Wednesday, April 04, 2007
PTJD
I retired several years ago. The company I worked for was pretty good as companies go. As with all jobs, there were some good times and some bad. In the six years since my retirement, a lot has happened but even now, when I dream, especially if it is a nightmare, I dream about the place where I worked. Many times in my nightmares, I do not recognize the faces. Sometime I won't recognize the locale, but always, I know I am at work. If I forget, someone in the dream will remind me. I don't think this is coincidence. I think I have something I call PTJD, post-traumatic job disorder. It is similar to PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder, just not as severe. I might just as well call it post job disorder as post-traumatic job disorder. After all, by their nature, most jobs are pretty traumatic. I've met people who said they loved their work, most of them were self-employed. Quite a few of the others appeared to me to be delusional. I once worked with a guy who went around all the time saying, "I love my job, I love my wife." I know he was kidding about the job, he may have been serious about his wife. I don't seek out treatment for this aliment; I have others like my inherited OCD and allergies that deserve more attention. After all, you have to dream and occasionally one is gonna be a nightmare. At least I have not waked up screaming and sweating... yet.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Demonizing Smokers
I don’t smoke, never have. Oh, when I was a teenager, I would sneak an occasional cigarette, but I never did start doing it regular. Many of the people I grew up with and around, including many of my relatives, were smokers. Many of my best friends have been smokers. It has always seemed to me that smokers were happy, easygoing people. When I was young smoking was all right; in fact it was socially cool. The Surgeon General came out with some stuff about it being bad, but nobody much cared about that. Over the years, smoking has fell from grace. Now, smokers are a pariah. With all the health concerns that have been raised over the years, I can understand people not smoking. What I have trouble understanding is people who don’t smoke and seemingly despise smokers. These people, some of them former smokers themselves, speak of smokers as if they were some lower order animal. Why is that?
Well, there is a thing called genetic predisposition that seems to have a lot of affect on how we develop and behave. I have a theory. I believe that some people, maybe even many people, have what I will call an “antagonistic gene.” These are the people who are always talking about “us and them.” “Us” being the group they are including themselves with and “them” being the enemy. Back when I was young there were groups that many people spoke of as “them.” Inclusion in the “them” groups often had to do with nationality, race, religion or sexual preference. It has become socially unacceptable and politically incorrect to denounce most of those groups. In fact one might be accused of hate speech for merely criticizing one of the former “them” groups. I am sure that this is a frustrating circumstance for the “us” folks. I think that many of the “us” folks that don’t smoke have substituted smokers as one of their new “them” groups. As for me, I probably have a touch of the antagonistic gene myself, but I will limit my “them”groups to politicians, government officials and their like and leave my smoking friends alone.
Well, there is a thing called genetic predisposition that seems to have a lot of affect on how we develop and behave. I have a theory. I believe that some people, maybe even many people, have what I will call an “antagonistic gene.” These are the people who are always talking about “us and them.” “Us” being the group they are including themselves with and “them” being the enemy. Back when I was young there were groups that many people spoke of as “them.” Inclusion in the “them” groups often had to do with nationality, race, religion or sexual preference. It has become socially unacceptable and politically incorrect to denounce most of those groups. In fact one might be accused of hate speech for merely criticizing one of the former “them” groups. I am sure that this is a frustrating circumstance for the “us” folks. I think that many of the “us” folks that don’t smoke have substituted smokers as one of their new “them” groups. As for me, I probably have a touch of the antagonistic gene myself, but I will limit my “them”groups to politicians, government officials and their like and leave my smoking friends alone.
High Speed Rail In Our Future?
Earlier this week I read an article about the increasing problems the airlines are having with lost baggage and not being able to meet schedules. This morning I read where the French have set a new land speed record of 354 mph for conventional rail. These two things have gotten me to thinking. Is high-speed rail the transportation system of our future? Probably not by itself, but how about in the heavily populated corridors? Traveling at 354 mph, a train could go from Atlanta to New York City in around 3 hours. With the existing airline security delays and having to travel to and from airports, 3 hours does not look that bad. There is already talk about a high-speed train from Sacramento to San Diego via San Francisco and LA. Who knows one of these days we may be back using trains like our fathers and grandfathers did.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
You Can't Dabble In Crap ...
