar to the Daubert Standard, and I think the significance of Daubert is just that it essentially overruled the Federal Rules of Evidence and established a Supreme Court precedent. More specifically, I think the FRE didn't clearly articulate what was permissible for expert opinions, and this case essentially clarified what would be, and it's similar to the original Frye Standard.

Two things were mentioned about the plaintiffs' evidence that bears mentioning. First, the evidence they submitted appeared to have been prepared specifically for litigation, which apparently made the Circuit Court skeptical. Also, the plaintiff's expert witness was later found to have falsifed research on the teratogenic effects of Bendectin, but that appears to have been after the case was heard by the Supreme Court.

Vote & Dissenting Opinions

Majority: 7 Concur/Dissent: 2

Notable on this is that Chief Justice Rehnquist is one of the two dissenters.

Further Discussion

I stumbled onto this case when it was mentioned in my Epidemiology text book. One of the first quotes I read was that this is the most important Supreme Court case you've never heard of.

It reminded me a bit of the Thimerosal vaccine discussion we had recently. How might this apply to potential cases involving Thimerosal? I would guess at this juncture, any cases with that would get thrown out pretty quickly or be an easy ruling for the defendants if the only evidence is one questionable research study that was later retracted by the journal that published it, so it's not exactly a valid comparison.

References and Further Reading

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_v._Merrell_Dow_Pharmaceuticals

http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~jus/0302/orofino.pdf

Federal Rules of Evidence as of 12/1/09:

http://www.uscourts.gov/rules/EV2009.pdf

Supreme Court Case of the Week: Gibbons v. Ogden

Case

Thomas Gibbons, Appellant v. Aaron Ogden, Respondent (1824)

Chief Justice

John Marshall

Background

Aaron Ogden had a license to operate a monopolistic steamboat service granted by the State of New York. Thomas Gibbons operated a competing steamboat service on interstate waterways adjacent to the state of New York. Ogden took him to court in the state of New York to prevent him from operating his business, and two levels of New York court agreed with him.

Synopsis

The Supreme Court agreed with Gibbons' lawyers argument that that the Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution (the Commerce Clause) gave Congress the right to regulate commerce extended to "all aspects of it, overriding state laws to the contrary." (from wikipedia)

Vote & Dissenting Opinions

6-0 (with 1 abstaining)

Further Discussion

This case seems pretty straightforward and simple, really. It is an important case, but at least on first glance, appears to be an easy decision. Here's Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 & 3 of the Constitution:

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes

References & Further Reading

http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1792-1850/1824/1824_0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbons_v._Ogden

Book Review: Problems of Knowledge and Freedom

Title
Problems of knowledge and freedom
Author
Noam Chomsky
Date
Two Lectures originally presented at Trinity College (Cambridge) in 1971

Reason
I previously read Chomsky’s “Profit over People” and greatly enjoyed his writing style as well as his insights and conclusions precisely pointed at not just interpreting our society, but also how we may improve it. While searching for additional Chomsky books to read I came across “Problems of knowledge and freedom” which offered a glimpse of Chomsky at the precipice of public admiration (or disagreement; 1971). The book couples Chomsky’s life (linguistics and politics) succinctly into two chapters (lectures) and reveals someone whom Chomsky revered (Bertrand Russell).


Synopsis
The book is two chapters; On interpreting the world and On changing the world. The first chapter summarizes Chomsky’s thesis on the acquisition and transfer of knowledge among humans (Linguistics, naturally). Briefly, a system of knowledge results from the interplay of innate mechanisms, genetically determined maturational processes, and the interaction with the social and physical environment (Chomsky’s Thesis). Herein lay the precepts from which the rest of the chapter evolves from; including our mental faculties being limited by our linguistic fecundity, neuroplasticity (use it or lose it), original thought being preempted by prior knowledge bases, and the necessity of a fully developed limbic system to give “scope and limits” to knowledge acquisition.

In the second chapter a relatively young Chomsky (41) recognizes the late work of his predecessor (Russell) and treks a similar path critically analyzing Western cultural and specifically the United States. This chapter builds nicely describing Chomsky’s phrase “consent without consent” highlighting the use of propaganda to galvanize a people into backing the concentration of power to ensure the status quo (a firm belief in the “benevolent” autocracies will be accompanied by one’s ability to accomplish the American Dream) and the chapter ends with many examples demonstrating the use and power of state propaganda (contextual; 1970s therefore Vietnam particularly). On of the more enjoyable sections in a chapter revealing subversion at the highest levels is a mental exercise Chomsky asks his readers to try reciting current United States handlings of war and inserting USSR for U.S. For an unfamiliar reader this could be a paradigm shifter.

