Friday, November 23, 2012
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Tumbling Trees.
The latest reports are out on the USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) eradication of the Asian longhorn beetle. The numbers are staggering, and those of you living in neighboring counties to those mentioned -- or neighboring states -- might want to take a long hard look at the numbers before you decide that it's not really anything you need to worry about.
New York, 1st detection in August 1996. They found 6,275 infested trees. They have removed 18,467 trees. That is roughly three times the amount that were 'sick'.
New Jersey. Since October 2002. 729 infested, 21,981 trees removed. This is 30 -- yes, 30 times the number of injured trees.
Massachusetts, August 2008. 22,264 infested, 31,925 removed.
Ohio June 2011. 9091 infested trees, 8809 removed.
The good people in Bethel, the most affected area in Ohio, are fighting to save their trees. They acknowledge the need for infested trees to be removed, but are objecting to the destruction of the healthy. For most tree owners, they would porefer to have the trees vaccinated.
Yes, that can be done.
It is even less expensive than tree cutters, and chippers, and mulchers, and cherry pickers and earth movers and fuel for machinery (checked the prices on the fuel lately? -- bet you have.)
I want you, wherever you are, to go out in your backyard, or to your closest, favorite public park.
Look around.
Pick a tree, any tree, since this is an exercise in imagination.
The tree you have selected is sick. It has a bug. This bug is not airborne (as they say about viruses). But the tree is sick.
Say "Good-bye, favorite tree."
Now look around and see the other trees.
See the three closest trees.
Say "good bye" to them.
They must be assassinated because their neighbor was sick.
But wait, the neighboring trees have neighbors too. Pick any number, 3 or 30 or any other number, of the neighboring trees' neighbors.
Say "good bye" to them, too. They are neighbors of the neighbors of the sick tree, so they, too, must die.
Now, look around your back yard, or your park.
Are there any trees left?
Is there any shade left in your yard?
Are there any windbreaks left around your house?
What will hold the soil in your yard when the snow melts or the rains pound down?
My friends, this can happen to you. Yes, you may live far away -- but with the likes of Superstorm Sandy, (and the USDA wasted no time laying down the law in New Jersey afterwards,) is anywhere far enough away? Yes, you may not have the specific species of bugs that are eating these species of trees.
But you DO have a government agency that says it can come in and remove and confiscate your personal property (trees) because they can.
Infested trees need to be removed. No one is arguing with that. And the government has every right to take those down at its expense for the public good.
But they are claiming the right to take down all the trees that might become bug-sick. Not just likely, but "maybe perhaps someday might."
If they are allowed to do that here, in the heart of Ohio, in the nation's scenic heart, why do you think they will stop when they get to your back yard? They will be able to point to New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Ohio as having established "THE" precedent.
Goodbye backyard.
Goodbye parks.
Goodbye trees.
Help the Bethel ALB group stop this trampling of property rights.
Before it becomes your rights that are lost.
http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=d9ab319101533a13ab1c45685&id=587ea78b12
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Blacker than Friday
is 'Black Thursday'
is the early Black Friday sales.
I don't know which I despise the most.
Yes, I said despise. As in disdainfully hate, loathe, and dislike. ALL.
Years and years ago, back in the last century, Black Friday sales used to be FUN! Hurtling through the dark early morning hours to go to stores never worth going to at other times. Hitting the 4 am openers, and then the 6 am early bird stores. Buying gifts that could not be afforded otherwise.
It wasn't even too bad when the "Black Friday" thing became part of the annual routine. The sales weren't as spectacular -- usually they are ordinary mark-downs of last year's leftovers -- and the fun wasn't there because too much traffic was taking its place. Everybody that wasn't working was hitting the sales.
Even the hysteria of 'limited number of items' (because they are selling last year's no-sells) was somewhat tolerable from a distance. Stupid, but tolerable. No one should be assaulted over a toy.
Now however, the whole thing has morphed into blatant money-grubbing. The stores started opening late on Thanksgiving Day, then they started being open "All Day" on Thanksgiving Day.
This year the Black Friday sales all were 'leaked' early, and have been underway for at least a week. There's still a week before Thanksgiving.
I haven't shopped any of them, and there are stores I won't shop, even when it is actually time to do so.