Earlier this week, I read an
[THIS LINK NO LONGER POINTS TO THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE]
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cm/content/view/369/162/
editorial on CapitolHillBlue.com in which Doug Thompson chastised some of his readers who had taken Schadenfreude in the reoccurrence of Tony Snow’s cancer. Doug is absolutely correct in calling those readers down. No reasonable person would wish something so tragic on even the likes of Bush, Cheney or Rumsfield and they certainly should not be happy when it happens to the administration's "press agent". After I read Doug’s editorial I asked myself what makes people act in this way? What brings out this kind of callousness? Some blame it on the anonymity of the Internet. Using a screen name or pseudonym, you call say pretty much anything on the Internet without letting people know who you are. I know that is the case, but all that does is enable. To be willing to say these things or type these things; first you must be thinking them. Therefore I say that the Internet does not cause this kind of mean-spiritedness, it only gives it a venue.
To find a cause for this insensitive boorish behavior you have to look deeper. One of the first things that came to my mind was an old saying my daddy had. He said “You can’t dabble in crap and not get some of it on you.” Really, he didn’t use the word crap, but I’m trying to clean up my act online a bit so I will spare yall the S word. A similar philosophy is presented in the statement; you become like the people and things with which you associate. I could throw out a lot of examples right here, but I am sure that you get the idea.
Don’t get me wrong, I think that there is a place in this world for everyone and everything. I’m certainly not in favor of a lot of laws regulating behavior. But, I will say this; if you spend your time watching network news, reading the stuff in the newspaper and listening to what the politicians and bureaucrats are harping about, you probably won’t end up being canonized by the Catholic Church. Think about it.
[THIS LINK NO LONGER POINTS TO THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE]
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/cm/content/view/369/162/
editorial on CapitolHillBlue.com in which Doug Thompson chastised some of his readers who had taken Schadenfreude in the reoccurrence of Tony Snow’s cancer. Doug is absolutely correct in calling those readers down. No reasonable person would wish something so tragic on even the likes of Bush, Cheney or Rumsfield and they certainly should not be happy when it happens to the administration's "press agent". After I read Doug’s editorial I asked myself what makes people act in this way? What brings out this kind of callousness? Some blame it on the anonymity of the Internet. Using a screen name or pseudonym, you call say pretty much anything on the Internet without letting people know who you are. I know that is the case, but all that does is enable. To be willing to say these things or type these things; first you must be thinking them. Therefore I say that the Internet does not cause this kind of mean-spiritedness, it only gives it a venue.
To find a cause for this insensitive boorish behavior you have to look deeper. One of the first things that came to my mind was an old saying my daddy had. He said “You can’t dabble in crap and not get some of it on you.” Really, he didn’t use the word crap, but I’m trying to clean up my act online a bit so I will spare yall the S word. A similar philosophy is presented in the statement; you become like the people and things with which you associate. I could throw out a lot of examples right here, but I am sure that you get the idea.
Don’t get me wrong, I think that there is a place in this world for everyone and everything. I’m certainly not in favor of a lot of laws regulating behavior. But, I will say this; if you spend your time watching network news, reading the stuff in the newspaper and listening to what the politicians and bureaucrats are harping about, you probably won’t end up being canonized by the Catholic Church. Think about it.
Friday, March 30, 2007
Alice's Restaurant
If you are over 50 and have about 25 minutes to spare, you will probably enjoy this:
By the way, Arlo Guthrie is exactly one day older than I am.
By the way, Arlo Guthrie is exactly one day older than I am.
I've Got Bad News And Good News
First the bad news. Our once great American republic has become an empire to the rest of the world and a police state for its own citizens. When I was young, one of the principles of law in this country was every man is innocent until proven guilty. While that principle may still be given lip service, in fact standing operating practice is, given the slightest provocation, every man is a drug dealing terrorist. This is an example of what I am talking about. This kind of thing is becoming all too common. For every instance that we learn about, you can be assured that there are a couple of dozen more that get covered up successfully because there are not any witnesses. This shift of our police from "public servants" who protect and serve to "law ENFORCEMENT officers" has been due in no small part to the para-military training so many police have received in the name of the war on drugs and the war on terror. Years ago, I heard Gordon Liddy talking about S.W.A.T. teams on the radio. He said that when you dress men up in those black jump suits and train them like they are soldiers sooner or later they are gonna put that training to use, often times in situations where it is not appropriate. As for the empire side of it, any country that has troops permanently stationed in over 100 other countries and that actively engages in "regime change" in the countries that do not agree with its policies, must be called an empire.
