Nothing really jumped out at me today as I cruised the net, other than this gem paraphrased from Jerry Pournelle's site:

One-time cost of a totally secure wall from Texas to California: $2 billion (budget version) to $8 billion (deluxe version).

Annual cost of social services to illegal immigrants: $20 to $25 billion.

I am reminded of the comparison of the to-date cost of the Iraq war vs. the cost of total energy independence. In fact, for what will likely be the grand total cost of our on-going adventure in Iraq (including the cost in human lives) we could launch a crash-program to deploy enough space-based solar to meet our energy needs and those of our friends. We give them free energy at little to no additional cost to ourselves, while we retain control of the Big Red Switch in case anyone gets out of line. If we really need something else to keep the Air Force busy, use them to air-drop Girls Gone Wild DVD's and western clothing on places like Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, etc. The effect would likely be more devastating in the long term than dropping bombs, and would be far less costly. Of course, that makes sense, like doing whatever is necessary to secure our borders. Which means it will never be done. (shrug) Once I realized that there was nothing I could do to stop the slide of Western Culture into oblivion (it is inevitable; read any history book), it has been fun to sit back and watch the show.

Speaking of watching the show, we watched some of Penn and Teller's Showtime series Bullshit last night. I love P&T, and this series is just roll-on-the-floor funny. In the introduction, they explain the name of the show and the repeated use of profanity in the series. Calling someone a quack or calling, say, reflexology a fraud can get you sued, but calling someone "mother f&^$#r" or calling reflexology "bullshit" is an opinion and is protected, first amendment speech. Sweet. Anyway, we watched about half of them last night. Nestina has to work tonight and tomorrow night, so it will probably be Thursday before we see the rest of them. Recommended.

I also made it to Kalkaska for the varsity soccer game. All but one of my girls team were there to cheer the guys on, screaming wildly every time one of the Kalkaska players touched the ball. Hormones. In spite of that, Kalkaska won 4-1 with a very well-played game. The best part was the crowd. I think soccer will be very popular in spite of the institutional prejudice against it in the local school administration.

And just to veer off onto a bunny trail: One reason for the opposition to soccer is the negative effect it is perceived to have on football. Fans, players, and resources, goes the argument, are drawn away to the soccer team and weaken the "football program". Well, just some random thoughts:

Football program? This is high school, folks. I realize that most people in Kalkaksa think a good football team is more important than having good teachers, or even literate graduates. The funding priorities show that. But there is no football program. Just a football team. Get a grip.

Can football survive in head-to-head competition with soccer? Lets face it; anyone that has been a spectator at both knows which one is more fun to watch. Football and baseball are old-school games with brief bits of action interspersed with endless stretches of nothing. Soccer is of a kind with hockey and basketball; continuous play with short interruptions.

Soccer has always held the upper hand at private schools where money is tight. The reason is simple math: I can outfit an entire soccer team for the cost of one football player. As more high school athletic departments are forced to become completely self-funded, football will find itself fighting an up-hill battle. The gender issue will also play into this. In most schools, football consumes the largest share of the athletic budget. As those budgets tighten up, this will become politically untenable.

Granted, football, for now, holds all the cards in terms of money, visibility, and audience. But we are now at the point where we have a generation of kids leaving high school that have played soccer since preschool. Are we to suppose that they will simply give up the sport they have played since their earliest memories, and start watching football? What sport do you think their kids will be playing at age 5? Soccer right now is about where hockey was in the 1960's; something most people had heard of, but not much else. One advantage soccer has over hockey is, again, the cost issue. Not only can I outfit an entire soccer team for the cost of one hockey player, I can play on any reasonably flat mowed field instead of a very costly ice arena. Another advantage, at least in areas with high levels of immigration, is the international stature of the sport. Parents coming here from overseas simply expect their kids will be playing soccer.

I'm not sure I have a point to all this other than to say that I expect soccer to continue to grow in popularity. I also expect soccer to have the same effect on football that hockey and basketball have had on baseball. Football is too integrated into our culture to simply vanish, but I expect it will find itself with declining mindshare.

And I guess I'll just stop there.