Had I been asked a few weeks ago how I feel about books, I'd have said I love them. I buy them constantly, and I'm seldom not in the process of reading a book. I have four book-cases jammed to capacity with books, many of the shelves are two-deep in books, and there are enough stacks of books around to upset my wife. It seemed to me that my love of books is well established.
Then we bought a Kindle.
If you're not familiar with the Kindle, it's Amazon's e-book reader. I never thought I'd embrace this technology. Every e-book reader I'd seen (and I admit I hadn't looked at one in a few years) was lacking, the text was poor, the screen was small, and I found the display led to eye fatigue (and this from someone who makes his living sitting in front of a computer screen all day). Plus, I reasoned, the Kindle was expensive. Upon speaking to a number of people (including cyber-buddy MorningGlory) I found that most of my objections, except the price, were unfounded. A lady I saw reading one on the train let me see the display, and I found that the text to be very readable. When Oprah announced a discount my wife and I decided to buy one.
Having now used it for a couple of months I can say I love it. I can change the font size to suit lighting or other conditions (larger fonts are more convenient on a bumpy train ride for instance, or at night when my eyes are tired). The battery needs to be recharged about once a week.
I also learned I didn't so much love books as love reading, and the Kindle is the perfect device for people who love to read. For instance, I bought a two-CD set of classic books from the Western Canon for $30, those two CDs contain almost eight hundred books. Available books range from free for public domain downloads to about ten dollars for current best-sellers. (And yes, I could have downloaded the 800 books on those two CDs for free, but my time is worth something too.)
So the man who resisted getting a cell phone until pay phones became rare, the man who refuses to buy a PDA because a paper calendar and note pad does the same thing cheaper and with no battery worries, the man who predicted twenty years ago that CDs were a passing fad, has embraced a new technology. Which brings me to another point about me. I'm not opposed to new technologies, but they have to actually be better than the low-tech devices they replace. Digital cameras, for instance, are better for most applications than film cameras. Battery-powered watches are better than wind-up (I still prefer a watch with hands as opposed to digital, but that's just my preference). The Kindle is the size and weight of a thin paperback but will hold hundreds of books and display them in in a font size that doesn't make my eyes water.
So, accompanied by much grinding of gears, I embrace a new device.
* For the non-gear-heads out there, "power shifting" is a method of shifting a manual transmission without lifting your foot from the accelerator. It's a good way to get extra acceleration, it's also a good way to break your transmission. If you try it, don't blame me for damage done.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Monday, November 10, 2008
Vote Mark D in 2012
OK, I've decided to annouce my candidacy for the office of President of the United States for the 2012 election. I offer my platform for your consideration.
I believe that America is the greatest nation in the world not because of our government, but because of our people. I believe that the government exists to serve the people (and not, I may add, in the same manner as a bull serves a cow). I believe that the function of government is to protect the rights of the citizens, those rights including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I believe that our Constitution creates a government that can do just that, but that the government has trangressed that Constitution and needs to be corrected.
Therefore, if elected, my first order of business will be to reform the executive branch, of which I will be the head. Each department head in the executive branch will provide me with the following: 1) a brief description of the duties and responsibilities of that department, and 2) a copy of the pertinent sections of the Constitution authorizing that department to perform those tasks. Mass resignations will be accepted in place of either of these items, failure to provide both to my satisfaction shall result in mass firings and (if I can manage it) public floggings. Any department heads who reference the "commerce clause" had BETTER be dealing with interstate highways or something similar. Don't test me on that.
Next, we will work on reforming the Legislative branch. I can't do this directly, but I can do so using two tools, the veto and public opinion. My first order of business will be elimination of expenditures added to bills which have nothing to do with the bill, we know this as pork barrel spending or simply as pork. I will veto any bill containing pork, regardless of the merit of the bill. This will be totally non-partisan. For example if the original bill is for tax reform that I would otherwise sign, but there's pork included, I'll veto it whether the pork provides for a wind farm to be built in Wisconsin (which I would disapprove of) or if it provides for a wall across our southern border to keep out illegal aliens (which I would approve of). Give me the expenditures as seperate bills which I can judge on their own merits. Finally, should Congress override my veto of a pork containing bill I'll call a press conference the very next day and explain to the American people that their Congress approved these expenses, apparently believing that their pet projects are more important than letting the taxpayers keep the money they work for. I will then name each and every member of Congress who voted to override the veto. I suspect a great many promising legislative careers will come to an abrupt end at the next election cycle.
I want America to take a page from her own Marine Corps, I want her to be no better friend and no worse enemy. First, America will no longer be part of the United Nations, an organization which serves only to undermine American sovereignty and give comfort to our enemies. If the UN wishes to maintain its offices in New York City they may do so, by paying fair market value for the property in question. Otherwise, they may leave, the choice is theirs. Next, I will re-evaluate our international alliances. These will be modified as appropriate, our allies should enhance American interests, not detract from them. Our remaining allies will find America a worthwhile friend, quick to assist them militarily, economically, or with humanitarian aid. Everyone else can pound sand. Oh, an earthquake just flattened your capital city and you need food, medical supplies and facilities, power and water? Well, we'll be happy to send a carrier group there to provide all those things, the fee will be one billion dollars per day, plus expenses.
Lastly, I want hostile nations or groups to think twice before they mess with us. I mean that. Much of the trouble we have today with terrorism is because we lacked the intestinal fortitude to flatten Tehran when they took Americans hostage under the Carter administration. You take Americans hostage? You have 48 hours to set them free unharmed or there will be a large hole where your capital used to be. This is non-negotiable, there will be no extensions, this will be your only warning.
So vote for me, we'll make America what it's intended to be.
I'm Mark D and I approve this message.
I believe that America is the greatest nation in the world not because of our government, but because of our people. I believe that the government exists to serve the people (and not, I may add, in the same manner as a bull serves a cow). I believe that the function of government is to protect the rights of the citizens, those rights including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I believe that our Constitution creates a government that can do just that, but that the government has trangressed that Constitution and needs to be corrected.