Now the good news. We are a bankrupt, debtor nation. All that stands between third world status and us is the reluctance of China and Japan to call in their financial markers. China alone owns over 1 Trillion dollars in US debt. We have exported our industry overseas. A sizeable portion of our GDP during the last few years has been due to a Ponzi scheme in real estate construction and finance. That real estate bubble is slowly beginning to collapse. That does not sound like good news you say? Well it may not be great news but in it lies the seeds of our redemption. You see, it takes megabucks to run a police state / empire. We are rapidly approaching the point where the Federal Government will no longer be able to fund their idiotic schemes. Most of the good people who now are manning the police state / empire will be forced back into the private sector for economic reasons. It will be a painful comeuppance to many of us, but just like the little kid who is punished for stealing cookies from the cookie jar or pushing his little brother or sister down, we will learn a valuable lesson.
Now the good news. We are a bankrupt, debtor nation. All that stands between third world status and us is the reluctance of China and Japan to call in their financial markers. China alone owns over 1 Trillion dollars in US debt. We have exported our industry overseas. A sizeable portion of our GDP during the last few years has been due to a Ponzi scheme in real estate construction and finance. That real estate bubble is slowly beginning to collapse. That does not sound like good news you say? Well it may not be great news but in it lies the seeds of our redemption. You see, it takes megabucks to run a police state / empire. We are rapidly approaching the point where the Federal Government will no longer be able to fund their idiotic schemes. Most of the good people who now are manning the police state / empire will be forced back into the private sector for economic reasons. It will be a painful comeuppance to many of us, but just like the little kid who is punished for stealing cookies from the cookie jar or pushing his little brother or sister down, we will learn a valuable lesson.
Universal Health Care
I hear a lot today about Universal Health Care. Al Franken, who is running for senator from Minnesota, was on Late Night with David Letterman the other night He said that his number one campaign issue is the need for Universal Health Care. Actually, the problem is not with getting health care; the problem is with paying for it. Many people want the government to step in and do something about the problem. Well, the government has already stepped in many years ago and that is the reason we have the problems we have today. Government regulation and the insurance system brought about by government regulation are the reason health care is unaffordable.
When the late Harry Browne was running for president, he quoted some figures that indicated that the average older American paid a smaller percentage of their overall income before Medicare than they do now and had better care. Old people say, oh I could not afford to pay for my health care if it were not for Medicare. Younger people say that I could not afford to pay for my health care if I did not have insurance. They could if government regulations did not make health care unreasonably costly.
Occasionally I hear someone say that the cost of health care is lots more expensive now because of all the technology that we have today that they did not have in the past. It does not work that way. Technology does not make things more expensive, it in fact, reduces cost. If you don't believe it, look at the price of the original home PC and what it did. Now look at the price of a new Dell and what it will do. Why is that? It is because the government does not regulate the computer industry. No, technology is not increasing prices; the expense associated with government regulation and insurance is what causes our medical cost to be out of sight.
If Mr. Franken and all the other politicians really want to make health care affordable for all Americans they need to work to get the government out of our health care system instead of calling for more government intervention. The government has never fixed anything. The late Harry Browne described the situation best when he said all the government is good for is to come in and break your legs, hand you a pair of crutches and say “look, without us you would not be able to walk.”
When the late Harry Browne was running for president, he quoted some figures that indicated that the average older American paid a smaller percentage of their overall income before Medicare than they do now and had better care. Old people say, oh I could not afford to pay for my health care if it were not for Medicare. Younger people say that I could not afford to pay for my health care if I did not have insurance. They could if government regulations did not make health care unreasonably costly.
Occasionally I hear someone say that the cost of health care is lots more expensive now because of all the technology that we have today that they did not have in the past. It does not work that way. Technology does not make things more expensive, it in fact, reduces cost. If you don't believe it, look at the price of the original home PC and what it did. Now look at the price of a new Dell and what it will do. Why is that? It is because the government does not regulate the computer industry. No, technology is not increasing prices; the expense associated with government regulation and insurance is what causes our medical cost to be out of sight.
If Mr. Franken and all the other politicians really want to make health care affordable for all Americans they need to work to get the government out of our health care system instead of calling for more government intervention. The government has never fixed anything. The late Harry Browne described the situation best when he said all the government is good for is to come in and break your legs, hand you a pair of crutches and say “look, without us you would not be able to walk.”
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Trademarks and Copyrights
I for one think that trademark and copyright law has gotten out of hand in the United States. I've thought that for quite some time but when I read this article, I knew it was time to holler "calf rope." Don't get me wrong, I have no problems with the Latter Day Saints Church (Mormons.) In fact I've yet to meet a Mormon that I did not like. They all seem to be nice folks and I have several Mormon relatives. So I'm not taking a swipe at them because of any bias. The LDS says that Moroni is an angel of God but yet they say that they have him trademarked. Now, somebody explain to me, how do you trademark and angel of God? What's next? Will the Catholics trademark the Virgin Mary? Will the Southern Baptist trademark Jesus? Will the Jews claim that they saw God first and trademark him? Are we approaching the point where I have to say that I believe in the unspecified deity that is the son of the one and only supreme unspecified deity so as not to run afoul of the trademark laws?