These stores -- Target is one of them -- are making it mandatory for their workers to come in on the holiday day. Yeah, they'll pay time-and-a-half (maybe) but that isn't the point. To many people, especially minimum wage workers, time spent with family is more important than all the money in the world. At least for that one day that is supposed to be about appreciating who and what you have.
I have no problem with the stores being open -- if the people working there want to be there. I always wished I could go to work, maybe, after the meal and the dishes and the guests went home, and the only thing on tv is football games. I'd have volunteered.
There are people to whom Thanksgiving is yet another lonely day, and they'd work or not, however it works out.
And if a store doesn't have the staff to work that day -- that special, family holiday -- then they shouldn't open, or should perhaps only have some areas open (no coffee shop, no fresh-sliced deli, etc.) They should respect the employees who want to respect their families -- not drag them out and demand they deal kindly and patiently with rude and demanding people.
Yes, I categorize the precious customers that way, because for the most part it is going to be the greedy people out grabbing goodies. The "real" people will be at home with their families, especially during the early part of the day.
And if you do go out, after your family's festivities, please remember to thank those who serve you in any capacity. A heck of a lot of them are there because they have to be, not because they want to be, and that's just not fair.
is the early Black Friday sales.
I don't know which I despise the most.
Yes, I said despise. As in disdainfully hate, loathe, and dislike. ALL.
Years and years ago, back in the last century, Black Friday sales used to be FUN! Hurtling through the dark early morning hours to go to stores never worth going to at other times. Hitting the 4 am openers, and then the 6 am early bird stores. Buying gifts that could not be afforded otherwise.
It wasn't even too bad when the "Black Friday" thing became part of the annual routine. The sales weren't as spectacular -- usually they are ordinary mark-downs of last year's leftovers -- and the fun wasn't there because too much traffic was taking its place. Everybody that wasn't working was hitting the sales.
Even the hysteria of 'limited number of items' (because they are selling last year's no-sells) was somewhat tolerable from a distance. Stupid, but tolerable. No one should be assaulted over a toy.
Now however, the whole thing has morphed into blatant money-grubbing. The stores started opening late on Thanksgiving Day, then they started being open "All Day" on Thanksgiving Day.
This year the Black Friday sales all were 'leaked' early, and have been underway for at least a week. There's still a week before Thanksgiving.
I haven't shopped any of them, and there are stores I won't shop, even when it is actually time to do so.
These stores -- Target is one of them -- are making it mandatory for their workers to come in on the holiday day. Yeah, they'll pay time-and-a-half (maybe) but that isn't the point. To many people, especially minimum wage workers, time spent with family is more important than all the money in the world. At least for that one day that is supposed to be about appreciating who and what you have.
I have no problem with the stores being open -- if the people working there want to be there. I always wished I could go to work, maybe, after the meal and the dishes and the guests went home, and the only thing on tv is football games. I'd have volunteered.
There are people to whom Thanksgiving is yet another lonely day, and they'd work or not, however it works out.
And if a store doesn't have the staff to work that day -- that special, family holiday -- then they shouldn't open, or should perhaps only have some areas open (no coffee shop, no fresh-sliced deli, etc.) They should respect the employees who want to respect their families -- not drag them out and demand they deal kindly and patiently with rude and demanding people.
Yes, I categorize the precious customers that way, because for the most part it is going to be the greedy people out grabbing goodies. The "real" people will be at home with their families, especially during the early part of the day.
And if you do go out, after your family's festivities, please remember to thank those who serve you in any capacity. A heck of a lot of them are there because they have to be, not because they want to be, and that's just not fair.
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
The Great American Temper Tantrum.
Or how to look more of a fool to the rest of the world.
The election is over! One man won, a lot of others (not just Mr. Moneybags) lost. Time for life to get back to normal, or at least head in that direction, right?
Nope. Not right.
Now that the election is over and approximately (an ironic) 47% of people were on the losing side, it's time to show the world that we are populated by whiny ass crybabies who, when they lose, throw down their tools and holler "I Quit" while the world laughs.
This is, of course, the members of the moneybags teams doing this. The first rumbles of the secession story came from Texas and Louisiana. Now, what does Texas and Louisiana have that's so special?