Therefore, if elected, my first order of business will be to reform the executive branch, of which I will be the head. Each department head in the executive branch will provide me with the following: 1) a brief description of the duties and responsibilities of that department, and 2) a copy of the pertinent sections of the Constitution authorizing that department to perform those tasks. Mass resignations will be accepted in place of either of these items, failure to provide both to my satisfaction shall result in mass firings and (if I can manage it) public floggings. Any department heads who reference the "commerce clause" had BETTER be dealing with interstate highways or something similar. Don't test me on that.
Next, we will work on reforming the Legislative branch. I can't do this directly, but I can do so using two tools, the veto and public opinion. My first order of business will be elimination of expenditures added to bills which have nothing to do with the bill, we know this as pork barrel spending or simply as pork. I will veto any bill containing pork, regardless of the merit of the bill. This will be totally non-partisan. For example if the original bill is for tax reform that I would otherwise sign, but there's pork included, I'll veto it whether the pork provides for a wind farm to be built in Wisconsin (which I would disapprove of) or if it provides for a wall across our southern border to keep out illegal aliens (which I would approve of). Give me the expenditures as seperate bills which I can judge on their own merits. Finally, should Congress override my veto of a pork containing bill I'll call a press conference the very next day and explain to the American people that their Congress approved these expenses, apparently believing that their pet projects are more important than letting the taxpayers keep the money they work for. I will then name each and every member of Congress who voted to override the veto. I suspect a great many promising legislative careers will come to an abrupt end at the next election cycle.
I want America to take a page from her own Marine Corps, I want her to be no better friend and no worse enemy. First, America will no longer be part of the United Nations, an organization which serves only to undermine American sovereignty and give comfort to our enemies. If the UN wishes to maintain its offices in New York City they may do so, by paying fair market value for the property in question. Otherwise, they may leave, the choice is theirs. Next, I will re-evaluate our international alliances. These will be modified as appropriate, our allies should enhance American interests, not detract from them. Our remaining allies will find America a worthwhile friend, quick to assist them militarily, economically, or with humanitarian aid. Everyone else can pound sand. Oh, an earthquake just flattened your capital city and you need food, medical supplies and facilities, power and water? Well, we'll be happy to send a carrier group there to provide all those things, the fee will be one billion dollars per day, plus expenses.
Lastly, I want hostile nations or groups to think twice before they mess with us. I mean that. Much of the trouble we have today with terrorism is because we lacked the intestinal fortitude to flatten Tehran when they took Americans hostage under the Carter administration. You take Americans hostage? You have 48 hours to set them free unharmed or there will be a large hole where your capital used to be. This is non-negotiable, there will be no extensions, this will be your only warning.
So vote for me, we'll make America what it's intended to be.
I'm Mark D and I approve this message.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Profits and Taxes
During last night's Presidential debate Senator Obama made mention of record profits by Exxon Mobil, profits that he wishes to tax. The implication is that those profits go to people who are already obscenely rich, so they can afford to lose a bit. Let's take a closer look at that.
Exxon Mobil (I'll abbreviate it as EM from now on) is a publicly traded company, meaning that anyone who can afford to buy stock in it can do so. Stockholders get dividends on their stock, corporate profits translate into a certain amount of money for each share of stock owned, so those profits are divided up among all the stockholders.
Yes, lots of wealthy people own EM stock. Who else does? Well, for one thing I probably do. I have IRAs, 401Ks and Mutual Funds, and of those funds don't have some shares of a company that posted record profits last year I want to speak to the fund manager and find out why.
Most companies, and I assume EM is no exception, have employee stock purchase programs where employees of the company can purchase stock, often with some matching funds provided by the company. This stock can form the basis of a retirement plan or personal investment package. Yes, the CEO will hold stock, but so will a chemist in the research department, an administrative assistant in Human Resources, or a mid-level manager in Accounts Payable. Let's take that last person as our example, let's say her name is Susan. She's been working for the company now for ten years and has been buying stock every paycheck since then. Her quarterly dividends checks have been growing larger as her stock portfolio has increased. She is, in point of fact, solidly middle class, with a job, a mortgage and a car payment. For the last seven years, since she gave birth to her son, she's been putting those dividend checks into a college savings account. Those are the profits Senator Obama wants to take away.
Unlike the government EM can't just print more money or force people under authority of law to pay higher taxes. EM won't just accept smaller profits and pay lower dividents, they'll also attempt to increase income and decrease expenses. Since EM is already selling all the petroleum products it can produce, increasing income is problematic, so they'll probably end up reducing expenses.
If I can simplify EM's business model, they make money by finding petroleum in the ground, removing it from the ground, refining it into usable products, and selling it to consumers. If profits are reduced perhaps EM will scale back the expense of exploring for new sources of petroleum, which may well cause a shortage years down the road (perhaps around the time Susan's son is preparing to go to college). Perhaps EM will scale back some drilling operations, especially in areas where it's more expensive (and thereby less profitable) to drill, which could cause shortages much sooner and may make Susan long for the gas prices of the summer of 2008. Maybe they'll move their operations overseas, to a nation that doesn't have such an onerous tax structure. Finally, maybe they'll just cut staff, and Susan will become one of many unemployed people who lost their jobs because companies were trying to stay profitable under a heavier tax burden.
So by taxing oil company profits we're reducing middle-class Susan's income by reducing her stock dividends, we're making her find other methods of financing her son's college education, we're potentially forcing her to pay more for gasoline, and we may even be forcing her out of her job. All because a politician sees a sum of money earned by a company for selling a product as a source of government income.
Still want to tax those juicy oil company profits?
Exxon Mobil (I'll abbreviate it as EM from now on) is a publicly traded company, meaning that anyone who can afford to buy stock in it can do so. Stockholders get dividends on their stock, corporate profits translate into a certain amount of money for each share of stock owned, so those profits are divided up among all the stockholders.
Yes, lots of wealthy people own EM stock. Who else does? Well, for one thing I probably do. I have IRAs, 401Ks and Mutual Funds, and of those funds don't have some shares of a company that posted record profits last year I want to speak to the fund manager and find out why.