Review
Why you should read this book. This is a Wikipedia page on Chomsky’s work. By this I mean it is brief but succinct with many references and best of all the author is Chomsky himself. I would recommend this book as a starter for those interested in Chomsky as his other readings will likely reiterate his statements here. The only criticism I might offer is Chomsky appears to be unaware of his critics or those holding opposing views with merit. This is a criticism of this particular book and not of Chomsky in general.


Quotes
“The major point that I want to show, by this brief and informal discussion, is that there apparently are deep-seated and rather abstract principles of a very general nature that determine the form and interpretation of sentences and such principles are language universals; it is plausible to attribute the proposed language invariants to the innate language faculty which is, in turn, one component of the structure of mind.”

“The systems of knowledge that underlie normal human behavior simply cannot be described in terms of networks of association, fabrics of dispositions to respond, habit structures, and the like.”

From Russell:
“There can be no real freedom or democracy until the men who do the work in a business also control its management…and the real obstacles lie in the heart of man, and the cure for these is a firm hope, informed and fortified in thought.”

Chomsky for a good laugh?

"I had a startling experience a few weeks ago. I travelled to Mexico City for talks at the National University, an enormous and very impressive institution with high standards of achievement and scholarship. Entrance is selective, but the university is virtually free. I then visited an even more remarkable institution, the college in Mexico City established by former mayor Lopez Obrador. Again, the facilities and standards are quite impressive. It is not only free, but has open admissions, though sometimes that requires some delay and sometimes assistance for students lacking adequate preparation. Shortly after I went to San Francisco for talks, and learned more about the California institutions of higher education. They have been at the very peak of the international higher education system. By now tuitions are quite high, even for in-state students, and cutbacks are affecting teaching, research, and staff. It would be no great surprise if the two major state universities, UC Berkeley and UC Los Angeles, will soon be privatized while the remainder of the state system is reduced considerably in scale and level. Needless to say, Mexico is a poor country with a struggling economy, and California should be one of the richest places in the world, with incomparable advantages. I mention these recent experiences only to emphasize that the recent cut-backs in higher education seen in much of the world cannot simply be traced to economic problems. Rather, they reflect fundamental choices about the nature of the society in which we will live. If it is to be designed for the wealthy and privileged, mostly engaged in management and finance while production is transferred abroad and most of the population is left to fend somehow for themselves at the fringes of decent and creative life, then these are good choices. If we have different aspirations for the world of our children and grandchildren, the choices are shameful and ruinous." (1)


Very succinct, very precise, very accurate. He just did what doctors do to patients but on the society level (doctors rarely make a diagnosis simply off one symptom even though it's possible). If that Mexican girl is in BIG this week, then I'm going to ask her more about the educational systems.

1) An email from Noam Chomsky. Chomsky.info Accessed Dec. 1, 2009
http://chomsky.info/letters/20091130.htm

Stormfront.org

After reading the Wikipedia page for Fight Club and seeing that some of the more major literary critics completely missed the usury bit, I took the search to google and ~6 down was a site called Stormfront.org. The '.org' is White Power. On their forums I found some very philosophical people, highly educated and as well versed in cognition as I am (and I might add even more articulate). And they are neo-Nazis. I soon received a Trojan Virus storm and have not visited the site since. These guys are smart and their web-counter was over 100,000. Palahniuk was not meaning for his work to be used in this way. Fight Club had nothing to do with eugenics, it had to do with power and slavery. It's clear how these ideas could be manipulated or taken in the wrong direction (made possible by those who do not value human life in the way which ironically their own God intended), but let's hope history does not repeat itself in this regard.

Do NOT visit this site. It is heavily guarded.

Fort Hood Shootings

This may be a tough topic but let’s address the Fort Hood shooting and media/populist reaction. Major Nidal Malik Hasan attacked fellow comrades last week leading to over 40 casualties including 13 deaths. Many news organizations immediately started questioning his heritage (Arab descent), his possible connections to extreme Muslim groups, and positing whether or not this was a terrorist attack. We all know this was a deplorable and cowardly act, so we don’t need to focus on that. Let’s instead talk about any of the following topics:
1) Does the media question other attackers connections to extreme groups (ex. abortion clinics) and therefore was their immediate reaction fair?
2) Not too long ago an American soldier killed 5 comrades at a base in Baghdad (1). Was this covered similarly to Hasan?
3) Should more attention be paid to stress surrounding military life during a time of war (ex. Stop loss)?

Let’s avoid “hindsight 20/20” conclusions such as, “the warning signs were there and Hasan should have been removed before he had a chance to carry out this act.”