Oh yeah! That's where the OIL is! And the oilmen! I suppose I should say oil barons, or perhaps oil profiteers, because MEN do not quit when they have a setback. They stand up, shake the dust off the seat of their pants and their hands, and get right back to work. (oh but these people don't get their hands dirty, and they can't reach the seat of their pants because their big fat wallets are in the way!)
And work there is for all of us. The NorthEast is still lights-out in many places -- they could use a whole lot more of that oil that Louisiana and Texas are wanting to hold hostage until they get their way. There are homes and no homes, food spoiling, damaged factories, stores, streets. There's work for each and every person who can get there to do it. There are many who would be doing it if they could get there. There is even work for leaders in the field, because the Corporate Chairs are fighting like preschool siblings over who is in charge of what, while friends and neighbors are opening their houses and cupboards to their neighbors. Some of them are even feeding people with no ID, no proof of address. "When I was hungry, You gave me food."
Not a ticket to go somewhere else and get it from someone else because that's just not your job.
It surprises me how many people are jumping onto this secession bandwagon. Yeah, we'd all like to be our own country, especially when we don't like public policies. Yeah, when we have to pay the piper in April, we wish we were our own realm.
Most of us outgrow this by the time we reach double digits. It's hard work making rules and enforcing them and trying to make other people abide by OUR rules because it's our country. If they don't like it, they can go make one of their own.
I have to wonder if these people have thought this through. Who will repair and maintain their roads? Their schools? I suppose with agreements like the once-famous NAFTA they won't have to worry about tarrifs on foodstuffs, or factory-built parts. But who will pay the governing bodies? How?
There will still be taxes; there will still be public policies that displease individuals. There may be even fewer jobs if interstate commerce becomes international..
In the meantime, the public face of America is showing itself to be the "Ugly American" in truth.
The real Americans are in New Jersey, working.
The election is over! One man won, a lot of others (not just Mr. Moneybags) lost. Time for life to get back to normal, or at least head in that direction, right?
Nope. Not right.
Now that the election is over and approximately (an ironic) 47% of people were on the losing side, it's time to show the world that we are populated by whiny ass crybabies who, when they lose, throw down their tools and holler "I Quit" while the world laughs.
This is, of course, the members of the moneybags teams doing this. The first rumbles of the secession story came from Texas and Louisiana. Now, what does Texas and Louisiana have that's so special?
Oh yeah! That's where the OIL is! And the oilmen! I suppose I should say oil barons, or perhaps oil profiteers, because MEN do not quit when they have a setback. They stand up, shake the dust off the seat of their pants and their hands, and get right back to work. (oh but these people don't get their hands dirty, and they can't reach the seat of their pants because their big fat wallets are in the way!)
And work there is for all of us. The NorthEast is still lights-out in many places -- they could use a whole lot more of that oil that Louisiana and Texas are wanting to hold hostage until they get their way. There are homes and no homes, food spoiling, damaged factories, stores, streets. There's work for each and every person who can get there to do it. There are many who would be doing it if they could get there. There is even work for leaders in the field, because the Corporate Chairs are fighting like preschool siblings over who is in charge of what, while friends and neighbors are opening their houses and cupboards to their neighbors. Some of them are even feeding people with no ID, no proof of address. "When I was hungry, You gave me food."
Not a ticket to go somewhere else and get it from someone else because that's just not your job.
It surprises me how many people are jumping onto this secession bandwagon. Yeah, we'd all like to be our own country, especially when we don't like public policies. Yeah, when we have to pay the piper in April, we wish we were our own realm.
Most of us outgrow this by the time we reach double digits. It's hard work making rules and enforcing them and trying to make other people abide by OUR rules because it's our country. If they don't like it, they can go make one of their own.
I have to wonder if these people have thought this through. Who will repair and maintain their roads? Their schools? I suppose with agreements like the once-famous NAFTA they won't have to worry about tarrifs on foodstuffs, or factory-built parts. But who will pay the governing bodies? How?
There will still be taxes; there will still be public policies that displease individuals. There may be even fewer jobs if interstate commerce becomes international..
In the meantime, the public face of America is showing itself to be the "Ugly American" in truth.
