Hello again, you two. Sorry to have neglected you so this year.
While trailing as usual, I've been participating in the preparation for the mid-term election here in the US of A. For those of you who are not from here, we here in the US of A like to spend as many months and dollars as possible arguing, fretting, advertising, and increasing our heart rate and circulation prior to any election. To help us in this pass-time, the press publicizes the outcome of elections long before the event. In the mid-term elections - the one between presidential elections - they tell us the party in power will be ousted. This is a sure thing, they say, because it is the historical trend.
Either the press has never heard of "self-fulfilling prophecy" or they think we haven't.
Sometimes, it does seem that the political decision-making is all in the advertising, mud-slinging, and predictions. So when it comes time to actually vote, most everyone with any sense is so sick and tired of hearing about it that they just don't vote at all. That way, our Representatives and Senators are elected by the remaining 10% of the voting population (about ten in every hundred citizens actually does get out and vote, it appears).
I've begun a blog about the upcoming election that I hope to get published before the fact, so as to join the throng that talks a good game...
You will also note, if you mosey down to the bottom of the page, a counter that keeps track of the number of folks looking at this blog, which might help us (me, anyway) keep track of what happened yesterday. When you get to be old and gray like me, you need these aids to memory. As Mark Twain was reported to have said, "When I was young, I could remember everything perfectly, even those things that never occurred." Now, I need assistance...
If you ever look at or post comments, be further advised that I also deleted advertisements or links to web pages I do not think are appropriate for this blog. If I missed any or deleted a valid link by mistake, please let me know.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Friday, September 10, 2010
them and us
"We don't differentiate between them and us. It's just us." President Barak Obama, September, 2010.
Before 9-11, I had a tag line that said, "We're all in this together. Luckily."
So then, should I drop the "Luckily," or what?
I dropped the tag line.
On the other hand, most of us know, deep down, that we're all in this life together. Luckily or not.
One of the nice things about being a citizen of the United States of America is that the common abbreviation is "US." You can't fault the sentiment, even if you fault the yelling. Or the frequently unwarranted self-satisfaction.
Nonetheless, I am proud to be an American.
Not so proud about our characterizing ourselves as the only important folks in several continents who should get to call them-/ourselves Americans. Continents where lots of important folks—who are not citizens of the US of A—live. But you can't have everything.
We, on the planet we call Earth, are all in this together. If people in Pakistan are dying, it should concern us, being people ourselves. (As a researcher, I was taught to say "persons" rather than "people" because only scientifically definable groupings are "people." Researchers are not always right.)
What do we mean when we differentiate between "them" and "us"? I mean, we all do it so it must mean something. Maybe it just means that we can't solve and protect everything so we should just work on things that concern "us." OK. So where do we draw the line?
This is the stuff that keeps me awake nights. This and the arthritis pain. So if it keeps you awake too (not, I hope, the arthritis pain—just the other stuff), maybe you can come up with some solutionary ideas.
Since it's just us, I hope you can because I'm trailing again.
Before 9-11, I had a tag line that said, "We're all in this together. Luckily."
So then, should I drop the "Luckily," or what?
I dropped the tag line.
On the other hand, most of us know, deep down, that we're all in this life together. Luckily or not.
One of the nice things about being a citizen of the United States of America is that the common abbreviation is "US." You can't fault the sentiment, even if you fault the yelling. Or the frequently unwarranted self-satisfaction.
Nonetheless, I am proud to be an American.
Not so proud about our characterizing ourselves as the only important folks in several continents who should get to call them-/ourselves Americans. Continents where lots of important folks—who are not citizens of the US of A—live. But you can't have everything.
We, on the planet we call Earth, are all in this together. If people in Pakistan are dying, it should concern us, being people ourselves. (As a researcher, I was taught to say "persons" rather than "people" because only scientifically definable groupings are "people." Researchers are not always right.)
What do we mean when we differentiate between "them" and "us"? I mean, we all do it so it must mean something. Maybe it just means that we can't solve and protect everything so we should just work on things that concern "us." OK. So where do we draw the line?
This is the stuff that keeps me awake nights. This and the arthritis pain. So if it keeps you awake too (not, I hope, the arthritis pain—just the other stuff), maybe you can come up with some solutionary ideas.
Since it's just us, I hope you can because I'm trailing again.
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
Healthcare Reform Update
Hey folks, we've been missing the main point in this healthcare reform debate. I know, you're tired of hearing about it, but back here at the Trailing Edge, we've hit on the solution!(1) And since this is a blog, we're going to share this amazing discovery with both of you. The solution to the high cost of healthcare and the way to eliminate the need for healthcare reform, which was right in front of us all the time, is…
Stop Being Poor!
That's right! All you poor folks who are getting way too sick before you go to the doctor or hospital, all you poor folks who are eating all the wrong things because healthy food is too expensive, all you poor folks who are smoking, drinking, or using street drugs because you need to face your life in a fog just to be able to face it at all – all of you just stop being poor! Your health problems will be solved!
Amazingly simple! Healthcare costs in all the major city hospitals will drop dramatically! The healthcare reform bill, which does not distinguish well between the needs of the rich and the needs of the poor, will work! The recent increases in health insurance that the insurance companies blame on the healthcare reform bill won't be necessary. They'll continue, but they won't be necessary, and that's the main thing. Why? Because there won't be any poor!
You poor people must quit your selfish adherence to poverty. Just stoppit.
I know it'll take a while; there's a lot of inertia from the rich and well-placed that you'll need to overcome. But don't be daunted. Here are the five simple steps to stopping your dependence on poverty – with a few necessary sub-steps, naturally:
With our simple 5-point plan, the entire US could be on its way to reduced healthcare costs and true healthcare reform.
Don’t thank the Trailing Edge for generously offering this simple solution. Just envisioning the millions of no-longer-poor healthy, happy children that the tens of millions of no-longer-poor parents can afford to nurture, feed, and love is thanks enough.
Footnotes:
(1) We've always said that one of the advantages of always being late is that we get to hear lots of different viewpoints before making a decision. Of course, we lose lots of potential friends and miss out on lots of useful information, but no system is perfect.
(2) For those of us who are arithmetically challenged, this means that to stop being poor, your income has to be twice what the US Federal government currently defines as being poor. The US government is changing this definition, for statistical purposes at least, but why wait? For those of us who don't know what "arithmetically challenged" is, as a prerequisite to step 1 (that is to say, before undertaking Step 1) you'll need to find somebody rich to support you while you go back to school.
(3) You will likely need to pay for these mental health services yourself, as most insurers include only nominal, inadequate coverage for mental healthcare. In addition, if you happen to reside in one of the states that is medically underserved (that is, there are not enough mental healthcare providers anywhere in the state), you may need to relocate and begin again at Step 1.
Coming soon: How to eliminate inequities due to gender, age, education, and inherited country or countries of origin: Be a young, male, college graduate of predominantly Western European ancestry!
Stop Being Poor!
That's right! All you poor folks who are getting way too sick before you go to the doctor or hospital, all you poor folks who are eating all the wrong things because healthy food is too expensive, all you poor folks who are smoking, drinking, or using street drugs because you need to face your life in a fog just to be able to face it at all – all of you just stop being poor! Your health problems will be solved!
Amazingly simple! Healthcare costs in all the major city hospitals will drop dramatically! The healthcare reform bill, which does not distinguish well between the needs of the rich and the needs of the poor, will work! The recent increases in health insurance that the insurance companies blame on the healthcare reform bill won't be necessary. They'll continue, but they won't be necessary, and that's the main thing. Why? Because there won't be any poor!
You poor people must quit your selfish adherence to poverty. Just stoppit.
I know it'll take a while; there's a lot of inertia from the rich and well-placed that you'll need to overcome. But don't be daunted. Here are the five simple steps to stopping your dependence on poverty – with a few necessary sub-steps, naturally:
1. Find jobs that pay better.
1.a. To do this, you may have to get somebody to recognize that you can't acutally stop being poor unless you have income from a single, full-time job that is 200% of the current poverty level or more.(2)
1.b. To get a raise to above the laughably low poverty level, you may need to unionize your workplace. To do that you may have to overcome a few problems, but nobody said this was going to be easy. Just simple.
1.b.i. Find a workplace.
1.b.ii. Seek a union that is acceptable to both you and your employer.
1.b.iii. If attempting 1.b.ii. results in your losing access to that workplace, find another workplace.
1.b.iv. Repeat 1.b.ii. and 1.b.iii. as necessary.
2. Make sure your increased income includes the benefits necessary to keep you out of poverty.
2.a. Since half or more of all bankrupcies are due at least in part to the cost of healthcare, you'll need to have health insurance.
2.b. And a primary healthcare provider who makes sure you get high quality healthcare so you can keep working.
2.b.i. As necessary, see 1. b., iv., above.
3. Start eating better – whole grains, lean meats with minimal processing, fresh fruits and vegetables that don't have too many toxic pesticides still in them.
3.a. Some of your fruits and vegetables will need to be organically grown so you can avoid toxic pesticides, but the extra cost is only about double, and believe me, it's worth it.
3.b. You may need to move to a different neighborhood where healthier food is available.
4. See your primary healthcare provider for regular check-ups and health maintenance.
4.a. If your insurance does not pay for check-ups you'll need to pay for them out-of-pocket because in addition to keeping you healthy, these check-ups lower healthcare costs for the rest of us, which is, of course, the point.
4.b. Make sure your income is sufficient to cover health maintenance costs. (See, for example, 1.b., above.)
5. Make the other lifestyle changes that your improved economic outlook and sense of well-being allow.
5.a. Plan for a healthy, loving home environment for your future family before embarking on puberty.
5.a.i. Some attention to your mental health may be necessary to overcome some of the misadventures of your childhood or to stop consuming or otherwise using some substance that is detrimental to your health.(3)
5.a.ii. In some cases, you will perceive a sort of chicken-and-egg phenomenon where you will need to complete step 5 before attempting step 1 but can't afford step 5 until step 1 is accomplished. Just do your best. You're sort of on your own here.
5.b. Make sure your children do the same - that is to say, all of the above. This will do much to eliminate that pesky multi-generational poverty thing.
With our simple 5-point plan, the entire US could be on its way to reduced healthcare costs and true healthcare reform.
Don’t thank the Trailing Edge for generously offering this simple solution. Just envisioning the millions of no-longer-poor healthy, happy children that the tens of millions of no-longer-poor parents can afford to nurture, feed, and love is thanks enough.
Footnotes:
(1) We've always said that one of the advantages of always being late is that we get to hear lots of different viewpoints before making a decision. Of course, we lose lots of potential friends and miss out on lots of useful information, but no system is perfect.