Most companies, and I assume EM is no exception, have employee stock purchase programs where employees of the company can purchase stock, often with some matching funds provided by the company. This stock can form the basis of a retirement plan or personal investment package. Yes, the CEO will hold stock, but so will a chemist in the research department, an administrative assistant in Human Resources, or a mid-level manager in Accounts Payable. Let's take that last person as our example, let's say her name is Susan. She's been working for the company now for ten years and has been buying stock every paycheck since then. Her quarterly dividends checks have been growing larger as her stock portfolio has increased. She is, in point of fact, solidly middle class, with a job, a mortgage and a car payment. For the last seven years, since she gave birth to her son, she's been putting those dividend checks into a college savings account. Those are the profits Senator Obama wants to take away.
Unlike the government EM can't just print more money or force people under authority of law to pay higher taxes. EM won't just accept smaller profits and pay lower dividents, they'll also attempt to increase income and decrease expenses. Since EM is already selling all the petroleum products it can produce, increasing income is problematic, so they'll probably end up reducing expenses.
If I can simplify EM's business model, they make money by finding petroleum in the ground, removing it from the ground, refining it into usable products, and selling it to consumers. If profits are reduced perhaps EM will scale back the expense of exploring for new sources of petroleum, which may well cause a shortage years down the road (perhaps around the time Susan's son is preparing to go to college). Perhaps EM will scale back some drilling operations, especially in areas where it's more expensive (and thereby less profitable) to drill, which could cause shortages much sooner and may make Susan long for the gas prices of the summer of 2008. Maybe they'll move their operations overseas, to a nation that doesn't have such an onerous tax structure. Finally, maybe they'll just cut staff, and Susan will become one of many unemployed people who lost their jobs because companies were trying to stay profitable under a heavier tax burden.
So by taxing oil company profits we're reducing middle-class Susan's income by reducing her stock dividends, we're making her find other methods of financing her son's college education, we're potentially forcing her to pay more for gasoline, and we may even be forcing her out of her job. All because a politician sees a sum of money earned by a company for selling a product as a source of government income.
Still want to tax those juicy oil company profits?
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Government and Business
For the last couple of days the morning radio news has abounded with stories of the Federal government "taking over" banks. I seem to be one of the few people who's not enthused over this idea, and I believe I have history to back me up.
When the United States entered World War I on April 6, 1917 the government realized, correctly, that there was one industry that would have a major stategic role to play in success in that conflict. It was an industry comprised of a large number of competing companies, often providing comparable products to the same markets and run by some of the most cut-throat businessmen ever to head a corporation. Some of these companies were crippled by labor disputes, the corporate infrastructure was aging and in many cases in need of replacement, and lack of standardization meant that most equipment was custom made.
That industry was the railroad system, which would be needed to move troops and equipment from all parts of the nation to the Eastern ports for shipment to Europe. Many doubted that the railroads were up to the task, so in 1918 the government nationalized most of the railroads under the United States Railroad Administration. This administration was responsible for allocating and upgrading equipment, dealing with labor, and controlling how railroads operated. While many good things came out of the USRA, such as standardized locomotive and freight-car designs, the costs to the government (and thus to the taxpayers) were staggering. After the conflict the railroads were returned to the prior ownership and operation.
It is, I think, significant that twenty-three years later, when the United States became embroiled in a larger conflict where even more troops and equipment needed to be transported to both coasts for shipment overseas, the government decided to let the railroads operate with minimal interference from the government. It would seem that the elected officials realized that corporations run for profit by men whose job it was to operate railroads could provide rail transport more efficiently than government bureaucrats could.
Answer this: who do you trust more with your money, the manager of your local bank or an appointee from a group of local politicians? Who do you think knows more about investing your money for a favorable rate of return, a person whose job is to manage money or a person whose job is to get re-elected? Who is more likely to make sure you get your money back when you want it, someone who has to compete with others providing similar services or someone who can take your money under power of law whenever he or she sees fit?
When the United States entered World War I on April 6, 1917 the government realized, correctly, that there was one industry that would have a major stategic role to play in success in that conflict. It was an industry comprised of a large number of competing companies, often providing comparable products to the same markets and run by some of the most cut-throat businessmen ever to head a corporation. Some of these companies were crippled by labor disputes, the corporate infrastructure was aging and in many cases in need of replacement, and lack of standardization meant that most equipment was custom made.
That industry was the railroad system, which would be needed to move troops and equipment from all parts of the nation to the Eastern ports for shipment to Europe. Many doubted that the railroads were up to the task, so in 1918 the government nationalized most of the railroads under the United States Railroad Administration. This administration was responsible for allocating and upgrading equipment, dealing with labor, and controlling how railroads operated. While many good things came out of the USRA, such as standardized locomotive and freight-car designs, the costs to the government (and thus to the taxpayers) were staggering. After the conflict the railroads were returned to the prior ownership and operation.
It is, I think, significant that twenty-three years later, when the United States became embroiled in a larger conflict where even more troops and equipment needed to be transported to both coasts for shipment overseas, the government decided to let the railroads operate with minimal interference from the government. It would seem that the elected officials realized that corporations run for profit by men whose job it was to operate railroads could provide rail transport more efficiently than government bureaucrats could.
Answer this: who do you trust more with your money, the manager of your local bank or an appointee from a group of local politicians? Who do you think knows more about investing your money for a favorable rate of return, a person whose job is to manage money or a person whose job is to get re-elected? Who is more likely to make sure you get your money back when you want it, someone who has to compete with others providing similar services or someone who can take your money under power of law whenever he or she sees fit?
Saturday, July 19, 2008
What a Difference Competition Makes
Last week my wife and I had two visits, on two consecutive days, by two technicians for purposes of making upgrades or repairs to items in our home. The difference in results of those two visits were enlightening, to say the least.
On day 1 we had a representative from the cable TV company in two do two things: install a cable box (which we needed because we kept losing channels we like because we didn't have one) and install a cable phone line. We decided to go with cable phone because it's cheaper, since we already have cable TV and cable internet service, so we get a package price.