Why the decider won't accept a timeline
First, let me say that it is unconstitutional for the Congress to be specifying a deadline for withdrawal from Iraq. I think that the Constitution defines that as a job for the President. The Congress can withhold funds. They can vote to revoke approval for the war, but they don't have the constitutional authority to dictate a timeline.
Of course none of that means anything because the Congress, the Courts and the President have all shown repeatedly that they don't give a tinker's damn about the Constitution. For the most part, the Democrats in Congress have no more interest in ending the war in Iraq than do the Republicans.
Now, back to my original topic, Why the decider won't accept a timeline. He and his buddy Cheney will tell you that it has to do with not undermining the mission. Or they will say that we can't specify a date because we are gonna stay in Iraq for as long as it takes to make it free and safe. Those excuses have nothing to do with it. The reason that the decider won't accept a date for withdrawal is that he never intends to bring our troops home. The USA is building permanent bases in Iraq. The powers that be, whether its the decider right now, or God forbid, Hitlery in the not too distance future, intend for US troops to be a permanent fixture in Iraq, just as they are in Korea, Japan, Germany and 137 other countries around the world. With any luck at all, they will not get their wish, but you can bet the farm that they are sure gonna try.
Of course none of that means anything because the Congress, the Courts and the President have all shown repeatedly that they don't give a tinker's damn about the Constitution. For the most part, the Democrats in Congress have no more interest in ending the war in Iraq than do the Republicans.
Now, back to my original topic, Why the decider won't accept a timeline. He and his buddy Cheney will tell you that it has to do with not undermining the mission. Or they will say that we can't specify a date because we are gonna stay in Iraq for as long as it takes to make it free and safe. Those excuses have nothing to do with it. The reason that the decider won't accept a date for withdrawal is that he never intends to bring our troops home. The USA is building permanent bases in Iraq. The powers that be, whether its the decider right now, or God forbid, Hitlery in the not too distance future, intend for US troops to be a permanent fixture in Iraq, just as they are in Korea, Japan, Germany and 137 other countries around the world. With any luck at all, they will not get their wish, but you can bet the farm that they are sure gonna try.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Which Is The Greater Sin?
Which is the greater sin, gambling or stealing? I don't feel theologically qualified to answer that question. I do however have an opinion on which is worse. To me stealing is worse. After all, gambling is voluntary. Stealing takes from people via stealth or threat of violence.
I have heard some people say that there are no such things as greater sins or lesser sins. Sins are sins. Maybe so, but I have also heard that some churches teach that masturbation is a sin. I can tell you for a fact that if I am given the option of someone playing with himself or having him steal from me, I would choose the former, although I would prefer to not have to witness the act myself. It may be just as great a sin, but the effects are not as profound for me.
Of course this all leads me to ask the question how can some people support taxation and denounce legalized gambling. After all, taxation is theft. It is the taking, by force of money that would not otherwise be given. Some would say, well it is necessary for the greater good. Of course I can make the same claim for legalized gambling. States that allow it have more money to use for education just like states that allow higher taxes.
From my point of view, if you oppose legalized gambling on the grounds that it is a sin, yet you support taxation because it is for the greater good, you are just splitting hairs.
I have heard some people say that there are no such things as greater sins or lesser sins. Sins are sins. Maybe so, but I have also heard that some churches teach that masturbation is a sin. I can tell you for a fact that if I am given the option of someone playing with himself or having him steal from me, I would choose the former, although I would prefer to not have to witness the act myself. It may be just as great a sin, but the effects are not as profound for me.
Of course this all leads me to ask the question how can some people support taxation and denounce legalized gambling. After all, taxation is theft. It is the taking, by force of money that would not otherwise be given. Some would say, well it is necessary for the greater good. Of course I can make the same claim for legalized gambling. States that allow it have more money to use for education just like states that allow higher taxes.
From my point of view, if you oppose legalized gambling on the grounds that it is a sin, yet you support taxation because it is for the greater good, you are just splitting hairs.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
A Neat Desk
I once had a plaque that said "A Neat Desk Is The Sign Of A Sick Mind." It was given to me by a friend, probably as a left-handed compliment. After I read this article I now realize that all those folks who found fault with my desk-keeping skills were actually just serving to make me less productive.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
We're From The Government
When I read
[DEAD LINK]
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TRAVEL/03/24/border.crossing.ap/index.html
this article. I was immediately reminded of something the Late Harry Browne said when he was running for President. All the governement is good for is to break your legs, then hand you a pair of crutches and say, see without us, you would not be able to walk.