(2) For those of us who are arithmetically challenged, this means that to stop being poor, your income has to be twice what the US Federal government currently defines as being poor. The US government is changing this definition, for statistical purposes at least, but why wait? For those of us who don't know what "arithmetically challenged" is, as a prerequisite to step 1 (that is to say, before undertaking Step 1) you'll need to find somebody rich to support you while you go back to school.
(3) You will likely need to pay for these mental health services yourself, as most insurers include only nominal, inadequate coverage for mental healthcare. In addition, if you happen to reside in one of the states that is medically underserved (that is, there are not enough mental healthcare providers anywhere in the state), you may need to relocate and begin again at Step 1.
Coming soon: How to eliminate inequities due to gender, age, education, and inherited country or countries of origin: Be a young, male, college graduate of predominantly Western European ancestry!
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
YAAAAAY! Again
The healthcare reform law passed! YAAAAAY!
Wow! Two "YAAAAY"s in less than two years.
Yes, I know, the bill far from perfect. We Trailing Edgesters know all about being far from perfect. It's what we do best.
And yes, forcing people to deal with health insurance companies is a really poor approach. Especially when a single-payer system would be cheaper, better, and healthier.
But this law does also require that health insurance companies must actually provide health insurance. As opposed to taking money from only the healthy and denying claims when they get sick. Or, in a pinch, charging the unhealthy insured more money than healthcare would ever cost, and then denying the claims. If you wonder why the health insurance companies were so set against this bill, re-read those last two sentences, OK? (Linguistic purists, re-read the last two sentence fragments.)
I do not claim to understand why Congress, in its possibly-not-so-very-infinite wisdom, thought the Massachusetts model of healthcare reform was good for everyone. But it (they? he, she, and it?) did. So now everybody and her cousin (or, in this case, his brother) can sue the Federal Government for promulgating an unfunded mandate.
Mind you, the Federal Government has been visiting unfunded mandates upon the States for lo, these many years. Like "No Child Left Behind" for example. That was an unfunded mandate brought to you by your friendly neighborhood Republicans that guaranteed that non-rich American kids would be kicked out, so as to avoid being left behind.
That was an unfunded mandate. But as we can see, friends and neighbors, it depends a bunch on who's doing the unfunding. Not to mention what is being unfunded and why.
So complain to your Attorney General, if she or he is part of the Daring Thirteen who are suing the Federal Government, that this nonsense is costing you money she or he should save for suing insurance companies who don't comply with the spirit of the new law.
And complain to your legislators - better yet, tell them you won't vote for them - if they don't leave this law in place and fix whatever they don't like. They have until 2014 to fix the "required to buy health insurance" part, so they just might make it. If they hurry. And avoid the sentence fragments.
And if your Attorney General or legislator is a Republican, ask him or her to develop (or beg, or borrow or steal) a position. Challenge her or him to do that instead of spreading fear and discontent. It's a much healthier way of avoiding any actual work.
Or at the very least, tell them all to just, in the wise words of my Great-Granddaughter, stoppit!
Wow! Two "YAAAAY"s in less than two years.
Yes, I know, the bill far from perfect. We Trailing Edgesters know all about being far from perfect. It's what we do best.
And yes, forcing people to deal with health insurance companies is a really poor approach. Especially when a single-payer system would be cheaper, better, and healthier.
But this law does also require that health insurance companies must actually provide health insurance. As opposed to taking money from only the healthy and denying claims when they get sick. Or, in a pinch, charging the unhealthy insured more money than healthcare would ever cost, and then denying the claims. If you wonder why the health insurance companies were so set against this bill, re-read those last two sentences, OK? (Linguistic purists, re-read the last two sentence fragments.)
I do not claim to understand why Congress, in its possibly-not-so-very-infinite wisdom, thought the Massachusetts model of healthcare reform was good for everyone. But it (they? he, she, and it?) did. So now everybody and her cousin (or, in this case, his brother) can sue the Federal Government for promulgating an unfunded mandate.
Mind you, the Federal Government has been visiting unfunded mandates upon the States for lo, these many years. Like "No Child Left Behind" for example. That was an unfunded mandate brought to you by your friendly neighborhood Republicans that guaranteed that non-rich American kids would be kicked out, so as to avoid being left behind.
That was an unfunded mandate. But as we can see, friends and neighbors, it depends a bunch on who's doing the unfunding. Not to mention what is being unfunded and why.
So complain to your Attorney General, if she or he is part of the Daring Thirteen who are suing the Federal Government, that this nonsense is costing you money she or he should save for suing insurance companies who don't comply with the spirit of the new law.
And complain to your legislators - better yet, tell them you won't vote for them - if they don't leave this law in place and fix whatever they don't like. They have until 2014 to fix the "required to buy health insurance" part, so they just might make it. If they hurry. And avoid the sentence fragments.
And if your Attorney General or legislator is a Republican, ask him or her to develop (or beg, or borrow or steal) a position. Challenge her or him to do that instead of spreading fear and discontent. It's a much healthier way of avoiding any actual work.
Or at the very least, tell them all to just, in the wise words of my Great-Granddaughter, stoppit!
Monday, March 15, 2010
Debating Health Care Reform
I am pleased that Congress has taken up the issue of health care reform.
I wrote that sentence in June of 2009.
In point of fact, everyone here at the Trailing Edge is pleased with the idea of health care reform. All one of us. And we're coming out right now - a mere year late - in favor of it.
Now, that's trailing for you.
But our Representatives are the real experts at trailing.
After all, I'm actually publishing this blog. Congress is lagging behind the entire developed world when it comes to providing for the health of that small group of Americans who don't have a good health care system. That small group is made up of all the Americans who aren't rich. The non-rich Americans, as I like to call them.
Congress is doing what it does best. Nothing. Especially for the non-rich Americans.
And blaming the President for it, of course.
In fact, the only question about finger pointing that remains unclear is which house does it best. As for the most successful finger-pointing party, I think the Republicans are the winning.
Hands down, as it were.
But really folks, passing health care reform seems to be even less popular than passing noxious reminders of the digestive process. And a lot less likely. At my age, at least.
But that's another tale, although not unrelated to health.
Maybe I should stop blathering and focus on what's really at stake here. Perhaps I can even skip asking our representatives if they think it's fair for corporations to be considered individuals but not pay taxes like the rest of us. The answer to that question is pretty clear and doesn't seem to trouble anyone in Congress nearly as much as it bothers me.
Maybe I should ask you this: ask your Representative if he or she thinks it's OK for Congress to let babies die because they're too busy being pro-life to pay attention to living newborns.
Or maybe we should ask if it's OK for a pregnancy to end tragically as long as the reason was a lack of money or insurance for health care and not someone's choice.
OK, that was harsh. And I'd apologize if it were untrue.
You see, when the House of Representatives refuses to vote on the Senate health care reform bill (after which they can add their many revisions that make life wonderful for the health insurance companies), they are agreeing that letting babies die, and letting unhealthy babies be born to unhealthy mothers, is better than spending money on preventive health care for women before and during pregnancy. Even though preventive health care for women before and during pregnancy is CHEAPER than letting unhealthy babies be born to unhealthy mothers.
Really.
For example, it can cost upwards of $600,000 for one baby to be born and live with an incurable health problem that might have been prevented by giving the young woman a daily dose of multi-vitamins. So why doesn't the woman just take the vitamins? Well, if she's like millions of young American women, somebody – like the doctor she can't afford to see – needs to tell her it's necessary. And some organization – like the healthcare coverage she doesn’t have just now – needs to pay for it. On the other hand, if she has the baby with the severe medical problem, the government will pay for the baby's health care.
And that's how the all the Republicans and some of the Democrats propose to save us money.
That's just one example. There are many, many others. The bottom line is this:
Our Representatives are voting in Socialism for the rich and Capitalism for the poor and whining about the high cost of health care reform. Meanwhile, babies and children and adults are getting sick, even dying, because they can't afford health insurance or their coverage doesn't cover what they need. Meanwhile, the cost of providing preventive health care for everyone who doesn't have a regular source of health care is cheaper than the cost of Medicaid/CHIP after the relatively few Americans get dreadfully, heart-breakingly ill because they lacked that inexpensive preventive health care.
Government intervention is not the central issue. Health insurance is not the central issue. Job security for our legislators is not the central issue. Except for our legislators, of course.
Future generations of healthy, non-rich Americans is the issue. Avoiding bankruptcy of individuals, Medicare, and Medicaid because of costly health care for conditions that did not need to happen is the issue.
Tell your Representative that. Please. Do it for the babies.
I wrote that sentence in June of 2009.
In point of fact, everyone here at the Trailing Edge is pleased with the idea of health care reform. All one of us. And we're coming out right now - a mere year late - in favor of it.
Now, that's trailing for you.
But our Representatives are the real experts at trailing.
After all, I'm actually publishing this blog. Congress is lagging behind the entire developed world when it comes to providing for the health of that small group of Americans who don't have a good health care system. That small group is made up of all the Americans who aren't rich. The non-rich Americans, as I like to call them.
Congress is doing what it does best. Nothing. Especially for the non-rich Americans.
And blaming the President for it, of course.
In fact, the only question about finger pointing that remains unclear is which house does it best. As for the most successful finger-pointing party, I think the Republicans are the winning.
Hands down, as it were.
But really folks, passing health care reform seems to be even less popular than passing noxious reminders of the digestive process. And a lot less likely. At my age, at least.
But that's another tale, although not unrelated to health.
Maybe I should stop blathering and focus on what's really at stake here. Perhaps I can even skip asking our representatives if they think it's fair for corporations to be considered individuals but not pay taxes like the rest of us. The answer to that question is pretty clear and doesn't seem to trouble anyone in Congress nearly as much as it bothers me.
Maybe I should ask you this: ask your Representative if he or she thinks it's OK for Congress to let babies die because they're too busy being pro-life to pay attention to living newborns.
Or maybe we should ask if it's OK for a pregnancy to end tragically as long as the reason was a lack of money or insurance for health care and not someone's choice.
OK, that was harsh. And I'd apologize if it were untrue.
You see, when the House of Representatives refuses to vote on the Senate health care reform bill (after which they can add their many revisions that make life wonderful for the health insurance companies), they are agreeing that letting babies die, and letting unhealthy babies be born to unhealthy mothers, is better than spending money on preventive health care for women before and during pregnancy. Even though preventive health care for women before and during pregnancy is CHEAPER than letting unhealthy babies be born to unhealthy mothers.
Really.
For example, it can cost upwards of $600,000 for one baby to be born and live with an incurable health problem that might have been prevented by giving the young woman a daily dose of multi-vitamins. So why doesn't the woman just take the vitamins? Well, if she's like millions of young American women, somebody – like the doctor she can't afford to see – needs to tell her it's necessary. And some organization – like the healthcare coverage she doesn’t have just now – needs to pay for it. On the other hand, if she has the baby with the severe medical problem, the government will pay for the baby's health care.