Now, deciding upon who to call for cable system upgrades is easy, the only company to call is the cable company. They are a monopoly. So we call them, and we are promised that the techician will arrive between 8:00 am and 11:00 am. At 10:30 the cable company calls to give me a phone number and reference number, so I can contact them if the technician doesn't arrive by 11:00. At 11:05 (as I was about the make the call) the cable company calls again, tells me the techician is running late, but he'll be here within 45 minutes. About 35 minutes later he arrives. He sets up our cable box, no problem, then installs the new internet/phone modem and shows us where on the form our new phone number is located.
Shortly all the hardware is installed and he now has to set up our internet connection for the new modem. He calls the cable company to do so, and his put on hold. I can hear the music playing thru his speakerphone, with periodic pauses to tell him his call is very important and he'll be assisted by the next available person. He was on hold for about 20 minutes, until at long last we're two-thirds set up. When we called the cable company we were informed that (a) this would in fact take ten minutes, (b) no, it could not be done on a Saturday and (c) we WOULD have to pay a fee for a service call. Amazingly, this fee was waived, perhaps threatening to switch to satellite TV had something to do with it. So I have a vacation day today to await the technician who will, of course, be there between eight and eleven again, so he'll probably leave too late for me to have time to go to the range anyway.
For service call number 2, our clothes dryer wasn't working properly. If you open the phone book under "appliance repair" you'll find a full page of listings for people who will come to your home and repair your dryer. Having purchased this dryer at Sears, we called Sears to repair it. This service call was scheduled for between eight am and twelve noon, and we were told that they'd call at 8:00 with an approximate time we could expect the repair technician. As it turns out, we were the first call of the day, so he just showed up at 8:15. I escorted him to the basement, explained the problem, told him the steps I'd taken such as cleaning the vent. He spent ten or fifteen minutes down there, went to his van for parts, and spent another fifteen minutes installing them (including replacing a part that wasn't the cause of our problem, but was squeaking). He was gone by 9:00, and I was on my way to the range by 10:00. If anything at all goes wrong with the dryer for the next year it will be repair for free, even if it has nothing to do with what was repaired this time.
So here we see a difference, one company that's the only game in town (unless you're willing to mount a big, ugly dish on your roof), one that knows it has to provide good service or we'll take our business elsewhere. One company that's one of many providing competing services, one that has no competition.
Tell me again how wonderful "single payer health care" will be.
On day 1 we had a representative from the cable TV company in two do two things: install a cable box (which we needed because we kept losing channels we like because we didn't have one) and install a cable phone line. We decided to go with cable phone because it's cheaper, since we already have cable TV and cable internet service, so we get a package price.
Now, deciding upon who to call for cable system upgrades is easy, the only company to call is the cable company. They are a monopoly. So we call them, and we are promised that the techician will arrive between 8:00 am and 11:00 am. At 10:30 the cable company calls to give me a phone number and reference number, so I can contact them if the technician doesn't arrive by 11:00. At 11:05 (as I was about the make the call) the cable company calls again, tells me the techician is running late, but he'll be here within 45 minutes. About 35 minutes later he arrives. He sets up our cable box, no problem, then installs the new internet/phone modem and shows us where on the form our new phone number is located.
Say what?
New phone number? No one told us we'd be getting a new phone number. After some discussion (and him calling the cable company) it's decided that he'll do everything but run the phone line, we'll need another service call (which he promised us could be done on a Saturday, for which we will not need to pay a fee, and which will take ten minutes).
Shortly all the hardware is installed and he now has to set up our internet connection for the new modem. He calls the cable company to do so, and his put on hold. I can hear the music playing thru his speakerphone, with periodic pauses to tell him his call is very important and he'll be assisted by the next available person. He was on hold for about 20 minutes, until at long last we're two-thirds set up. When we called the cable company we were informed that (a) this would in fact take ten minutes, (b) no, it could not be done on a Saturday and (c) we WOULD have to pay a fee for a service call. Amazingly, this fee was waived, perhaps threatening to switch to satellite TV had something to do with it. So I have a vacation day today to await the technician who will, of course, be there between eight and eleven again, so he'll probably leave too late for me to have time to go to the range anyway.
For service call number 2, our clothes dryer wasn't working properly. If you open the phone book under "appliance repair" you'll find a full page of listings for people who will come to your home and repair your dryer. Having purchased this dryer at Sears, we called Sears to repair it. This service call was scheduled for between eight am and twelve noon, and we were told that they'd call at 8:00 with an approximate time we could expect the repair technician. As it turns out, we were the first call of the day, so he just showed up at 8:15. I escorted him to the basement, explained the problem, told him the steps I'd taken such as cleaning the vent. He spent ten or fifteen minutes down there, went to his van for parts, and spent another fifteen minutes installing them (including replacing a part that wasn't the cause of our problem, but was squeaking). He was gone by 9:00, and I was on my way to the range by 10:00. If anything at all goes wrong with the dryer for the next year it will be repair for free, even if it has nothing to do with what was repaired this time.
So here we see a difference, one company that's the only game in town (unless you're willing to mount a big, ugly dish on your roof), one that knows it has to provide good service or we'll take our business elsewhere. One company that's one of many providing competing services, one that has no competition.
Tell me again how wonderful "single payer health care" will be.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Apocryphal Text From Genesis
Found in a cave near Qumran in Israel, sealed in a metal can with a plastic lid:
God saith unto Adam “Thou shalt harvest the fruit of the coffee plant, and thou shalt dry that fruit, and thou shalt roast that fruit until it is a deep brown color. And thou shalt grind the roasted fruit into a fine power. Thou shalt place the grindings in water over a fire and boil them until the brew is dark and strong. This brew shall be called “coffee”, and behold it is very good. Behold, thou shalt be careful not to drink in the grindings at the bottom of the cup, lest ye choke. Thou mayest add to the coffee the milk of the cow, or the product of the sugar cane, according to thy taste. And behold, using the intellect which I hath given thee, thou shalt devise new and better methods for preparing coffee, causing hot water to drip or perk through the grindings, that thou mayest consume better coffee without the dregs at the bottom of the cup. Beware though, lest ye be led astray from the pure coffee I intend that thou consumest, and addest to thy coffee vile substances such as sugar substitutes or creamers not made of the milk of the cow.” And thus Adam drank coffee, and behold it was good. And Adam devised new methods for brewing coffee, the percolator, the drip maker, and the French press. And God smelled the aroma of brewing coffee in Heaven, a sweet scent beloved by the Lord, and God saw that it was good. In the fullness of time Adam devised a method for forcing steam, rather than hot water, through the grindings, causing a stronger and richer coffee to be made, Adam called this brew Espresso. And God looked upon Adam drinking his coffee, and behold it was very good.