The real Americans are in New Jersey, working.
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Making Magic
Today, I made magic for a child.
It was a follow up to the magic I made last night, when I took cookies out of the oven, and promised her that tomorrow we would decorate them. She didn't know what decorate meant, I think, but was willing to take my word for it.
After all, a Mammaw who can get cookies out of an oven instead of a bag must know something.
Today while she was watching tv, I got my powdered sugar and my milk and food coloring and 4 bowls and 1 coffee cup that belonged to my dad and started mixing. When Hailey's show was over, she came out to the kitchen and climbed up in the chair.
"Mammaw, it's purple. And orange."
I showed her how to use the purple plastic knives to spread the frosting on the cookies, but it was still pretty runny, so I reached into my bag of powder and dumped another handful into each bowl. Then I picked one up and started stirring it in.
"Ooooh, Mammaw! You're making magic! I want to help! We can make a RAINBOW!"
So, I told her to pick up a bowl and stir it up. She said she was making green magic, and I was making purple magic, and blue magic, and yellow magic, and she was doing orange magic.
Then we painted the cookies.
I put sprinkles on the cookies after they were painted and she yelled at me that I was "Messing up" her magic paint cookies.
But she was liberal with the sprinkles and the candies herself afterward.
Sadly, we still have paint left, and nothing to paint on. My flour is nearly gone or I'd make a plain cake or something -- then we could indeed make a rainbow. I put the leftover frosting in jars in the refrigeratoe. She keeps telling me the food paint is getting cold. I have no idea if it will keep or if it is safe to keep that way, but if it goes bad, there's always the sink.
I could have a rainbow drain.
The real magic is in the child's simple belief that Mammaw can do magic -- and lets her help.
Surely there's no greater magic than feeding the children -- bodies and imagination both.
It was a follow up to the magic I made last night, when I took cookies out of the oven, and promised her that tomorrow we would decorate them. She didn't know what decorate meant, I think, but was willing to take my word for it.
After all, a Mammaw who can get cookies out of an oven instead of a bag must know something.
Today while she was watching tv, I got my powdered sugar and my milk and food coloring and 4 bowls and 1 coffee cup that belonged to my dad and started mixing. When Hailey's show was over, she came out to the kitchen and climbed up in the chair.
I showed her how to use the purple plastic knives to spread the frosting on the cookies, but it was still pretty runny, so I reached into my bag of powder and dumped another handful into each bowl. Then I picked one up and started stirring it in.
"Ooooh, Mammaw! You're making magic! I want to help! We can make a RAINBOW!"
So, I told her to pick up a bowl and stir it up. She said she was making green magic, and I was making purple magic, and blue magic, and yellow magic, and she was doing orange magic.
Then we painted the cookies.
I put sprinkles on the cookies after they were painted and she yelled at me that I was "Messing up" her magic paint cookies.
But she was liberal with the sprinkles and the candies herself afterward.
Sadly, we still have paint left, and nothing to paint on. My flour is nearly gone or I'd make a plain cake or something -- then we could indeed make a rainbow. I put the leftover frosting in jars in the refrigeratoe. She keeps telling me the food paint is getting cold. I have no idea if it will keep or if it is safe to keep that way, but if it goes bad, there's always the sink.
I could have a rainbow drain.
The real magic is in the child's simple belief that Mammaw can do magic -- and lets her help.
Surely there's no greater magic than feeding the children -- bodies and imagination both.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Art will Out.
My husband used to say. when we'd go flea marketing, "I could do that if..."
He could be talking about wooden yard cutouts, or concrete statues, or handmade pottery, or plaster busts, or just about any handcraft.
His "if" was usually
"If I had the tools."
"If I had the equipment."
"If I had the space"
I was usually the penny pinching bully who wouldn't "let" him have the whatever he wanted for something he might do. Never mind that he probably never would do any of it.
I knew he wouldn't.
I made this judgement because he could have done many of the things using the tools at hand, but because they weren't specialty tools, he 'couldn't.'
Art doesn't work that way. If you have a need in your soul to create, you create. You don't wait for tools or stop for argument. If the need is in you and has to get out, you use what's at hand and do the best you can.
Period.