And that's how the all the Republicans and some of the Democrats propose to save us money.
That's just one example. There are many, many others. The bottom line is this:
Our Representatives are voting in Socialism for the rich and Capitalism for the poor and whining about the high cost of health care reform. Meanwhile, babies and children and adults are getting sick, even dying, because they can't afford health insurance or their coverage doesn't cover what they need. Meanwhile, the cost of providing preventive health care for everyone who doesn't have a regular source of health care is cheaper than the cost of Medicaid/CHIP after the relatively few Americans get dreadfully, heart-breakingly ill because they lacked that inexpensive preventive health care.
Government intervention is not the central issue. Health insurance is not the central issue. Job security for our legislators is not the central issue. Except for our legislators, of course.
Future generations of healthy, non-rich Americans is the issue. Avoiding bankruptcy of individuals, Medicare, and Medicaid because of costly health care for conditions that did not need to happen is the issue.
Tell your Representative that. Please. Do it for the babies.
Monday, February 02, 2009
Economics, It’s What’s for Dinner
My annual review and predictions didn’t cover the economic situation, and you may wonder why. Then again, you may not, but that’s not my problem.
The reason was that I couldn’t find anything funny to say about the economic situation.
I’m not alone in this, but there you are. I wanted the predictions to have some humor.
When it comes to economics, I do have some strong opinions. (Other people have biases; I have strong opinions.)
I’m in favor of the cooperative economic model.
“Why is that?” you ask.
And I’m so glad you did. Otherwise I’d have to shut up and sit down. Fortunately, I’m already sitting, and shutting up is unlikely.
Well, to answer your question, it’s because the cooperative model operates on the odd assumption that everyone in an economic transaction should benefit.
“What a thought,” you comment. “Who came up with this contrary notion?”
Again, so glad you asked. (As my actress mother always told me, it works so much better when the other fellow knows his lines.)
It certainly wasn’t the capitalists who thought it up. They benefit from their economic model because they’re rich. (Scratch a poor capitalist and you’ll find a dreamer longing to be rich.)
Nor was it the communists, who don’t benefit from anything but totalitarian rule, as nearly as I can tell. And these days, they only benefit from that in isolated, virtually insular, cases.
Nor the socialists, who generally don’t benefit at all, being too entrenched in saving others from capitalism. (I’m not saying this is bad, just that it’s not very profitable.)
No, the cooperative form of economic dealings eschews all that. And please don’t bless me for sneezing; I mean that the cooperative model is just plain different.
“And how is it different?” you continue to help me out by asking.
Well, being based on the notion that everyone involved in a transaction should benefit, this model requires us to pay more for goods and services than it cost to produce them.
No more making shoes for $1.50 a pair, selling them for $1.25 a pair, and making up the difference on the volume. After deducting entertainment expenses and bonuses. (Don’t laugh; this is how banking systems have been working lately. Thirty years ago, it was how insurance companies worked.)
The cooperative economic model also requires that the business transaction do no serious harm to those not involved in the transaction.
Such as destroying the environment on their planet.
Well, you can see why that hasn’t caught on.
But I still favor it. Silly me. Want to join me?
The reason was that I couldn’t find anything funny to say about the economic situation.
I’m not alone in this, but there you are. I wanted the predictions to have some humor.
When it comes to economics, I do have some strong opinions. (Other people have biases; I have strong opinions.)
I’m in favor of the cooperative economic model.
“Why is that?” you ask.
And I’m so glad you did. Otherwise I’d have to shut up and sit down. Fortunately, I’m already sitting, and shutting up is unlikely.
Well, to answer your question, it’s because the cooperative model operates on the odd assumption that everyone in an economic transaction should benefit.
“What a thought,” you comment. “Who came up with this contrary notion?”
Again, so glad you asked. (As my actress mother always told me, it works so much better when the other fellow knows his lines.)
It certainly wasn’t the capitalists who thought it up. They benefit from their economic model because they’re rich. (Scratch a poor capitalist and you’ll find a dreamer longing to be rich.)
Nor was it the communists, who don’t benefit from anything but totalitarian rule, as nearly as I can tell. And these days, they only benefit from that in isolated, virtually insular, cases.
Nor the socialists, who generally don’t benefit at all, being too entrenched in saving others from capitalism. (I’m not saying this is bad, just that it’s not very profitable.)
No, the cooperative form of economic dealings eschews all that. And please don’t bless me for sneezing; I mean that the cooperative model is just plain different.
“And how is it different?” you continue to help me out by asking.
Well, being based on the notion that everyone involved in a transaction should benefit, this model requires us to pay more for goods and services than it cost to produce them.
No more making shoes for $1.50 a pair, selling them for $1.25 a pair, and making up the difference on the volume. After deducting entertainment expenses and bonuses. (Don’t laugh; this is how banking systems have been working lately. Thirty years ago, it was how insurance companies worked.)
The cooperative economic model also requires that the business transaction do no serious harm to those not involved in the transaction.
Such as destroying the environment on their planet.
Well, you can see why that hasn’t caught on.
But I still favor it. Silly me. Want to join me?
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
2008 in Review - 2009 Predictions
Well friends, neighbors, and fan, it’s time to honor long-established tradition of the Trailing Edge and post my second annual summary of the past year and predictions for the coming year.
2008 – The Year In Review
As years go, 2008 really didn’t come up to expectations in many areas; on the other hand, it exceeded expectations in a few key areas. We probably shouldn’t go with averaging here. Despite the USA’s electoral trends (oh, happy day), I think we’ll have to give 2008 a split vote, grade-wise.
Low Scoring Events:
Gag orders continued to encourage countries receiving funds from the USA to modify their health education and healthcare to suit USA officials who are remarkably free of any need for that health education or healthcare.
Gag orders abounded requiring government agencies in the USA to edit scientific reports to remove any undesirable elements, such as research findings.
Gags and other public-spirited messages and candidates assured us all that the only thing to fear is anything that would cause us to vote for a Democrat.
Gag-reflex-inducing antics of confused Robins-definitely-not-of-the-Hood continued to include robbing from “your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free” (I read that somewhere) to feed the rich.
And so on.
High Scoring Events:
The electorate in the good old US of A finally got the idea that we could actually nominate a candidate and vote for him or her based on ridiculous criteria like merit, stated policies and plans, intelligence, and honesty, thus abandoning time-honored Christian values such as mud-slinging skill, folksy brazenness, homey ethnic humor, and word-twisting ability.
Three or more people in the national picture-window started talking about the nation’s health without focusing exclusively on our healthcare industry. I can’t remember who the third one was, but the then Health and Human Services Secretary Designate and then President-Elect spoke about improving our health without any sign of embarrassment, shame, or need to speak only in compound nouns. And some other public figure talked about health and forgot to add “care.” At least, I’m pretty sure someone else did.
In spite of – or perhaps in order to cope with – serious problems that seemed to compound faster than variable mortgage interest, people retained their sense of humor. For example, while President Elect Obama was saying that there should be only one president at a time, a frank member of the USA’s House of Representatives seemed to think “one” was an underestimate.
And so forth.
Looking Ahead
Now we get to the real issue. What’s going to happen from here to 2010? Well, friends and neighbors, the Trailing Edge is prepared to boldly go where anybody with a lick of sense would avoid like a banker’s solution to the housing bubble. Let the infinitives split where they may!
No, we’re not going to predict the choice of First Dog. This old Trailer isn’t that foolish.
Predictions for 2009 (trumpet fanfare, please)
Somebody will get the idea that if the President can speak in whole paragraphs, other politicians might try a diet of something other than empty sound bites. This new thought will give some politicians headaches, but others will try it anyway.
One or two more people in the USA – who are not public health professionals like me, with an ax to grind – will start talking about the nation’s health without a “care” in the word. Being extremists, they will want things like an infant death rate that’s as low as, say, Cuba’s. They may even think helping people find a job so they can afford safe housing and information so they eat healthy food might be a good approach to avoiding unnecessary healthcare costs. Of course, if this health promotion and disease prevention stuff catches on, there might be a run on our health information banks. Now that bailout would be interesting.
The Congress of the United States of America will avoid for as long as it possibly can making any decision about economic stimulus, bailout, or help for somebody other than the rich. Finally, the Republicans will suddenly realize that in trying to keep President Obama from looking good they’ve made themselves look so bad that they may have already lost the re-election they were so worried about. At that point, they will salvage the situation by taking credit for having forced those spend-thrift Democrats to come up with a really good law. Now, in the past, one party defined a really good law as one that makes the other party look bad. But this is one of those things President Obama wanted us to change as I recall. So let’s keep our fingers crossed about that. Better yet, let’s keep our fingers flexed so we can email our legislators, ask them to play nice, and remind them about who acutally does the voting.
The guy who’s wandering around the country talking to inner city youth about making money by going green – not Al Gore, the other one – will start to build a following of urban entrepreneurs who think there’s a chance that when he talks to them about green, it isn’t because he is interested in money laundering or got lost and wandered into the wrong room.
President Obama will continue to work steadily to undo the damage done in any prior administration that might have immediately preceded this one.
Sadly, it won’t all be beer and skittles. The economy will take more than this year to heal, and so, of course will war-torn regions around the world. The housing market and the banking systems will take longer than one year to revive, and so will our healthcare system. And we do have to talk about health with a care in the word, too, so we can fix it.
On the other hand, if the legislative branch of government in the US of A wakes up to its responsibility to all the voters, some of these ills may heal faster.
And if Rip Van Winkle kisses Sleeping Beauty awake and she and Snow White lead the Seven Mine Workers in forming a collective bargaining association, then Prince Charming can give up his flagrant lifestyle and ride off into the sunset with Little Red Riding Hood.
Or something like that.
Oops, please excuse that inadvertant eruption of cynicism.
Let’s keep working on the good hope. Baby steps, maybe, but with your help and mine 2009 will be a year of small improvements on all fronts.
And that’s really pretty good, as happy endings go.
2008 – The Year In Review
As years go, 2008 really didn’t come up to expectations in many areas; on the other hand, it exceeded expectations in a few key areas. We probably shouldn’t go with averaging here. Despite the USA’s electoral trends (oh, happy day), I think we’ll have to give 2008 a split vote, grade-wise.
Low Scoring Events:
Gag orders continued to encourage countries receiving funds from the USA to modify their health education and healthcare to suit USA officials who are remarkably free of any need for that health education or healthcare.
Gag orders abounded requiring government agencies in the USA to edit scientific reports to remove any undesirable elements, such as research findings.
Gags and other public-spirited messages and candidates assured us all that the only thing to fear is anything that would cause us to vote for a Democrat.
Gag-reflex-inducing antics of confused Robins-definitely-not-of-the-Hood continued to include robbing from “your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free” (I read that somewhere) to feed the rich.