Source:
1) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/world/middleeast/12iraq.html?_r=1&hp

Blackwater (Xe) update

A rare picture of the devil? Okay, maybe not. Update on our Blackwater following. NY Times just reported that Blackwater spent $1 million to bribe Iraqi officials after Blackwater (unprovoked) killed 17 Iraqi citizens (1). And we still pay this firm to fight for us (2)?


Sources:
1) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/11/world/middleeast/11blackwater.html?_r=2&hp
2) http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090817/scahill2

Top Tax Bracket: A brief history

Brent and I were discussing this Saturday night. Scroll down near the bottom of this page to see the history of the top tax bracket.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States

How fiscally “responsible” of us to have rates at 80-90% between 1940-1945 when we were funding a war. I’m guessing this was just (i.e., justice) because the top earners were probably those associated with the military-industrial complex and benefiting the most due to the war (probably needs fact checked). Compare that to what Reagan did in 1981 (70% down to 50) and then in 1986 (50% down to 35%) then Bush did in 2003 (Bush: while funding two wars). Fiscally “Conservative”? Someone needs to define this for me, because I don’t get it.

The Wire - Greatest television show of all time?

Last night I finished season 5 of The Wire. I am more documenting that than anything else as I think I'll need time to process the show and write something meaningful on its behalf. This is likely the best show I have ever seen and may in fact be the best television show of all time. This, of what I've read of Shakespeare, lines right up there (even though the aims of the two are different). It really is like literature on screen.

David Simon the shows creator, worked with Ed Burns, a former detective (and I thought crime journalist for a Baltimore or Washington based newspaper but I may be thinking of Simon). I highly recommend reading any of his books or watching any of his interviews (easily found on google or youtube one of which is linked below). I'll try to find some of his articles from the Baltimore Sun and bring those for discussion here.


http://www.hbo.com/thewire/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wire#cite_note-greatest-2

Bill Moyers compares him to Dickens but before that Edward Gibbon!!!
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=david%20simon&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wv#

Pre-book review

I'm currently reading Cannibals All! Slaves without Masters by George Fitzhugh:

http://reactor-core.org/cannibals-all.html#fitz33

It's an argument for slavery and I think toward socialism at the same time. I'm reading it mainly because a quote by Eric Foreman in an episode of House where he said all the masters thought they were doing slaves a favor (and for hundreds of years slaves apparently did not mind). I really want some insight into the mind of the average slave. I think our society currently may have it about right (where young people working their way up go through a semi-slave phase where they do equal or greater work than adults but receive little to no pay). If I were designing a society, this is probably how I'd do it. Quinn objects to this of course and makes a strong argument against it, but I believe the argument in favor of young-slavery is just as strong + is tradition so it is the prevailing system.

Muslims on Capital Hill: scare tactics?

Fox News Special Report: "Four House Republicans on Wednesday accused the nation's largest Muslim advocacy group of trying to "infiltrate" Capitol Hill by placing interns in the offices of lawmakers who handle national security issues.

The four lawmakers, members of the anti-terror caucus, asked for an investigation into the Council on American Islamic Relations after discovering an internal memo noting the group's strategy."

This seem ridiculous to me. First, it sounds like the CAIR is becoming just like anyother organization trying to lobby congress to pass bills fit to their needs. So, if congress wants to stop them, then stop all lobbying. Second, the way this is presented poses CAIR as a terrorist group and fails to mention the Christian groups that have sought to infiltrate congress in the same manner. If correct, Jerry Falwells college and law school specifically trains Christians to become leaders and politicians to push the Christian agenda.

Should this draw the same concerns?

Source:
1) Fox News Article
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/14/gop-lawmakers-accuse-muslim-advocacy-group-planting-spies-capitol-hill/

2) Info on Falwell Law School
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4632072

Free Market System?

I recently read that more than 20 of the Fortune 100 companies in 1993 would not exist as independent companies without government intervention at some point in their company history (i.e., government subsidy). Here is the list of Fortune 100 companies in 1993:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500_archive/full/1993/

My search was cursory at best, only looking for evidence for the companies that jumped off the page (i.e., Oil Companies, military). A simple search on google of “Company Name” + Government subsidy was all that was required to find the results I needed:

Lockheed Martin, ConocoPhillips, GM, ExxonMobil, Ford, Boeing, ConAgra Foods, Chevron, Shell, Marathon Oil, Honeywell, Monsato, Texaco, ADM, and Occidental Petroleum. That’s 15 out of 100; I found in just 15 minutes.

So, next time someone tries to tell me that the “free market” determines which companies succeed or fail I will call their ignorance out, and so should you.

Noam Chomsky points out “that the modern corporation is almost completely totalitarian.”

Do we agree?