I know this, because I write. I write in all conditions, under any, many circumstances. I HAVE dived into trash cans for something to write on. I have used a mascara brush to jot down notes for a plot twist that just came to me as I was waiting in line. I have written with crayon, with full-fledged permanent marker, with broken pencils where I've chipped and peeled the wood away from the lead with my teeth and fingernails, because the words need to get OUT.
If I had no tools or equipment, I created some, I found some, I made some.
The same can be said for those who want to dance, or design, or act, cook, or do any other creative, expression.
There is no "if" in making art.
I'm reminded of this today watching my granddaughter.
She draws.
She paints.
She has taught herself to use the Paint program on the computer. She knows more of how to get it to do what she wants than I do.
If she finds an ink pen, a crayon, a marker, a burned stick, a charcoal briquet, she picks it up and draws a line or a circle with it.
If she has no paper to draw on, she uses a sidewalk, a rock, a board, a wall.
There is no "if" in this child when it comes to her art.
"If" she has no other legacy, I hope this is what she gets from Mammaw.
There is no "if" in "art."
He could be talking about wooden yard cutouts, or concrete statues, or handmade pottery, or plaster busts, or just about any handcraft.
His "if" was usually
"If I had the tools."
"If I had the equipment."
"If I had the space"
I was usually the penny pinching bully who wouldn't "let" him have the whatever he wanted for something he might do. Never mind that he probably never would do any of it.
I knew he wouldn't.
I made this judgement because he could have done many of the things using the tools at hand, but because they weren't specialty tools, he 'couldn't.'
Art doesn't work that way. If you have a need in your soul to create, you create. You don't wait for tools or stop for argument. If the need is in you and has to get out, you use what's at hand and do the best you can.
Period.
I know this, because I write. I write in all conditions, under any, many circumstances. I HAVE dived into trash cans for something to write on. I have used a mascara brush to jot down notes for a plot twist that just came to me as I was waiting in line. I have written with crayon, with full-fledged permanent marker, with broken pencils where I've chipped and peeled the wood away from the lead with my teeth and fingernails, because the words need to get OUT.
If I had no tools or equipment, I created some, I found some, I made some.
The same can be said for those who want to dance, or design, or act, cook, or do any other creative, expression.
There is no "if" in making art.
I'm reminded of this today watching my granddaughter.
She draws.
She paints.
She has taught herself to use the Paint program on the computer. She knows more of how to get it to do what she wants than I do.
If she finds an ink pen, a crayon, a marker, a burned stick, a charcoal briquet, she picks it up and draws a line or a circle with it.
If she has no paper to draw on, she uses a sidewalk, a rock, a board, a wall.
There is no "if" in this child when it comes to her art.
"If" she has no other legacy, I hope this is what she gets from Mammaw.
There is no "if" in "art."
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Thanks Giving
We all have a lot to be thankful for. What's "a lot" to me may be only a little to you, but it's the size of the thankfulness that counts more than what the thankfulness is for.
I bring this up for several reasons.
1)A Facebook friend posted a 'month of gratitude' status.
2)We have, mostly, survived a natural disaster. It could have been so much worse. Those where it hit the hardest and are still being hit -- one horror after another -- are a reminder to those of us not afflicted.
3)It's November. Halloween is over. It's time for Thanksgiving here in the US.
Do you hear that, people? Media? Advertisers?
Halloween is over. It's time for Thanksgiving.
Not Christmas.
Not "the Holidays"
Thanks Giving.
Yesterday, a commercial for a local station's news had a cheery voiced woman announcing "Halloween is over. Time to gear up for the next holiday. This years must have-toys for Christmas. See our story at five."
I don't watch that station's news and very little of their programming anyway, but really? How many stories will they be doing four weeks from now on "Thanksgiving, the forgotten holiday?"
Hypocrites.
I tried to post a protest on their Facebook page -- it wouldn't take. Tried several times. Tried liking/friending to be able to post, still couldn't post. I undid that pretty quick, you can bet.
The media will all do/make/have big stories about the "rush to Christmas." I've already seen a few. The problem is -- they are a large part of the problem. If they didn't do stories on the top ten must-have toys. If they didn't preface miracle/ goodwill stories as early Christmas.