Then the demon Nescafe didst whisper in Adam’s ear, saying “Behold, brewing coffee takes much time! Let us brew coffee in large quantities, and let us then dry the water from the coffee, leaving us with grindings that need only have hot water added. This we shall call “instant coffee”.” So Adam was led astray, and made instant coffee. Adam saw that the instant coffee lacked the flavor and richness of the fresh-brewed coffee, but Adam deemed this a small sacrifice to the convenience offered by Nescafe. And Adam was led astray, and fresh coffee was reserved for special occasions, and not partaken of daily as the Lord had commanded.
In the fullness of time Adam was visited by the demon Starbucks. And the demon saith unto Adam “Behold, a place where thou canst purchase burnt-tasting coffee for an excessive price, and behold, the cup is emblazoned with the name of the place, so that all whom thou meetest shall know that thou hast purchased expensive coffee, and thy esteem shall be great. And behold, for an additional price, thou mayest add small quantities of additional flavors to thy coffee. Thou mayest add flavorings like vanilla or mocha, thou mayest add espresso to thy coffee, thou mayest have thy coffee topped with foam or steamed milk.” And Adam was beguiled by Starbucks, and didst consume of the fruit of the coffee plant in a manner not intended by the Lord. And instead of saying “Large coffee, regular, no sugar”, a term pleasing to the Lord, Adam didst say “Vente Cappuccino, double-shot, mocha, foam, cinnamon”, a phrase vile to the Lord’s ears.
Then the demon Heathnut didst speak in Adam’s ear and sayeth “Behold, caffeine is not good for thee!” Beguiled by the demon Adam didst devise a way to extract the caffeine from the fruit of the coffee plant, along with most of the flavor. And Adam didst combine this knowledge with that of Nescafe and didst make Sanka, an abomination in the eyes of the Lord. And Adam didst order decaffeinated espresso from Starbucks.
Adam’s face was darkened, for behold, he lacked energy, and was unproductive in the morning, and was unproductive after lunch, and wouldst sleep when he ought to labor. Adam also was stricken with poverty because of the excessive prices of coffee provided by Starbucks. And Adam saith unto himself “Where hath my energy gone? Why am I unproductive? Why do I lack my former vigor? Why have I no money with which to take Eve to dinner?” And the Lord sent His Angel to Adam in a dream, and showed him how he used to drink brewed coffee in the morning, and in the afternoon. And the Angel reminded Adam of the flavor and smell of the brewed coffee. And Adam repented and ceased drinking of the beverages that are vile to the Lord. And Adam found his old percolator in the back of the cupboard, and didst wash the dust from it, and Adam didst harvest the fruit of the coffee plant, and roast it, and grind it, and brew it with fresh water and drink it. And Adam was happy, and the Lord smiled upon him.
Then the Lord saith unto Adam “Behold, thou hast learned thy lesson, now bear that lesson in mind while I teach thee to make beer, dark and full of flavor.”
God saith unto Adam “Thou shalt harvest the fruit of the coffee plant, and thou shalt dry that fruit, and thou shalt roast that fruit until it is a deep brown color. And thou shalt grind the roasted fruit into a fine power. Thou shalt place the grindings in water over a fire and boil them until the brew is dark and strong. This brew shall be called “coffee”, and behold it is very good. Behold, thou shalt be careful not to drink in the grindings at the bottom of the cup, lest ye choke. Thou mayest add to the coffee the milk of the cow, or the product of the sugar cane, according to thy taste. And behold, using the intellect which I hath given thee, thou shalt devise new and better methods for preparing coffee, causing hot water to drip or perk through the grindings, that thou mayest consume better coffee without the dregs at the bottom of the cup. Beware though, lest ye be led astray from the pure coffee I intend that thou consumest, and addest to thy coffee vile substances such as sugar substitutes or creamers not made of the milk of the cow.” And thus Adam drank coffee, and behold it was good. And Adam devised new methods for brewing coffee, the percolator, the drip maker, and the French press. And God smelled the aroma of brewing coffee in Heaven, a sweet scent beloved by the Lord, and God saw that it was good. In the fullness of time Adam devised a method for forcing steam, rather than hot water, through the grindings, causing a stronger and richer coffee to be made, Adam called this brew Espresso. And God looked upon Adam drinking his coffee, and behold it was very good.
Then the demon Nescafe didst whisper in Adam’s ear, saying “Behold, brewing coffee takes much time! Let us brew coffee in large quantities, and let us then dry the water from the coffee, leaving us with grindings that need only have hot water added. This we shall call “instant coffee”.” So Adam was led astray, and made instant coffee. Adam saw that the instant coffee lacked the flavor and richness of the fresh-brewed coffee, but Adam deemed this a small sacrifice to the convenience offered by Nescafe. And Adam was led astray, and fresh coffee was reserved for special occasions, and not partaken of daily as the Lord had commanded.
In the fullness of time Adam was visited by the demon Starbucks. And the demon saith unto Adam “Behold, a place where thou canst purchase burnt-tasting coffee for an excessive price, and behold, the cup is emblazoned with the name of the place, so that all whom thou meetest shall know that thou hast purchased expensive coffee, and thy esteem shall be great. And behold, for an additional price, thou mayest add small quantities of additional flavors to thy coffee. Thou mayest add flavorings like vanilla or mocha, thou mayest add espresso to thy coffee, thou mayest have thy coffee topped with foam or steamed milk.” And Adam was beguiled by Starbucks, and didst consume of the fruit of the coffee plant in a manner not intended by the Lord. And instead of saying “Large coffee, regular, no sugar”, a term pleasing to the Lord, Adam didst say “Vente Cappuccino, double-shot, mocha, foam, cinnamon”, a phrase vile to the Lord’s ears.