And so on.
High Scoring Events:
The electorate in the good old US of A finally got the idea that we could actually nominate a candidate and vote for him or her based on ridiculous criteria like merit, stated policies and plans, intelligence, and honesty, thus abandoning time-honored Christian values such as mud-slinging skill, folksy brazenness, homey ethnic humor, and word-twisting ability.
Three or more people in the national picture-window started talking about the nation’s health without focusing exclusively on our healthcare industry. I can’t remember who the third one was, but the then Health and Human Services Secretary Designate and then President-Elect spoke about improving our health without any sign of embarrassment, shame, or need to speak only in compound nouns. And some other public figure talked about health and forgot to add “care.” At least, I’m pretty sure someone else did.
In spite of – or perhaps in order to cope with – serious problems that seemed to compound faster than variable mortgage interest, people retained their sense of humor. For example, while President Elect Obama was saying that there should be only one president at a time, a frank member of the USA’s House of Representatives seemed to think “one” was an underestimate.
And so forth.
Looking Ahead
Now we get to the real issue. What’s going to happen from here to 2010? Well, friends and neighbors, the Trailing Edge is prepared to boldly go where anybody with a lick of sense would avoid like a banker’s solution to the housing bubble. Let the infinitives split where they may!
No, we’re not going to predict the choice of First Dog. This old Trailer isn’t that foolish.
Predictions for 2009 (trumpet fanfare, please)
Somebody will get the idea that if the President can speak in whole paragraphs, other politicians might try a diet of something other than empty sound bites. This new thought will give some politicians headaches, but others will try it anyway.
One or two more people in the USA – who are not public health professionals like me, with an ax to grind – will start talking about the nation’s health without a “care” in the word. Being extremists, they will want things like an infant death rate that’s as low as, say, Cuba’s. They may even think helping people find a job so they can afford safe housing and information so they eat healthy food might be a good approach to avoiding unnecessary healthcare costs. Of course, if this health promotion and disease prevention stuff catches on, there might be a run on our health information banks. Now that bailout would be interesting.
The Congress of the United States of America will avoid for as long as it possibly can making any decision about economic stimulus, bailout, or help for somebody other than the rich. Finally, the Republicans will suddenly realize that in trying to keep President Obama from looking good they’ve made themselves look so bad that they may have already lost the re-election they were so worried about. At that point, they will salvage the situation by taking credit for having forced those spend-thrift Democrats to come up with a really good law. Now, in the past, one party defined a really good law as one that makes the other party look bad. But this is one of those things President Obama wanted us to change as I recall. So let’s keep our fingers crossed about that. Better yet, let’s keep our fingers flexed so we can email our legislators, ask them to play nice, and remind them about who acutally does the voting.
The guy who’s wandering around the country talking to inner city youth about making money by going green – not Al Gore, the other one – will start to build a following of urban entrepreneurs who think there’s a chance that when he talks to them about green, it isn’t because he is interested in money laundering or got lost and wandered into the wrong room.
President Obama will continue to work steadily to undo the damage done in any prior administration that might have immediately preceded this one.
Sadly, it won’t all be beer and skittles. The economy will take more than this year to heal, and so, of course will war-torn regions around the world. The housing market and the banking systems will take longer than one year to revive, and so will our healthcare system. And we do have to talk about health with a care in the word, too, so we can fix it.
On the other hand, if the legislative branch of government in the US of A wakes up to its responsibility to all the voters, some of these ills may heal faster.
And if Rip Van Winkle kisses Sleeping Beauty awake and she and Snow White lead the Seven Mine Workers in forming a collective bargaining association, then Prince Charming can give up his flagrant lifestyle and ride off into the sunset with Little Red Riding Hood.
Or something like that.
Oops, please excuse that inadvertant eruption of cynicism.
Let’s keep working on the good hope. Baby steps, maybe, but with your help and mine 2009 will be a year of small improvements on all fronts.
And that’s really pretty good, as happy endings go.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Inauguration Day
Thank you, Mr. President
For having become you, Mr. President.
Our president.
It couldn’t have been easy,
Those many steps you took
Before the short, long walks you took today.
Thank you for understanding that our crisis isn’t
Simply in the interests of The Economy,
Solely about global warming,
Just about healthcare,
Merely about education,
Entirely about US.
Thank you for turning defeat into victory,
For turning victory into success,
For requrining success with honor.
Thank you, Mr. President
For an inaugural address that was everything I have come to expect from you
And more.
Thank you for your writing skill that gave us all those sentences
Full of meaning and promise,
For the meaning and promise you use that skill so well to express,
For giving us more than the sound-bite-sentence
Our broadcasters were waiting for.
I could cry today, Mr. President.
I didn’t cry when you were nominated, although many did.
We had not come far enough.
I didn’t cry when you were elected, although many more did.
Not far enough, still.
Today we have not yet come far enough.
But we will.
Today I cried for happy.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Sherry Spence
January 20, 2009
For having become you, Mr. President.
Our president.
It couldn’t have been easy,
Those many steps you took
Before the short, long walks you took today.
Thank you for understanding that our crisis isn’t
Simply in the interests of The Economy,
Solely about global warming,
Just about healthcare,
Merely about education,
Entirely about US.
Thank you for turning defeat into victory,
For turning victory into success,
For requrining success with honor.
Thank you, Mr. President
For an inaugural address that was everything I have come to expect from you
And more.
Thank you for your writing skill that gave us all those sentences
Full of meaning and promise,
For the meaning and promise you use that skill so well to express,
For giving us more than the sound-bite-sentence
Our broadcasters were waiting for.
I could cry today, Mr. President.
I didn’t cry when you were nominated, although many did.
We had not come far enough.
I didn’t cry when you were elected, although many more did.
Not far enough, still.
Today we have not yet come far enough.
But we will.
Today I cried for happy.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Sherry Spence
January 20, 2009
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Home for the Holidays
Well, friends, now that the USA’s national election has been satisfactorily resolved - for me anyway - we can all turn our thoughts to important matters of concern to our nation.
In our town, that means resuming the yearly discussion about how to celebrate the holiday season with appropriate consideration for all religions, sects, creeds, and degrees of non-belief. You probably don’t recall this, but the solution our city fathers came up with last year was to have white lights, as opposed to colored lights, adorning all the trees in our quaint downtown neighborhood, Old Town. This was to celebrate the holidays without overt reference to Christianity so they wouldn't be forced to allow overt reference to some - and potentially all - other religion. I don’t know if our city mothers were involved in the decision. The city fathers (and, possibly, mothers) then backed off a bit and allowed store-owners to decorate their stores as they chose - on the inside. At that phase of this momentous debate, I sort of lost interest.
Before losing interest, I’d spent some considerable time trying to figure out why multicolored lights are religious and white lights are not. It’s important to understand the issues in a debate before weighing in on one side or the other. Now that the debate has resurfaced, I’m back to puzzling over the question of how a light bulb becomes religious. No success so far. If I come up with anything, I’ll let you know.
Meanwhile, other people in this and other towns are puzzling about other things almost as important. Things like how to keep their homes at least through the holidays and whether they have any relatives left who still own - or rent - a place that has room for extra beds. Now, being as that’s not as difficult a question, I came across what seems to me to be a good solution day before yesterday in an article by Dean Baker of the Center for Economic Policy Research. I’d like to share it with you, in case it interests you more than the lightbulb controversy.
Suppose the congress passed a temporary law that banks could not foreclose on homeowners without offering them the option to rent their home, at current market rates, for the next 10 or 20 years. Then the banks would have a choice: they could collect rent and maintain the home they acquire from the former owner(s). Or they could renegotiate the loan and let the family continue to purchase and maintain the home at a lower cost to the family. The bank would likely get payments above the rental market rate, and the family would pay for the home’s upkeep. (I think this is what’s known in the arbitration business as a not-lose – not-lose situation.) There’s even a law already running around to do this; Representative Raul Grijalva proposed such a change in the Saving Family Homes Act. At least I think it’s running around; it doesn’t seem to be doing anything else.
If we can get Congress to pass this law, then the financial wizards who got us into this mess will have something constructive to do with the money our Treasury folks seem intent on giving them. Maybe there’s a problem with the proposed law. Maybe it makes too much sense to be a law or something. If that’s the case, any number of legislators could fix it.
So what can we do? Well, since the three of you won’t email me, even to join my war on violence, I’ll just ask those of you who are citizens of the USA to email your congresspersons and ask them to support this law without changing the intent too much. Or at all, even.
Of course, I could be wrong in thinking this is a good solution. However, like most people, I don’t often entertain the possiblity that I might be wrong. And even though that possiblity entertains me pretty frequently, I think this is the best approach to handling the situation and I think you should contact your congressperson about getting this act out of the House Committee on Financial Services and into law.
LATE BREAKING NEWS: When we went grocery shopping yesterday, we saw Christmas wreaths on several buildings in Old Town.
Taken together with the election results, is this an indication that common sense can prevail and there’s a glimmer of hope for the nation’s homeowners?
Now I know what I want for Christmas. If there are any middle class homeowners left by then. I can’t wait to see Santa.
In our town, that means resuming the yearly discussion about how to celebrate the holiday season with appropriate consideration for all religions, sects, creeds, and degrees of non-belief. You probably don’t recall this, but the solution our city fathers came up with last year was to have white lights, as opposed to colored lights, adorning all the trees in our quaint downtown neighborhood, Old Town. This was to celebrate the holidays without overt reference to Christianity so they wouldn't be forced to allow overt reference to some - and potentially all - other religion. I don’t know if our city mothers were involved in the decision. The city fathers (and, possibly, mothers) then backed off a bit and allowed store-owners to decorate their stores as they chose - on the inside. At that phase of this momentous debate, I sort of lost interest.
Before losing interest, I’d spent some considerable time trying to figure out why multicolored lights are religious and white lights are not. It’s important to understand the issues in a debate before weighing in on one side or the other. Now that the debate has resurfaced, I’m back to puzzling over the question of how a light bulb becomes religious. No success so far. If I come up with anything, I’ll let you know.
Meanwhile, other people in this and other towns are puzzling about other things almost as important. Things like how to keep their homes at least through the holidays and whether they have any relatives left who still own - or rent - a place that has room for extra beds. Now, being as that’s not as difficult a question, I came across what seems to me to be a good solution day before yesterday in an article by Dean Baker of the Center for Economic Policy Research. I’d like to share it with you, in case it interests you more than the lightbulb controversy.
