Monday, 4 January 2010

Made your New Year's Resolutions yet? [updated]

Made your New Year's Resolutions yet? "Unfortunately," observes Alex Epstein, "this ritual commitment to self-improvement is widely viewed as something of a joke." So here's his idea [hat tip Voices for Reason]:

_quoteThis New Year’s, resolve to think about how to make your life better, not just once a year, but every day. Resolve to set goals, not just in one or two aspects of life, but in every important aspect and in your life as a whole. Resolve to pursue the goals that will make you successful and happy, not as the exception in a life of passivity, but as the rule that becomes second-nature."

See how that works for you. 

And it's not too late--just resolve to be more punctual in future.

UPDATE:  Instead of looking back like everyone does around New Year, I'm looking forward--forward to headlines  that I'd like to see sometime in 2010 [hat tip The New Clarion, from whom I've pinched a couple]. Only some of them are likely:

  • NZers See Through Spineless Nats: "No Clue What They Stand For" say Vox Pops
  • New Finance Minister Announces Cross-the-Board Tax Cuts: "Time We Kept Our Promises" he says
  • Environment Minister Scraps RMA: Announces "Property Rights Best For Environment"
  • "Gareth Morgan hasn't done well for us--too much time off the ball" say Investors
  • Inquiry Into ClimateGate Finds Widespread Corruption. NIWA Sacks Salinger's Spawn
  • Warmists Routed as Emissions Trading Schemes Collapse
  • Bennett's Ministry Told "Start Publishing Honest Unemployment Figures":  "If You Can't Or Won't Work Then You're Unemployed, No Matter What Your Benefit is Called" says Minister
  • Ben Bernanke Fails to Put Multi-Trillion Dollar Genie Back in Bottle: Senate Demands His Head
  • Obama says "Ayn Rand was right!": Begins Dismantling Big Govt
  • United Nations Announces "No Money for Development Programmes": Helen Clark to Head Back Home
  • Teachers Demand Separation of School & State: "Time for Ministry to Go" says Principal
  • Rugby Finds Mojo Again, Makes New Fans: "First Time I've Seen Rucking In Years" says Meads
  • Geelong Wins Third AFL Premiership in Four Years
  • Another Al Gore Lecture on GW Cancelled Due to Extreme Cold, and Violent Disinterest
  • Businessmen Gain Spine, Start Defending Themselves & Capitalism
  • "I'm Going on a Quango Hunt," says Brownlee, "and I'm Taking My Axe!"
  • Economists Announce Huge Attendance at 'Mises Circle' Conference in Wellington: Call for Reserve Bank to Shut Down
  • News Bosses Can Braindead News, Hire Intelligent Presenters: "We're Going to Stop Insulting Our Audience's Intelligence," says  Mogul
  • Nats Prepare Roster of SOEs for Sale, and Close Down Many More: "We're Paying Back Debt and Getting Out Of Your Way" says new Finance Minister
  • David Cunliffe Enrols in Humility Training: "Crunch Came When Head Too Big For Hat" says Wife
  • Greens Say Resource Consent Process "Too Authoritarian": "Common Law Works Best" says Norman
  • Maoris Look Forward To Day in Court After Simple Repeal of Foreshore & Seabead Act: "Common Law Works Best" says Tariana
  • Kelsey & Colleagues Sacked as Students Demand Rational Education on Campus:  "Sick of Warmed-Over Marxism and Post-Modern Crap" say Student Leaders


  1. "Businessmen Gain Spine, Start Defending Themselves & Capitalism"

    Wouldn't that be a glorious day? Progressives would be toast inside a year.

  2. This one:-

    "Geelong Wins Third AFL Premiership in Four Years"


  3. Glad to see Helen Clark to "head back home" and nothing about her making it back home. Oops, I just said the thing everyone else was thinking but knew not to say.

    Perhaps you could finish that sentence as "Helen Clark to head back home to face electoral fraud & corruption charges along with charges relating to the bad blood scandal."

  4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  5. William, perhaps you forgot that wee note about "staying on topic, or you're likely to find your comments deleted."

    I didn't.

  6. [NZers See Through Spineless Nats: "No Clue What They Stand For"]

    I can only hope that National voters will flux into ACT in massive numbers comes the next election (2011). National is no difference from Labour.

  7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  8. @ACT Youth: Surely you jest?

    What in Galt's name would encourage anyone to flock to a brand that stands for nothing, that is now disintegrating into in-fighting--and by 2011 will have just delivered Auckland ratepayers to Len Brown, or worse?

  9. Barry/William: You've been banished. Reasons:
    1) You're off-topic again,
    2) You've admitted you are posting with two identities, one a "sock-puppet" of the other to pretend you have supporters.
    3) You're a troll.

  10. @Jeff: You'll enjoy this headline then, from The Economist:

    "The silence of Mammon: Business people should stand up for themselves"

  11. Assuming ACT Youth is not writing in jest, I can't help but wonder why anyone who supports liberty would ever now consider supporting ACT. If liberty was ever of interest to them, then on election night they would have seen the opportunity that was afforded them and made an uncompromising & principled stand on an issue of great import That one issue was The Emissions Trading Scam. They should have said "if you want ACT's support, then National will not introduce an Emissions Trading Scheme ." That could have been ACT's bottom line (hey - it was even on ACT's billboards during the election) and National would have acceded to this request if it meant they could form a government. ACT would have gained my respect for actually achieving something in favour of our liberty - something vitally important. But as PC says, all they have done created a more complicated bureaucracy for us Aucklanders.

    Before the election, it is possible for someone to advance an argument for why I should vote for ACT. That no longer can be the case. Why would any advocate of liberty take ACT seriously now?

  12. So what has ACT actually delivered, apart from a new tax (emissions trading scheme), another expensive new bureaucracy ("supercity") and some grade one hypocracy (partaking in the parliamentry rort-fest)?

    Just wondering if they are different from the rest or simply moe of the same...


  13. If the Libz are in Parliament (with 5 MPs), then the same criticism can be directed at them. You will never have achieved anything at all. Be it being part of an agreement to be a minor partner in any government (Nat or Lab) or not.

  14. @ACT Youth
    In this thread we have begun to discuss the achievement (or lack of) of the ACT party after you floated ACT as being a credible alternative to the appalling National party. You are now introducing Libertarianz into the discussion (something no one else has done on this thread) so as to divert the discussion away from the fact that ACT have not only not achieved anything, but have introduced an additional bureaucracy into Auckland - not something which should sit well with advoates of liberty. I understand that ACT - as a minor party - cannot achieve all it would want. But given its track record in the last year why would anyone think that ACT is better than the National party? and why should I trust them to stand up for me as the State continues to take away our freedoms?

    I am genuinly interested in your answers to my above questions.



1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.