Then the demon Heathnut didst speak in Adam’s ear and sayeth “Behold, caffeine is not good for thee!” Beguiled by the demon Adam didst devise a way to extract the caffeine from the fruit of the coffee plant, along with most of the flavor. And Adam didst combine this knowledge with that of Nescafe and didst make Sanka, an abomination in the eyes of the Lord. And Adam didst order decaffeinated espresso from Starbucks.
Adam’s face was darkened, for behold, he lacked energy, and was unproductive in the morning, and was unproductive after lunch, and wouldst sleep when he ought to labor. Adam also was stricken with poverty because of the excessive prices of coffee provided by Starbucks. And Adam saith unto himself “Where hath my energy gone? Why am I unproductive? Why do I lack my former vigor? Why have I no money with which to take Eve to dinner?” And the Lord sent His Angel to Adam in a dream, and showed him how he used to drink brewed coffee in the morning, and in the afternoon. And the Angel reminded Adam of the flavor and smell of the brewed coffee. And Adam repented and ceased drinking of the beverages that are vile to the Lord. And Adam found his old percolator in the back of the cupboard, and didst wash the dust from it, and Adam didst harvest the fruit of the coffee plant, and roast it, and grind it, and brew it with fresh water and drink it. And Adam was happy, and the Lord smiled upon him.
Then the Lord saith unto Adam “Behold, thou hast learned thy lesson, now bear that lesson in mind while I teach thee to make beer, dark and full of flavor.”
Thursday, March 06, 2008
The Gulag Archipelago
My posts lately have taken a lighter tone, but this one is most certainly not of that mold. This is a topic that should disturb you.
I just finished reading The Gulag Archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn lately. The Gulags were a series of prisons in the former Soviet Union which were used for “enemies of the state”. Solzhenitsyn (pronounced, I’m told, Sol-JA-hen-eet-sin) likens these camps to an archipelago, a series of islands in the ocean. People were routinely arrested for the slightest reason, or for no reason at all, only to fill a quota of arrests. They were then tortured into confessing, or murdered, or were sent to work camps where they worked until they died.
This is the most disturbing book I’ve ever read. I don’t say that lightly either. I’ve read Iris Chang’s book about the atrocities committed by Japanese Soldiers in Nanking, China that shocked Nazi government officials who were there (The Rape of Nanking). I’ve read of the Nazis and their concentration camps and their Ultimate Solution. This story of millions of people imprisoned, tortured and murdered by their own government, of people pulled from their homes in the middle of the night never to be seen by their loved ones again, of people living in constant fear that they may be next is the worst story I’ve ever encountered.
While many of the people imprisoned in the gulags were criminals, most were “political” criminals. Their crimes? There were stories of World War II pilots who were shot down and spent the remainder of the war in other nations, where they were exposed to foreign culture. These people were considered dangerous and needed to be re-educated. People (including the author) were arrested for being friends with someone who was arrested (who may, in fact, have also been arrested for that reason). Since the work camps needed people to perform the manual labor there were quotas to be met. No one cared if the person in the camp was actually guilty of anything or merely got in the way of an arresting officer with a quota.
We’ll probably never know just how many people died in the Gulags, estimates run in the tens of millions. Some were murdered outright, some were worked to death.
I’ll offer a glimpse of the Gulags. Prisoners were set to work to build a canal, using picks, shovels and wheelbarrows, no heavy machinery. In winter. People would freeze to death during the work day, sledges had to be sent around at night to pick up the corpses. Two hundred and fifty thousand prisoners died during this construction project. You read that correctly, a quarter of a million people. The result of this project can be seen in the authors own words: “In 1966 I spent eight hours by the canal. During this time there was one self-propelled barge which passed from Povenets to Soroka, and one, identical in type, from Soroka to Povenets. Their numbers were different, and it was only by their numbers that I could tell them apart and be sure it was not the same one as before on its way back. Because they were loaded altogether identically; with the very same pine logs which had been lying exposed for a long time and were useless for anything except firewood. And canceling one load against another we get zero. And a quarter of a million corpses to be remembered.” This was just for one construction project, by one work-camp, for one canal that apparently didn’t see much use.
This book has, if anything, increased my already deep hatred of Communism and my pledge to oppose anyone who would try to make America over in the Communist mold. Solzhenitsyn wrote this book not only to preserve the past, but to serve as a warning for the future. On the last page of the book he writes “All you freedom-loving “left wing” thinkers in the West! You left-laborites! You progressive American, German, and French students! As far as you are concerned, this whole book of mine is a waste of effort. You may suddenly understand it all someday – but only when you yourselves hear ‘hands behind your backs there!’ and step ashore on our Archipelago.”
Don’t say you weren’t warned.
I just finished reading The Gulag Archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn lately. The Gulags were a series of prisons in the former Soviet Union which were used for “enemies of the state”. Solzhenitsyn (pronounced, I’m told, Sol-JA-hen-eet-sin) likens these camps to an archipelago, a series of islands in the ocean. People were routinely arrested for the slightest reason, or for no reason at all, only to fill a quota of arrests. They were then tortured into confessing, or murdered, or were sent to work camps where they worked until they died.
This is the most disturbing book I’ve ever read. I don’t say that lightly either. I’ve read Iris Chang’s book about the atrocities committed by Japanese Soldiers in Nanking, China that shocked Nazi government officials who were there (The Rape of Nanking). I’ve read of the Nazis and their concentration camps and their Ultimate Solution. This story of millions of people imprisoned, tortured and murdered by their own government, of people pulled from their homes in the middle of the night never to be seen by their loved ones again, of people living in constant fear that they may be next is the worst story I’ve ever encountered.