Suppose the congress passed a temporary law that banks could not foreclose on homeowners without offering them the option to rent their home, at current market rates, for the next 10 or 20 years. Then the banks would have a choice: they could collect rent and maintain the home they acquire from the former owner(s). Or they could renegotiate the loan and let the family continue to purchase and maintain the home at a lower cost to the family. The bank would likely get payments above the rental market rate, and the family would pay for the home’s upkeep. (I think this is what’s known in the arbitration business as a not-lose – not-lose situation.) There’s even a law already running around to do this; Representative Raul Grijalva proposed such a change in the Saving Family Homes Act. At least I think it’s running around; it doesn’t seem to be doing anything else.
If we can get Congress to pass this law, then the financial wizards who got us into this mess will have something constructive to do with the money our Treasury folks seem intent on giving them. Maybe there’s a problem with the proposed law. Maybe it makes too much sense to be a law or something. If that’s the case, any number of legislators could fix it.
So what can we do? Well, since the three of you won’t email me, even to join my war on violence, I’ll just ask those of you who are citizens of the USA to email your congresspersons and ask them to support this law without changing the intent too much. Or at all, even.
Of course, I could be wrong in thinking this is a good solution. However, like most people, I don’t often entertain the possiblity that I might be wrong. And even though that possiblity entertains me pretty frequently, I think this is the best approach to handling the situation and I think you should contact your congressperson about getting this act out of the House Committee on Financial Services and into law.
LATE BREAKING NEWS: When we went grocery shopping yesterday, we saw Christmas wreaths on several buildings in Old Town.
Taken together with the election results, is this an indication that common sense can prevail and there’s a glimmer of hope for the nation’s homeowners?
Now I know what I want for Christmas. If there are any middle class homeowners left by then. I can’t wait to see Santa.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Y A A A A A A A A A Y!
The following is a translation for non-English-speaking readers and bloggers:
YAAAAAAAAAY!!!
YAAAAAAAAAY!!!
Friday, August 29, 2008
Being Democratic
So one day before Reverend Martin Luther King’s historic “I have a dream” speech, “Senator Barack Obama, the Hawaiian-born son of a father from Kenya and a mother from Kansas, officially [became] the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party” (NY Times News Alert) of the United States of America (USA). On the day of the historic “dream” speech, Obama gave his acceptance speech. Wow.
Today (can you believe I’m actually blogging on the day of the event, albeit late in the day?), we hear of the Republican vice presedential nominee, and we see that the lines are drawn.
On the Republican side:
• Drill, tunnel, scrape, and plant to extract the energy Mother Earth has to offer for the benefit of citizens of the USA;
• Arm, plan, and fight for what we, in the USA, believe we have the right to seek;
• Share our bounty, developed from our free market economy and necessary USA government protection, with those less fortunate; and
• Change the USA’s healthcare system cautiously and carefully, protecting those in need within the framework of the larger economic and social needs.
On the Democratic side:
• Remove dependence on foreign energy resources by spending now on Mother Earth’s solar, wind, and geothermal resources for our energy needs;
• Use diplomacy to bring the global focus back to our shared needs so we can assure what the USA needs for our political, economic, and societal safety;
• Restore economic stability and tax equity and support free enterprise for small or start-up operations rather than for national or global corporations; and
• Improve healthcare for the most needy and make the cost of healthcare affordable for the average citizen in the USA.
I tried to sound unbiased, guys, really I did.
It’s not easy being green.
Or promoting social justice.
Or trying to stay healthy on a fixed income, for that matter.
So while I think of the speech that Martin Luther King, Jr., made so many years ago yesterday, other memories come back to swamp my little pleasure boat:
• When I was twelve or thirteen years old, I went on my annual outing to the State Fair of Texas. This year represented a first: instead of three restrooms (“men,” “women,” and “colored”), there were two (“men” and “women”). In my naïve, pubescent mind, the idea of sharing a restroom with the opposite sex was apalling, so I welcomed the change. However, the two women (generally referred to as “negro” at the time) who were there when I walked in were clearly angry with me. What had I done? Ruined their chance to use a “comfort station” comfortably by my very need to do the same. My 80 pound presence was a real threat to them. They were scared; I felt the need – but didn’t have the guts – to apologize. Silence reigned. What a world.
• Around the time of the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago – with all its chaos and drama – my friend Butch (still identified as “negro”) was reminiscing about his supposed friend who was referring to himself and some other white friends as “Americans.” Butch had pointed out that he, too, was an American, to which his “friend” had replied, “You know, real Americans.” I still couldn’t think of anything to say.
So my sense of history is that we’ve come a long way in the last half-century. And I still, all too frequently, can’t think of anything to say. And I still welcome the change. Maybe, someday, we could even do the same for women. You know, real humans…;-))
Today (can you believe I’m actually blogging on the day of the event, albeit late in the day?), we hear of the Republican vice presedential nominee, and we see that the lines are drawn.
On the Republican side:
• Drill, tunnel, scrape, and plant to extract the energy Mother Earth has to offer for the benefit of citizens of the USA;
• Arm, plan, and fight for what we, in the USA, believe we have the right to seek;
• Share our bounty, developed from our free market economy and necessary USA government protection, with those less fortunate; and
• Change the USA’s healthcare system cautiously and carefully, protecting those in need within the framework of the larger economic and social needs.
On the Democratic side:
• Remove dependence on foreign energy resources by spending now on Mother Earth’s solar, wind, and geothermal resources for our energy needs;
• Use diplomacy to bring the global focus back to our shared needs so we can assure what the USA needs for our political, economic, and societal safety;
• Restore economic stability and tax equity and support free enterprise for small or start-up operations rather than for national or global corporations; and
• Improve healthcare for the most needy and make the cost of healthcare affordable for the average citizen in the USA.
I tried to sound unbiased, guys, really I did.
It’s not easy being green.
Or promoting social justice.
Or trying to stay healthy on a fixed income, for that matter.
So while I think of the speech that Martin Luther King, Jr., made so many years ago yesterday, other memories come back to swamp my little pleasure boat:
• When I was twelve or thirteen years old, I went on my annual outing to the State Fair of Texas. This year represented a first: instead of three restrooms (“men,” “women,” and “colored”), there were two (“men” and “women”). In my naïve, pubescent mind, the idea of sharing a restroom with the opposite sex was apalling, so I welcomed the change. However, the two women (generally referred to as “negro” at the time) who were there when I walked in were clearly angry with me. What had I done? Ruined their chance to use a “comfort station” comfortably by my very need to do the same. My 80 pound presence was a real threat to them. They were scared; I felt the need – but didn’t have the guts – to apologize. Silence reigned. What a world.
• Around the time of the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago – with all its chaos and drama – my friend Butch (still identified as “negro”) was reminiscing about his supposed friend who was referring to himself and some other white friends as “Americans.” Butch had pointed out that he, too, was an American, to which his “friend” had replied, “You know, real Americans.” I still couldn’t think of anything to say.
So my sense of history is that we’ve come a long way in the last half-century. And I still, all too frequently, can’t think of anything to say. And I still welcome the change. Maybe, someday, we could even do the same for women. You know, real humans…;-))
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Join the War on Violence!
Here it is, friends, the Trailing Edge is proud to announce the promised – delayed, naturally – launch of the war on violence.
Action Alert: Join me in fighting violence! Follow these simple steps:
• Step 1: Remove violence from our language (unless, of course, we are really, really angry).
• Step 2: Remove violence from our language when we are really, really angry.
In the spirit of trailing, we can deal with removing violence from our actions at a later date.
That’s it.
Simple, right? Well, no, not easy. But simple.
So why, you ask, would we want to wage yet another war against one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. That answer is simple, also. Why not?
We’re prevailing valiantly against Pestulence and Famine, aren’t we?
OK, bad reasoning – we’re acutally not doing so well with those fights these days. Small farmers are working to survive by making money off food for fuel and agribusiness is cleaning up – monetarily speaking, of course. World hunger is winning that one. Sadly, the fight on the pestulence front is, in general, less than ideal. For example, in the funding vs. HIV battle, HIV is winning. The federal government here in the USA is working hard on these wars. However, not all funding seems to be on the anti-Apocalypse-Horsemen side, in my somewhat-less-than-humble opinion.
Anyway, back to the front. Our War on Violence. Maybe we can make some headway there. In my search for reasons not to have violence – restricted, of course to violent language for the moment – I’ve come up with the following:
Violent language may lead to violent thinking, which may lead to actual violence, and acutal violence is expensive.
Outstanding thinking, don't you agree? Not to mention an outstanding example of a run-on sentence.
War for example, is very costly by any humane or economic measure. The National Priorities Project has been keeping track of the dollar cost of the war in Iraq for us:
click here to learn more
And even back in January 2007, some folks at the New York Times knew that there were some good non-violent things to do with that money. One thing would be health care for more than 20 million children for more than 10 years. My, my. Perhaps we could just try keeping all the kids in the US of A healthy for 5 years. Maybe longer, if we spent some of the healthcare funding on public health - you know, preventing diseases and accidents being cheaper than healing them. Maybe we could provide healthcare for everyone just by watching the overspending and misspending by government contractors in our war efforts. That is to say, by doing something about over-and mis-spending; some say we have been watching it for a while now.
So join the fight! And just to show you I'm ready for a long siege, I'll start by example right here in this blog. Here goes...
OK. So a quick re-read of the above comes up with seven violent verbs and more than 20 violent nouns (including repetitions).
So I may not be your best example of removing violence from language just yet. You sharp bloggees, you noticed that right off, didn't you? Maybe we all need to band together to fight this tendency to express ourselves violently. No. Wait. What I meant was...
Baby Step 1: Remove violent language from non-violent and/or helpful activities.
We will attack - or rather, cease using - expressions for prevention and cure of disease such as “the war on cancer.” Wanting to make - that is to say, help - people stop substance abuse will no longer be a “war on drugs.” And so on.
Let’s try this together:
Join forces... Not.
Team up to conque... Nope.
Heed the call to arm... Not even.
Email me to sign up.
One baby step for us, one giant step for non-violence. Or vice versa, perhaps. Email your acceptance of the terms of engagement, that is to say, of peaceful activity. (No offerers of purchases or large cash rewards need apply.)
We can do it.
First thing tomorrow.
Action Alert: Join me in fighting violence! Follow these simple steps:
• Step 1: Remove violence from our language (unless, of course, we are really, really angry).
• Step 2: Remove violence from our language when we are really, really angry.
In the spirit of trailing, we can deal with removing violence from our actions at a later date.
That’s it.
Simple, right? Well, no, not easy. But simple.
So why, you ask, would we want to wage yet another war against one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. That answer is simple, also. Why not?
We’re prevailing valiantly against Pestulence and Famine, aren’t we?
OK, bad reasoning – we’re acutally not doing so well with those fights these days. Small farmers are working to survive by making money off food for fuel and agribusiness is cleaning up – monetarily speaking, of course. World hunger is winning that one. Sadly, the fight on the pestulence front is, in general, less than ideal. For example, in the funding vs. HIV battle, HIV is winning. The federal government here in the USA is working hard on these wars. However, not all funding seems to be on the anti-Apocalypse-Horsemen side, in my somewhat-less-than-humble opinion.