[DEAD LINK]
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TRAVEL/03/24/border.crossing.ap/index.html
this article. I was immediately reminded of something the Late Harry Browne said when he was running for President. All the governement is good for is to break your legs, then hand you a pair of crutches and say, see without us, you would not be able to walk.
Free To Choose
Being a libertarian, I advocate that everyone be free to choose his or her lifestyle without interference so long as it does not impact the lifestyle of others in a negative way. When I say impact in a negative way, I mean a real impact, not some imagined one like you saying "cracker" hurts my feelings.
Feeling that way, I respect the right of these people to live like they have chosen, but they are pretty far out in left field. Granted, this guy is doing this only as an experiment, only for one year, and apparently to obtain a book deal. So, this may be more of a gimmick than anything else may. However, during my lifetime, I have known many people who have gone off on just such a tangent. To me, this is an act of self-flagellation. Something deep down in some peoples psyche seems to demand that they suffer.
Feeling that way, I respect the right of these people to live like they have chosen, but they are pretty far out in left field. Granted, this guy is doing this only as an experiment, only for one year, and apparently to obtain a book deal. So, this may be more of a gimmick than anything else may. However, during my lifetime, I have known many people who have gone off on just such a tangent. To me, this is an act of self-flagellation. Something deep down in some peoples psyche seems to demand that they suffer.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Ron Paul on FOX BYA
"I wanna be President because I have this dream, I'd like to reinstate the Constitution and restore the Republic," said Paul. "And I think the Republican party and all of Washington have lost their way."
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Sixth-Graders Smarter Than Al Gore
[DEAD LINK]
http://www.longmontfyi.com/Local-Story.asp?ID=15357
These Longmont Six-Graders are smarter than Al Gore.
http://www.longmontfyi.com/Local-Story.asp?ID=15357
These Longmont Six-Graders are smarter than Al Gore.
PETA and GreenHouse Gas
Jim Amrhein in this article for Whiskey and Gunpowder tells how PETA's most recent ad campaign helps show up "man-made global warming" for the ridiculous idea it really is.
Tobacco Money
I was over at Linda's this morning and she had the TV on CNN. A couple of guys were talking about how the states had spent their "Tobacco Money", that is the money they got from suing the tobacco companies. They were extolling the fact that all the public service ads had reduced the amount of smoking but now that the money had run out, smoking among teens was on the rise.
Hindsight being 20/20, I thought about it a bit and figured out what would have been a better use for the tobacco money. What if, instead of running ads to stop people from smoking, they had used that money to run ads to keep people from going into politics? After all, smoking only shortens life; politics makes a life worthless. What if people like George Bush and Hillary Clinton had seen public service ads in their youth that steered them away from politics? What if George had chosen a career in stand up comedy? He can be really funny, if you doubt that, watch Late Night with David Letterman sometime. The Great Presidential Speeches segment is hilarious. And what about Hillary, don't you think that she would have made a fairly good 5th grade social studies teacher? I'm pretty sure that if neither of these people had entered politics, the world would be a better place.
Sure, the anti-tobacco ads have added a few years to the end of some lives, but which is worse, to live 5 years less than you could have, or to waste your entire life in politics?
Hindsight being 20/20, I thought about it a bit and figured out what would have been a better use for the tobacco money. What if, instead of running ads to stop people from smoking, they had used that money to run ads to keep people from going into politics? After all, smoking only shortens life; politics makes a life worthless. What if people like George Bush and Hillary Clinton had seen public service ads in their youth that steered them away from politics? What if George had chosen a career in stand up comedy? He can be really funny, if you doubt that, watch Late Night with David Letterman sometime. The Great Presidential Speeches segment is hilarious. And what about Hillary, don't you think that she would have made a fairly good 5th grade social studies teacher? I'm pretty sure that if neither of these people had entered politics, the world would be a better place.
Sure, the anti-tobacco ads have added a few years to the end of some lives, but which is worse, to live 5 years less than you could have, or to waste your entire life in politics?
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Using Digg to Pass the Read The Bills Act (RTBA) in 3 Easy Steps.
No group is better positioned to place the right kind of pressure on our representatives than Diggers. It's our destiny to start making a difference in the way things are run, and I propose we get the ball rolling.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)