While many of the people imprisoned in the gulags were criminals, most were “political” criminals. Their crimes? There were stories of World War II pilots who were shot down and spent the remainder of the war in other nations, where they were exposed to foreign culture. These people were considered dangerous and needed to be re-educated. People (including the author) were arrested for being friends with someone who was arrested (who may, in fact, have also been arrested for that reason). Since the work camps needed people to perform the manual labor there were quotas to be met. No one cared if the person in the camp was actually guilty of anything or merely got in the way of an arresting officer with a quota.
We’ll probably never know just how many people died in the Gulags, estimates run in the tens of millions. Some were murdered outright, some were worked to death.
I’ll offer a glimpse of the Gulags. Prisoners were set to work to build a canal, using picks, shovels and wheelbarrows, no heavy machinery. In winter. People would freeze to death during the work day, sledges had to be sent around at night to pick up the corpses. Two hundred and fifty thousand prisoners died during this construction project. You read that correctly, a quarter of a million people. The result of this project can be seen in the authors own words: “In 1966 I spent eight hours by the canal. During this time there was one self-propelled barge which passed from Povenets to Soroka, and one, identical in type, from Soroka to Povenets. Their numbers were different, and it was only by their numbers that I could tell them apart and be sure it was not the same one as before on its way back. Because they were loaded altogether identically; with the very same pine logs which had been lying exposed for a long time and were useless for anything except firewood. And canceling one load against another we get zero. And a quarter of a million corpses to be remembered.” This was just for one construction project, by one work-camp, for one canal that apparently didn’t see much use.
This book has, if anything, increased my already deep hatred of Communism and my pledge to oppose anyone who would try to make America over in the Communist mold. Solzhenitsyn wrote this book not only to preserve the past, but to serve as a warning for the future. On the last page of the book he writes “All you freedom-loving “left wing” thinkers in the West! You left-laborites! You progressive American, German, and French students! As far as you are concerned, this whole book of mine is a waste of effort. You may suddenly understand it all someday – but only when you yourselves hear ‘hands behind your backs there!’ and step ashore on our Archipelago.”
Don’t say you weren’t warned.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Strange People I've Worked With
Over the last 22 years I’ve worked in a number of offices and in direct contact with literally hundreds of people. The law of averages states that a number of those people will be, well, for charities sake let’s call them eccentric. Here is a sampling of the strange people I’ve worked with; names have been changed though, just in case.
David was about my age, we were both only a couple years out of college when we first worked together. He was an employee of the company, I was a consultant. David was, to put it politely, an apple polisher (we used to say he bought chap-stick by the case). David knew the birthday of every manager above him, from his immediate supervisor to the CEO of the company. You’re thinking he sent them a card, aren’t you? You’re thinking too small. He baked them a cake or cookies, with his own two little hands.
Emma was a truly unique person; I will probably never meet another person who reminds me of her. She’d arrive at work with her black wool winter coat covered (and I do mean covered) with cat fur because her cats liked sleeping on it. My cat would like to sleep on my coat too, but I don’t let her. One day she had a bowl of cereal for breakfast and didn’t finish it, the remaining cereal sat, in the bowl, for weeks and weeks, she called it her science project. Her most noticeable quality though was an apparent lack of control over her bodily functions combined with a diet heavy in peppers and onions (she once told me that she’d eat an onion like other people eat an apple, just bite into it). This combination made her both flatulent and fragrant, and she made no attempt to hold them in. On more than one occasion I or a co-worker were driven from our office by her emanations, and she’d frequently be seen, heard and smelled walking down the hall emitting a noxious cloud as she went.
One instance where you learn a person’s eccentricities is when you share a bathroom with them, so there are a couple of men on my list here. Alan had an odd habit in the men’s room. On this particular floor we had a man in a wheelchair, so the men’s room was handicapped accessible There was a plate next to the door you could push and the door would open automatically. Alan would go into the bathroom and, before doing anything else, would wash his hands thoroughly with soap and water. He would then go about the business he came into the bathroom for, after which he would splash a little more water onto his hands, without soap, dry them on a paper towel, use the towel to push the plate to open the door, run back to the trash can to discard the towel, then run back out thru the door before it closed.
Frank was probably the least mechanically-inclined person I’ve ever known. He set up his inflatable pool on a part of his yard that wasn’t level and couldn’t understand why the water was lower at one end than the other. His high-water (pardon the pun) mark was met when he bought a snow-blower. He first wanted to know why a snow-blower with an electric starter needed a pull-cord, which I explained by saying that if it stalled at the end of your property it was probably easier to re-start a hot engine by pulling the cord than by walking all the way back to the electrical outlet. The best one was when he asked me which way he should point the discharge chute from the snow-blower, I told him you should point it left or right, depending on where you want the snow to go. He asked “Can’t I point it straight back?” to which I replied “Frank, you’ll be standing there”.
Marv liked to argue. He considered himself a provocateur (which is apparently French for chop-buster). Given that he was a self-described bleeding heart Liberal I was a frequent target of his discussions, since I was just about guaranteed to be on the opposite side of any topic he could pick. I also don’t like to argue, so I never understood where Marv was coming from until he told me one day that, when among friends of similar political leanings, he’d say things he didn't agree with just to start a “discussion”. There’s a word for people like that, but I’ll keep this blog PG-rated.
Jack was another guy with odd bathroom habits. He must’ve been a high-order germophobe. If he needed to, shall we say, sit down he’d clean the seat. Now most guys will wipe the seat just to avoid anything really nasty, but he would wash the seat with soap, rinse it with water, then dry it, then put TP on it. He’d let you know if you walked in while he was performing this process and you went into “his” stall while he was getting more paper towels or whatever.
Inez was, briefly, my immediate manager. She was, shall we say, hygienically challenged. We suspected she showered once a month or so, whether she needed it or not. During long meetings she’d slip her shoes off under the conference room table, and you could ALWAYS tell when she’d done so.
Claude was also on of my managers. He was actually a really nice guy, but he was a micro-manager. Co-workers told me about an occasion before I went to work for him where there was some emergency that everyone was involved in correcting. Claude insisted upon a thirty-second status meeting every five minutes until the problem was resolved. I was glad I wasn’t working for him at the time, I’d have kicked him out and told him I’d update him when I had enough time to accomplish something.