Anyway, back to the front. Our War on Violence. Maybe we can make some headway there. In my search for reasons not to have violence – restricted, of course to violent language for the moment – I’ve come up with the following:
Violent language may lead to violent thinking, which may lead to actual violence, and acutal violence is expensive.
Outstanding thinking, don't you agree? Not to mention an outstanding example of a run-on sentence.
War for example, is very costly by any humane or economic measure. The National Priorities Project has been keeping track of the dollar cost of the war in Iraq for us:
click here to learn more
And even back in January 2007, some folks at the New York Times knew that there were some good non-violent things to do with that money. One thing would be health care for more than 20 million children for more than 10 years. My, my. Perhaps we could just try keeping all the kids in the US of A healthy for 5 years. Maybe longer, if we spent some of the healthcare funding on public health - you know, preventing diseases and accidents being cheaper than healing them. Maybe we could provide healthcare for everyone just by watching the overspending and misspending by government contractors in our war efforts. That is to say, by doing something about over-and mis-spending; some say we have been watching it for a while now.
So join the fight! And just to show you I'm ready for a long siege, I'll start by example right here in this blog. Here goes...
OK. So a quick re-read of the above comes up with seven violent verbs and more than 20 violent nouns (including repetitions).
So I may not be your best example of removing violence from language just yet. You sharp bloggees, you noticed that right off, didn't you? Maybe we all need to band together to fight this tendency to express ourselves violently. No. Wait. What I meant was...
Baby Step 1: Remove violent language from non-violent and/or helpful activities.
We will attack - or rather, cease using - expressions for prevention and cure of disease such as “the war on cancer.” Wanting to make - that is to say, help - people stop substance abuse will no longer be a “war on drugs.” And so on.
Let’s try this together:
Join forces... Not.
Team up to conque... Nope.
Heed the call to arm... Not even.
Email me to sign up.
One baby step for us, one giant step for non-violence. Or vice versa, perhaps. Email your acceptance of the terms of engagement, that is to say, of peaceful activity. (No offerers of purchases or large cash rewards need apply.)
We can do it.
First thing tomorrow.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Pro Life? Pro Common Sense? What’s Ap-Pro-priate Here?
Have you heard the latest rumor (for example, check out RH Reality Check)? It seems that someone in the current administration is thinking about a rule that would kill all dissenting "birds" (aka women) with two stones:
Even for people who don’t believe in killing – at least not pre-birth humans – this is pretty drastic action. Surely, this can’t be true. In the first place, there's no way medical science can tell an egg is fertile until after implantation, so this means that the provider can just decide that a patient might be pregnant and proceed accordingly. Someone, tell me it isn’t true.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Happy Juneteenth!
We’re really hitting our stride at the Trailing Edge this month. Here it is practically the end of June, and we’re just now limping up - with hang-dog look and, as Pogo put it, “covered with rue” - to celebrate Juneteenth.
If she were trying to deflect blame, a person might say this is poetic justice. Or irony in social justice perhaps. Juneteenth being a celebration of the very belated recognition in
For those of us who are still unclear about this holiday, a quick check of our trusty internet search engine - and a small typo - will bring up Junteenth and quite a good description by kzntell (who - name notwithstanding - is a better speller than we are, having titled his/her summary of the day “What is Juneteenth?”).
“Juneteenth,” writes the aforementioned kzntell, “also known as Freedom Day or Emancipation Day, annual holiday celebrated on June 19 in the United States to commemorate the ending of slavery…. marks the day in 1865 when word reached African Americans in
Other descriptions are available from the National Black Justice Coalition and from the
Handbook of Texas. (That explains our trouble adjusting to
“On June 19 ("Juneteenth"), 1865,” the Handbook tells us, “Union general Gordon Granger read the Emancipation Proclamation in Galveston, thus belatedly bringing about the freeing of 250,000 slaves in Texas. The tidings of freedom reached slaves gradually as individual plantation owners read the proclamation to their bondsmen over the months following the end of the war [in keeping with the spirit of delaying ethics in favor of money which, among other things, characterized the US Civil War]. The news elicited an array of personal celebrations, some of which have been described in The Slave Narratives of Texas (1974).” And so on.
We hope you did something liberating and ethical on the 19th.
We intended to. But we made strawberry jam. We’d like to say the jam made us think about Mark Twain’s Puddinhead Wilson. But it didn’t.
Monday, June 16, 2008
How Many Politicians
How many politicians does it take to change a lightbulb?
No, really. You may be thinking this is like the “how many programmers” lightbulb joke. (Answer: No number is sufficient; it’s a hardware problem.) That would be a reasonable thought (or a lame joke; your call). But I’m thinking this issue would call for legislative action (and another lame joke, of course).
First, the bipartisan committee would have to be formed and named something appropriate (say, the Committee for Bipartisan Upkeep of Legislative Lighting while Safeguarding Health and Impact…etc.). Then, the Co-BULL..etc. debate could proceed about wattage, variety (fluorescent or incandescent would be a key issue here and would probably require input from the joint legislative committee on energy policy), contracting requirements, and so on.
By that time, several days would have passed. So someone in Maintenance, who doesn’t have a healthcare plan, a retirement job lined up, or expensive advertising to help keep his or her job, has already changed the bulb. So the committee could debate whether a change of focus is necessary or the Co-BULL…etc. should continue, in anticipation of the next Lighting Fixture Maintenance Event.
In case you're wondering why yet another back-to-back post, my planned tasks for the week are to complete a peer review, work on an annotated bibiliography, clean out my files, and do bookkeeping.
No, really. You may be thinking this is like the “how many programmers” lightbulb joke. (Answer: No number is sufficient; it’s a hardware problem.) That would be a reasonable thought (or a lame joke; your call). But I’m thinking this issue would call for legislative action (and another lame joke, of course).
First, the bipartisan committee would have to be formed and named something appropriate (say, the Committee for Bipartisan Upkeep of Legislative Lighting while Safeguarding Health and Impact…etc.). Then, the Co-BULL..etc. debate could proceed about wattage, variety (fluorescent or incandescent would be a key issue here and would probably require input from the joint legislative committee on energy policy), contracting requirements, and so on.
By that time, several days would have passed. So someone in Maintenance, who doesn’t have a healthcare plan, a retirement job lined up, or expensive advertising to help keep his or her job, has already changed the bulb. So the committee could debate whether a change of focus is necessary or the Co-BULL…etc. should continue, in anticipation of the next Lighting Fixture Maintenance Event.
In case you're wondering why yet another back-to-back post, my planned tasks for the week are to complete a peer review, work on an annotated bibiliography, clean out my files, and do bookkeeping.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Women's Health in the US of A
Well, this is something. Two blogs back to back.
We might lose our reputation as laggards. Not to worry; this is worth it.
If you are a woman, married to a woman, involved with a woman, or a citizen of the USA, this might just interest you.
If you don't care about women in the USofA, politics, my opinions, or all of the above, you are probably here by mistake. Go in good health; I wish you well.
Anybody still out there? You might be interested in the Bush-McCain challenge "to see if folks knew where John McCain stands when it comes to protecting women's health," coming to us from the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. Whether or not you approve of Planned Parenthood, check out this video:
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3774&id=12852-635311-Vq5UZ4x&t=5
By the way, if you don't approve of planned parenthood, which one don't you like? The planned part or the parenthood part? Just wondering...
We might lose our reputation as laggards. Not to worry; this is worth it.
If you are a woman, married to a woman, involved with a woman, or a citizen of the USA, this might just interest you.
If you don't care about women in the USofA, politics, my opinions, or all of the above, you are probably here by mistake. Go in good health; I wish you well.
Anybody still out there? You might be interested in the Bush-McCain challenge "to see if folks knew where John McCain stands when it comes to protecting women's health," coming to us from the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. Whether or not you approve of Planned Parenthood, check out this video:
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=3774&id=12852-635311-Vq5UZ4x&t=5
By the way, if you don't approve of planned parenthood, which one don't you like? The planned part or the parenthood part? Just wondering...
Which puts me in mind of a poem I wrote a while back (who knows why):
Our Daughters
9/6/2005
Our daughters
Sit on the mantel
Mine on the left
His on the right
Grinning
Beautiful
Young women
Our daughters
Younger
So much younger
Frame our bed
His on the left
Mine on the right
Cherubs
Our daughters
How do I greive so
For the one I never met
Friday, June 13, 2008
If there’s no flour for bread, make biscuits…
Revised - per valid, reasonable request - from blog posted 6/13/2008; please use and/or quote this version. Thanks, Sherry, ChezSherry:
So how, you may ask, have we spent our time since mid-May? And why, for that matter, didn’t we acknowledge the earthquake in China, Memorial Day in the USA, or Barak Obama’s nomination? An enormous ongoing loss, a reminder of personal loss, and the greatest cause for hope in my lifetime. They all went by without a murmur from the Trailing Edge. Now that’s trailing for you!
If you haven’t asked yourselves those questions, continuing to read this is optional – as it ever is, was, and shall be, of course...
But enough about you; this is about me.
I have been doing battle (interesting how so many of our metaphors are war-related, isn’t it? Join our soon-to-be-posted “War on Violence” campaign…). Battle has been joined with those well trained, well-intentioned voices in the ether(net) available to help us 24/7 with our electronic difficulties.
It started simply enough: we lost our electrical power and our internet services on Thursday, May 22, because of tornado-strength winds. We were so lucky not to lose more as a tornado that passed within 20 or 30 miles (30-50 km.) of us. So lucky to only watch the enormous, black cloud bank as it blew past less than 5 miles (8 km.) away in a few, frighteningly short minutes. So lucky that losing electrical services was the least we could do.
After our power was restored – but not our internet service – we called the help line, waited through the recording assuring us we could get faster service at www.helpful-service-providers.com, punched all the right buttons (mostly), said all the right words (several times), and got to an actual person. She was very nice. She said nicely that our service was indeed still interrupted by the tornado. We were so lucky after all that it seemed churlish to complain when the she asked us, helpfully, if there was any other help she could provide. Upon hearing that there was not, she reminded us sweetly that we could get service quicker and more easily just by going to www.helpful-service-providers.com.
Yes. Well. So lucky, all the same.
After we saw by the green light on our heretofore trusty modem that our internet service was restored, we tried to get on-line. “Server not available,” reported our trusty Windows browser.
We waited.
Friday morning dawned with our trusty modem cheerfully flashing its green Internet light. We mis-trusted it. Rightly so. We pressed its reset button. Once resot, light green, browser at the ready, we clicked. “Server not available,” replied the browser. We took away the modem’s power. We rebooted the computer. “Server not available,” stated the browser, the modem flashing its green internet light. Mockingly.
We did the help line tango again, got our helpful “go online” suggestions, and spoke to another nice person. She explained that while our modem could connect to the network, the internet server was down. It would be restored in two to 24 hours, she said helpfully, so we should check periodically throughout the day. And we should provide our email address so we could comment on her help. We tried unsuccessfully to keep her from adding “msn.com” to the end of our email address, and listened politely to her reminder that we could get really fast help at www.helpful-service-providers.com.
After lots of fun interaction with the “Server not available” module on our browser, we greeted a new day. Within the predicted 24 hours, give or take 4 hours for building our character, the server became available. Yay! While hopeful, we still couldn’t get on the internet. We called our trusty hot-line, executed the now-familiar dance, got to a person, and in mere hours reestablished internet connectivity on both the desktop and the laptop. We were so happy to have internet service that we didn’t even comment when the helpful person sweetly told us that if we encountered this problem in future, we could go to www.helpful-service-providers.com.
These kindly folks are so well trained.
We used our internet and tended to our garden, literally and figuratively. We began to contemplate a world in which we in the United States of America can finally, maybe, hope to get over our pre-Civil-War greed and post-Civil-War Reconstruction and see people when we look at people.
We developed a false sense of security.
One day, we left the house to run errands, being among the shrinking number of folks on this planet who can buy food whenever we like. We returned through the wind to a powerless home. We understood the feeling.
Once the power and internet were restored, we did some actual paid work, weeded our garden, and turned to maintenance of our electronic garden. Our new handheld device was not playing well with our desktop devices.
We had a new one-sided conversation with our desktop.
“! Windows – System Error
“There is an IP address conflict with another system on the network”
said the hidden icons at the bottom of our screen and refused to explain further.
Knowing what would happen if we telephoned our helpful 24/7 handheld device and cell phone service provider folks, we went online. The following exchange occurred:
Ourcellphoneservice.com: Enter your device description
Poor user: Click on handheld, find and select our handheld device.
Ourcellphoneservice.com: Enter your question
Poor user: Find list of service needs and click on “e-mail.”
Ourcellphoneservice.com: Enter your device description
Poor user: Click on handheld, find and select our handheld device.
Ourcellphoneservice.com: Enter your question
Poor user: Find list of service needs and click on “e-mail.”
We repeated this exchange from several start points on ourcellphoneservice.com.
Having now established that Poor User has met one of the criteria for insanity – repeatedly performing the same actions, getting the same results, and expecting different results – we stopped and moved on to the next cycle.
We called 1-800-ourcellphoneservice for 24/7 help. We listened to the friendly advice to go to myourcellphoneservice.com. Forearmed, we danced through the phone system to a person. He was very helpful and understanding. His accent was almost incomprehensible because he was not from our country. He was from Texas.
But he was happy to repeat himself, and we got along nicely. We didn’t solve the problem, but we did get logged into ourmycellphoneprovider.com. Of course, our computer wouldn’t display anything but the login screen where we entered our brand new password. Repeatedly. Once our helpful person made us understand that he could see we were logged in already, we stopped demonstrating our insanity in that way. He tried to talk us through setting up email on our handheld device. We worked through our language barrier and established that if the handheld is unplugged from the computer or the Wi-fi connection is deactivated there is no service on the handheld device. (We already knew that actual cell service was only possible if one went outside and stood in the county road, but our helper didn’t.) We tried, but in our cell-towerless neighborhood the signal wasn’t strong enough to connect to the internet, no matter what risky behavior we undertook.
After following various other instructions, we got our handheld device to the point that it would do even less than before, even when re-Wi-fi’ed. Without, of course, setting up email. Our help person had a suggestion: we should drive to the cell phone service provider nearest us and they’d help us restore the menu options we need and add email service, for which he assured we are already paying. Because he understood our frustration, repeatedly, our helpful trouble-shooter offered us 50 free minutes. When we pointed out that we couldn’t currently use our cell phone’s existing minutes, he understood our frustration and awarded us 50 free minutes.
After a few more attempts at fixing things, which he did at our request because they hadn’t worked so well the first time, we agreed to stop repeating this activity. Our helpful person said once again that he understood our frustration at not getting either the handheld device or myourcellphoneservice.com to work. He forbore reminders about our free minutes and asked if there was anything else he could do for us today. We thought that he had done enough. Before wishing us a great day, he reminded us that we could get fast, easy service at www.myourcellphoneservice.com.
I recounted these woes to my husband.
“If there’s no flour for bread, make pancakes,” he said.
So, being – as has previously been established – insane, I waited a day before trying again. Oddly enough, the login to myourcellphoneservice.com worked, and the first attempt to select help with email setup on the selected handheld device yielded a new result! It was:
“It appears that the page you have requested no longer exists. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience this may have caused you.”
And the hidden icons added,
“! Windows – System Error
“There is an IP address conflict with another system on the network”
I am not going to telephone anyone.
I am not going to go anywhere else on the internet.
I am going to stay home (ChezSherry) and make pancakes.
Or maybe biscuits.
So how, you may ask, have we spent our time since mid-May? And why, for that matter, didn’t we acknowledge the earthquake in China, Memorial Day in the USA, or Barak Obama’s nomination? An enormous ongoing loss, a reminder of personal loss, and the greatest cause for hope in my lifetime. They all went by without a murmur from the Trailing Edge. Now that’s trailing for you!
If you haven’t asked yourselves those questions, continuing to read this is optional – as it ever is, was, and shall be, of course...
But enough about you; this is about me.
I have been doing battle (interesting how so many of our metaphors are war-related, isn’t it? Join our soon-to-be-posted “War on Violence” campaign…). Battle has been joined with those well trained, well-intentioned voices in the ether(net) available to help us 24/7 with our electronic difficulties.
It started simply enough: we lost our electrical power and our internet services on Thursday, May 22, because of tornado-strength winds. We were so lucky not to lose more as a tornado that passed within 20 or 30 miles (30-50 km.) of us. So lucky to only watch the enormous, black cloud bank as it blew past less than 5 miles (8 km.) away in a few, frighteningly short minutes. So lucky that losing electrical services was the least we could do.
After our power was restored – but not our internet service – we called the help line, waited through the recording assuring us we could get faster service at www.helpful-service-providers.com, punched all the right buttons (mostly), said all the right words (several times), and got to an actual person. She was very nice. She said nicely that our service was indeed still interrupted by the tornado. We were so lucky after all that it seemed churlish to complain when the she asked us, helpfully, if there was any other help she could provide. Upon hearing that there was not, she reminded us sweetly that we could get service quicker and more easily just by going to www.helpful-service-providers.com.
Yes. Well. So lucky, all the same.
After we saw by the green light on our heretofore trusty modem that our internet service was restored, we tried to get on-line. “Server not available,” reported our trusty Windows browser.
We waited.
Friday morning dawned with our trusty modem cheerfully flashing its green Internet light. We mis-trusted it. Rightly so. We pressed its reset button. Once resot, light green, browser at the ready, we clicked. “Server not available,” replied the browser. We took away the modem’s power. We rebooted the computer. “Server not available,” stated the browser, the modem flashing its green internet light. Mockingly.
We did the help line tango again, got our helpful “go online” suggestions, and spoke to another nice person. She explained that while our modem could connect to the network, the internet server was down. It would be restored in two to 24 hours, she said helpfully, so we should check periodically throughout the day. And we should provide our email address so we could comment on her help. We tried unsuccessfully to keep her from adding “msn.com” to the end of our email address, and listened politely to her reminder that we could get really fast help at www.helpful-service-providers.com.
After lots of fun interaction with the “Server not available” module on our browser, we greeted a new day. Within the predicted 24 hours, give or take 4 hours for building our character, the server became available. Yay! While hopeful, we still couldn’t get on the internet. We called our trusty hot-line, executed the now-familiar dance, got to a person, and in mere hours reestablished internet connectivity on both the desktop and the laptop. We were so happy to have internet service that we didn’t even comment when the helpful person sweetly told us that if we encountered this problem in future, we could go to www.helpful-service-providers.com.
These kindly folks are so well trained.
We used our internet and tended to our garden, literally and figuratively. We began to contemplate a world in which we in the United States of America can finally, maybe, hope to get over our pre-Civil-War greed and post-Civil-War Reconstruction and see people when we look at people.
We developed a false sense of security.
One day, we left the house to run errands, being among the shrinking number of folks on this planet who can buy food whenever we like. We returned through the wind to a powerless home. We understood the feeling.
Once the power and internet were restored, we did some actual paid work, weeded our garden, and turned to maintenance of our electronic garden. Our new handheld device was not playing well with our desktop devices.
We had a new one-sided conversation with our desktop.
“! Windows – System Error
“There is an IP address conflict with another system on the network”
said the hidden icons at the bottom of our screen and refused to explain further.
Knowing what would happen if we telephoned our helpful 24/7 handheld device and cell phone service provider folks, we went online. The following exchange occurred:
Ourcellphoneservice.com: Enter your device description
Poor user: Click on handheld, find and select our handheld device.
Ourcellphoneservice.com: Enter your question
Poor user: Find list of service needs and click on “e-mail.”
Ourcellphoneservice.com: Enter your device description
Poor user: Click on handheld, find and select our handheld device.
Ourcellphoneservice.com: Enter your question
Poor user: Find list of service needs and click on “e-mail.”
We repeated this exchange from several start points on ourcellphoneservice.com.
Having now established that Poor User has met one of the criteria for insanity – repeatedly performing the same actions, getting the same results, and expecting different results – we stopped and moved on to the next cycle.
We called 1-800-ourcellphoneservice for 24/7 help. We listened to the friendly advice to go to myourcellphoneservice.com. Forearmed, we danced through the phone system to a person. He was very helpful and understanding. His accent was almost incomprehensible because he was not from our country. He was from Texas.
But he was happy to repeat himself, and we got along nicely. We didn’t solve the problem, but we did get logged into ourmycellphoneprovider.com. Of course, our computer wouldn’t display anything but the login screen where we entered our brand new password. Repeatedly. Once our helpful person made us understand that he could see we were logged in already, we stopped demonstrating our insanity in that way. He tried to talk us through setting up email on our handheld device. We worked through our language barrier and established that if the handheld is unplugged from the computer or the Wi-fi connection is deactivated there is no service on the handheld device. (We already knew that actual cell service was only possible if one went outside and stood in the county road, but our helper didn’t.) We tried, but in our cell-towerless neighborhood the signal wasn’t strong enough to connect to the internet, no matter what risky behavior we undertook.