Martha was another of my immediate supervisors. She was dopey in a harmless sort of way. Her major idiosyncrasy was a nearly pathological fear of squirrels. This wasn’t mere phobia though, she was actually convinced they could hurt you or, if they were near your car, could damage your tires. I know, you’re thinking that she was concerned about their admittedly sharp teeth or claws, but her concern was for their tails. Yes, she believed that a squirrel’s tail was covered, not in soft fur, but in little spikes that would cut into you if they touched you.
There have been other odd people in my career, and if I think of any I’ll be sure to write a part 2 of this entry.
David was about my age, we were both only a couple years out of college when we first worked together. He was an employee of the company, I was a consultant. David was, to put it politely, an apple polisher (we used to say he bought chap-stick by the case). David knew the birthday of every manager above him, from his immediate supervisor to the CEO of the company. You’re thinking he sent them a card, aren’t you? You’re thinking too small. He baked them a cake or cookies, with his own two little hands.
Emma was a truly unique person; I will probably never meet another person who reminds me of her. She’d arrive at work with her black wool winter coat covered (and I do mean covered) with cat fur because her cats liked sleeping on it. My cat would like to sleep on my coat too, but I don’t let her. One day she had a bowl of cereal for breakfast and didn’t finish it, the remaining cereal sat, in the bowl, for weeks and weeks, she called it her science project. Her most noticeable quality though was an apparent lack of control over her bodily functions combined with a diet heavy in peppers and onions (she once told me that she’d eat an onion like other people eat an apple, just bite into it). This combination made her both flatulent and fragrant, and she made no attempt to hold them in. On more than one occasion I or a co-worker were driven from our office by her emanations, and she’d frequently be seen, heard and smelled walking down the hall emitting a noxious cloud as she went.
One instance where you learn a person’s eccentricities is when you share a bathroom with them, so there are a couple of men on my list here. Alan had an odd habit in the men’s room. On this particular floor we had a man in a wheelchair, so the men’s room was handicapped accessible There was a plate next to the door you could push and the door would open automatically. Alan would go into the bathroom and, before doing anything else, would wash his hands thoroughly with soap and water. He would then go about the business he came into the bathroom for, after which he would splash a little more water onto his hands, without soap, dry them on a paper towel, use the towel to push the plate to open the door, run back to the trash can to discard the towel, then run back out thru the door before it closed.
Frank was probably the least mechanically-inclined person I’ve ever known. He set up his inflatable pool on a part of his yard that wasn’t level and couldn’t understand why the water was lower at one end than the other. His high-water (pardon the pun) mark was met when he bought a snow-blower. He first wanted to know why a snow-blower with an electric starter needed a pull-cord, which I explained by saying that if it stalled at the end of your property it was probably easier to re-start a hot engine by pulling the cord than by walking all the way back to the electrical outlet. The best one was when he asked me which way he should point the discharge chute from the snow-blower, I told him you should point it left or right, depending on where you want the snow to go. He asked “Can’t I point it straight back?” to which I replied “Frank, you’ll be standing there”.
Marv liked to argue. He considered himself a provocateur (which is apparently French for chop-buster). Given that he was a self-described bleeding heart Liberal I was a frequent target of his discussions, since I was just about guaranteed to be on the opposite side of any topic he could pick. I also don’t like to argue, so I never understood where Marv was coming from until he told me one day that, when among friends of similar political leanings, he’d say things he didn't agree with just to start a “discussion”. There’s a word for people like that, but I’ll keep this blog PG-rated.
Jack was another guy with odd bathroom habits. He must’ve been a high-order germophobe. If he needed to, shall we say, sit down he’d clean the seat. Now most guys will wipe the seat just to avoid anything really nasty, but he would wash the seat with soap, rinse it with water, then dry it, then put TP on it. He’d let you know if you walked in while he was performing this process and you went into “his” stall while he was getting more paper towels or whatever.
Inez was, briefly, my immediate manager. She was, shall we say, hygienically challenged. We suspected she showered once a month or so, whether she needed it or not. During long meetings she’d slip her shoes off under the conference room table, and you could ALWAYS tell when she’d done so.
Claude was also on of my managers. He was actually a really nice guy, but he was a micro-manager. Co-workers told me about an occasion before I went to work for him where there was some emergency that everyone was involved in correcting. Claude insisted upon a thirty-second status meeting every five minutes until the problem was resolved. I was glad I wasn’t working for him at the time, I’d have kicked him out and told him I’d update him when I had enough time to accomplish something.
Martha was another of my immediate supervisors. She was dopey in a harmless sort of way. Her major idiosyncrasy was a nearly pathological fear of squirrels. This wasn’t mere phobia though, she was actually convinced they could hurt you or, if they were near your car, could damage your tires. I know, you’re thinking that she was concerned about their admittedly sharp teeth or claws, but her concern was for their tails. Yes, she believed that a squirrel’s tail was covered, not in soft fur, but in little spikes that would cut into you if they touched you.
There have been other odd people in my career, and if I think of any I’ll be sure to write a part 2 of this entry.
Thursday, January 03, 2008
No, I'm Not In Jail!
Nor amI tied to a chair listening to Barry Manilow.
I called back on Wednesday as previously directed and I was told that the ticket was "changed", meaning I am not responsible for it. Whether this means that the correct person is responsible for it, or that the whole matter is being tossed out, I don't know neither do I care. There will be no SWAT team breaking down my door at 2 am because of a $48 parking ticket.
I need to thank my wife for the offer of a cake with a file in it, and for MG for her concern that'd I'd been incarcerated.
I called back on Wednesday as previously directed and I was told that the ticket was "changed", meaning I am not responsible for it. Whether this means that the correct person is responsible for it, or that the whole matter is being tossed out, I don't know neither do I care. There will be no SWAT team breaking down my door at 2 am because of a $48 parking ticket.
I need to thank my wife for the offer of a cake with a file in it, and for MG for her concern that'd I'd been incarcerated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)