After following various other instructions, we got our handheld device to the point that it would do even less than before, even when re-Wi-fi’ed. Without, of course, setting up email. Our help person had a suggestion: we should drive to the cell phone service provider nearest us and they’d help us restore the menu options we need and add email service, for which he assured we are already paying. Because he understood our frustration, repeatedly, our helpful trouble-shooter offered us 50 free minutes. When we pointed out that we couldn’t currently use our cell phone’s existing minutes, he understood our frustration and awarded us 50 free minutes.
After a few more attempts at fixing things, which he did at our request because they hadn’t worked so well the first time, we agreed to stop repeating this activity. Our helpful person said once again that he understood our frustration at not getting either the handheld device or myourcellphoneservice.com to work. He forbore reminders about our free minutes and asked if there was anything else he could do for us today. We thought that he had done enough. Before wishing us a great day, he reminded us that we could get fast, easy service at www.myourcellphoneservice.com.
I recounted these woes to my husband.
“If there’s no flour for bread, make pancakes,” he said.
So, being – as has previously been established – insane, I waited a day before trying again. Oddly enough, the login to myourcellphoneservice.com worked, and the first attempt to select help with email setup on the selected handheld device yielded a new result! It was:
“It appears that the page you have requested no longer exists. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience this may have caused you.”
And the hidden icons added,
“! Windows – System Error
“There is an IP address conflict with another system on the network”
I am not going to telephone anyone.
I am not going to go anywhere else on the internet.
I am going to stay home (ChezSherry) and make pancakes.
Or maybe biscuits.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Quiet Neighbors
We have two Colorado Blue Spruce trees in our front yard.
One, a taller, sparer tree lives slightly West of the best water. She’s the Mama tree, producing Spruce-cones, protecting the Papa tree from the harsh West wind, and giving of herself – to the point that she almost died of thirst one summer while her mate prospered.
The shorter, plumper, fuller Papa tree to her east provides a home for birds of many species. His many branches hide them so well that we can’t find the nest if a chick falls in the spring or summer. He is very prosperous, our Papa tree, and grows out, not up, so Mama can catch the early morning sun on her cone-laden upper branches.
Respecting their natures, we put the bird-seed in the Mama tree and stay away from the Papa tree, so as not to disturb the many families.
When we did a bit of decorative landscaping last spring, laying down fabric and bark in a newly-created aluminum circle, Papa was careful not to scratch my back with his low branches. He kept his sharp needles away. Mama, on the other hand, was much more interested in protecting her babies and wasn’t so worried about my back – or the weeds and grass we removed from around her trunk. Her needles were sharp, although not hurtful. I do think she was grateful that we’d noticed how thirsty she was and remedied the situation. Grateful, but wary.
So far from their mountain home, and such good neighbors. It would be heartless not to be thankful for the pleasure of their company.
One, a taller, sparer tree lives slightly West of the best water. She’s the Mama tree, producing Spruce-cones, protecting the Papa tree from the harsh West wind, and giving of herself – to the point that she almost died of thirst one summer while her mate prospered.
The shorter, plumper, fuller Papa tree to her east provides a home for birds of many species. His many branches hide them so well that we can’t find the nest if a chick falls in the spring or summer. He is very prosperous, our Papa tree, and grows out, not up, so Mama can catch the early morning sun on her cone-laden upper branches.
Respecting their natures, we put the bird-seed in the Mama tree and stay away from the Papa tree, so as not to disturb the many families.
When we did a bit of decorative landscaping last spring, laying down fabric and bark in a newly-created aluminum circle, Papa was careful not to scratch my back with his low branches. He kept his sharp needles away. Mama, on the other hand, was much more interested in protecting her babies and wasn’t so worried about my back – or the weeds and grass we removed from around her trunk. Her needles were sharp, although not hurtful. I do think she was grateful that we’d noticed how thirsty she was and remedied the situation. Grateful, but wary.
So far from their mountain home, and such good neighbors. It would be heartless not to be thankful for the pleasure of their company.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
If It Looks Like a Duck...
and talks like an ultra-conservative, maybe it's Bruce Tinsley's Mallard Fillmore. But when it comes to his views on what's racist, maybeee...
The Trailing Edge version of "What's Racist Today" says:
Number One: Endlessly calling attention to the race of one of the leading candidates for President when there are so many real issues we need to consider...
That would be racist.
Or do you object to what Senator Obama and Senator Clinton are really doing - calling attention to those serious issues when your favorite party wants us to ignore them and keep hiding under our beds?
You know. Access to healthcare, the state of our economy, a break for the working poor, the US standing in the world... Stuff like that.
Or is that left wing liberal thinking?
The Trailing Edge version of "What's Racist Today" says:
Number One: Endlessly calling attention to the race of one of the leading candidates for President when there are so many real issues we need to consider...
That would be racist.
Or do you object to what Senator Obama and Senator Clinton are really doing - calling attention to those serious issues when your favorite party wants us to ignore them and keep hiding under our beds?
You know. Access to healthcare, the state of our economy, a break for the working poor, the US standing in the world... Stuff like that.
Or is that left wing liberal thinking?
Friday, May 02, 2008
Hi you two. How have you been this last month or two? Did you miss me? Me neither.
But I missed you.
Somebody told me last week that Lent has been over for a while, so I can be as righteously indignant as I want.
How about that? Lent ends when Easter Sunday celebrates a new way of thinking about God.
Hoodathunkit?
Speaking of new ways of thinking, I’ve been thinking about the revolution in politics in the good ol’ US of A.
We Democrats are actually registering to vote.
Try a browser search on Voter Registration if you don’t believe me.
Of course you’ll have to wade through the statistics state by state, so don’t blame me if you miss the next 47 appointments and commitments you have.
If you get to page 12 of your search engine choices, let me know what’s there.
In any case, Democrats can't possibly win according to recent press releases.
Perhaps the unbiased free press thinks this is because we are contemplating electing a woman or a member of a minority group. Senator Clinton is not a member of a minority, by the way, because "in 2005, women and girls outnumbered men and boys by 4.4 million—150.4 million compared with 146.0 million" according to the US Census. Minority is an accurate designation for Senator Obama, according to same source; about 67% of US residents say they're white, not any other race and not Hispanic, and Senator Obama says he's not in that group. (These are admittedly old statistics, but not the sort that change very fast, so let's proceed.)
But that's probably all beside the point anyway - or at least it's beside the pressing point, to coin a pun. The point is that Obama and Clinton are arguing over details, as candidates in the same party do, and methods, as everyone does, and our independent, unbiased reporters think this is dangerous to their success.
Personally, I have a preference. And I'll bet it's just as well justified as yours. If we disagree, is that dangerous to our success?
Meanwhile, back at the Republican election campaign:
According to Roger Hickey as posted on Our Future Community aka Campaign for America’s Future, Arizona Senator John McCain “…wants voters to think he is going after health care cost inflation. In reality, he wants to dismantle the employer-provided system that now covers over 60 percent (or about 158 million) of non-elderly Americans, forcing millions of us who now get fairly decent health insurance on the job to instead buy whatever they can find on the individual market controlled by unregulated and predatory insurance companies. And he would drive health care costs upward, not downward."
Speaking as an ex-employee who has had to pay first about $680, now more than $800, per month (yes, I did mean PER MONTH) for health insurance ever since health issues forced me to take early retirement, I don’t think McCain has a very good idea. I had the luxury of paying that amount for health insurance only because COBRA required my employer’s insurer to make that insurance available to me. Otherwise, my insurance would have been whole dollars cheaper. But then, of course, my existing conditions – those pesky ones that forced me to leave my job – would not have been covered for the first year. Or at all. An insurer can always exclude them altogether if not a COBRA or employer-provided insurer, you see.
Does either of you live outside the US of A? I forget. If so, please enjoy your healthcare. And contact me for an explanation of all this insanity if you'd like to have a headache.
Or if you might reconsider trying to emigrate to our wonderful land.
None of this applies to you if you plan to remain in perfect health for the forseeable future.
Oops. That sounded a lot like righteous indignation, didn’t it?
So glad that Lent is over.
But I missed you.
Somebody told me last week that Lent has been over for a while, so I can be as righteously indignant as I want.
How about that? Lent ends when Easter Sunday celebrates a new way of thinking about God.
Hoodathunkit?
Speaking of new ways of thinking, I’ve been thinking about the revolution in politics in the good ol’ US of A.
We Democrats are actually registering to vote.
Try a browser search on Voter Registration if you don’t believe me.
Of course you’ll have to wade through the statistics state by state, so don’t blame me if you miss the next 47 appointments and commitments you have.
If you get to page 12 of your search engine choices, let me know what’s there.
In any case, Democrats can't possibly win according to recent press releases.
Perhaps the unbiased free press thinks this is because we are contemplating electing a woman or a member of a minority group. Senator Clinton is not a member of a minority, by the way, because "in 2005, women and girls outnumbered men and boys by 4.4 million—150.4 million compared with 146.0 million" according to the US Census. Minority is an accurate designation for Senator Obama, according to same source; about 67% of US residents say they're white, not any other race and not Hispanic, and Senator Obama says he's not in that group. (These are admittedly old statistics, but not the sort that change very fast, so let's proceed.)
But that's probably all beside the point anyway - or at least it's beside the pressing point, to coin a pun. The point is that Obama and Clinton are arguing over details, as candidates in the same party do, and methods, as everyone does, and our independent, unbiased reporters think this is dangerous to their success.
Personally, I have a preference. And I'll bet it's just as well justified as yours. If we disagree, is that dangerous to our success?
Meanwhile, back at the Republican election campaign:
According to Roger Hickey as posted on Our Future Community aka Campaign for America’s Future, Arizona Senator John McCain “…wants voters to think he is going after health care cost inflation. In reality, he wants to dismantle the employer-provided system that now covers over 60 percent (or about 158 million) of non-elderly Americans, forcing millions of us who now get fairly decent health insurance on the job to instead buy whatever they can find on the individual market controlled by unregulated and predatory insurance companies. And he would drive health care costs upward, not downward."
Speaking as an ex-employee who has had to pay first about $680, now more than $800, per month (yes, I did mean PER MONTH) for health insurance ever since health issues forced me to take early retirement, I don’t think McCain has a very good idea. I had the luxury of paying that amount for health insurance only because COBRA required my employer’s insurer to make that insurance available to me. Otherwise, my insurance would have been whole dollars cheaper. But then, of course, my existing conditions – those pesky ones that forced me to leave my job – would not have been covered for the first year. Or at all. An insurer can always exclude them altogether if not a COBRA or employer-provided insurer, you see.
Does either of you live outside the US of A? I forget. If so, please enjoy your healthcare. And contact me for an explanation of all this insanity if you'd like to have a headache.
Or if you might reconsider trying to emigrate to our wonderful land.
None of this applies to you if you plan to remain in perfect health for the forseeable future.
Oops. That sounded a lot like righteous indignation, didn’t it?
So glad that Lent is over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