Imagine if the news (local, national, or its own private network) didn't run ANY Christmas stories until after Thanksgiving. The holidays wouldn't be so rushed in and pushed into our consciousness, and the stories themselves would be more special, more effective. They would have their own place to sparkle and shine and move people if they were treated as the seasonal treats that they are meant to be.
To help explain -- candy corn is available year-round, but it doesn't taste the same in April as it does in October. Jelly beans aren't the same in October. Because that is the time and the place for them.
Oh advertisers are more obviously guilty, but how would it benefit the advertisers if the media ignored their pre-emptive extravaganzas, such as top-ten lists? If those news people weren't attending these events, the advertisers would lose money and maybe even actually have to pay out for their ads.
Isn't that what they are supposed to do?
And the fourth item on my list has to be
4) Us. People.
We need to take this time, to make this accounting of our lives, our families, our things. We gripe and complain, true, but what effect can there be when we watch and buy anyway?
It is OUR power to change things. Let's stop talking and start thanking before we shop.
I bring this up for several reasons.
1)A Facebook friend posted a 'month of gratitude' status.
2)We have, mostly, survived a natural disaster. It could have been so much worse. Those where it hit the hardest and are still being hit -- one horror after another -- are a reminder to those of us not afflicted.
3)It's November. Halloween is over. It's time for Thanksgiving here in the US.
Do you hear that, people? Media? Advertisers?
Halloween is over. It's time for Thanksgiving.
Not Christmas.
Not "the Holidays"
Thanks Giving.
Yesterday, a commercial for a local station's news had a cheery voiced woman announcing "Halloween is over. Time to gear up for the next holiday. This years must have-toys for Christmas. See our story at five."
I don't watch that station's news and very little of their programming anyway, but really? How many stories will they be doing four weeks from now on "Thanksgiving, the forgotten holiday?"
Hypocrites.
I tried to post a protest on their Facebook page -- it wouldn't take. Tried several times. Tried liking/friending to be able to post, still couldn't post. I undid that pretty quick, you can bet.
The media will all do/make/have big stories about the "rush to Christmas." I've already seen a few. The problem is -- they are a large part of the problem. If they didn't do stories on the top ten must-have toys. If they didn't preface miracle/ goodwill stories as early Christmas.
Imagine if the news (local, national, or its own private network) didn't run ANY Christmas stories until after Thanksgiving. The holidays wouldn't be so rushed in and pushed into our consciousness, and the stories themselves would be more special, more effective. They would have their own place to sparkle and shine and move people if they were treated as the seasonal treats that they are meant to be.
To help explain -- candy corn is available year-round, but it doesn't taste the same in April as it does in October. Jelly beans aren't the same in October. Because that is the time and the place for them.
Oh advertisers are more obviously guilty, but how would it benefit the advertisers if the media ignored their pre-emptive extravaganzas, such as top-ten lists? If those news people weren't attending these events, the advertisers would lose money and maybe even actually have to pay out for their ads.
Isn't that what they are supposed to do?
And the fourth item on my list has to be
4) Us. People.
We need to take this time, to make this accounting of our lives, our families, our things. We gripe and complain, true, but what effect can there be when we watch and buy anyway?
It is OUR power to change things. Let's stop talking and start thanking before we shop.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Need Help? Hire Someone!
There's a lot of stuff on internet bulletin boards and in business magazines about how there really are jobs out there. There are scads of ads for schools to get you educated (and more in debt than ever) for jobs.
There are jobs out there, they insist. Companies are begging for workers.
Until you are ready to apply.
Then you are given the list of qualifications and conditions of employment. These terms usually involve higher education.
Companies are whining and crying -- and sometimes losing profits and shareholders -- because they can't fill the jobs.
Can't.
Applicants don't meet their standards.
If you ask me, it's their own faults. They have set their standards too high. If a job needs done, it needs done. Pieces of paper accumulated don't make anyone more employable, yet companies are insisting that they "need" employees with more degrees, more education.
More education, at least to me, has made people less employable. They no longer know (if they ever did) how to work as a team member. They can't follow orders. They won't follow a chain of command. They don't know how to ask subordinates for help; to get the job done; to be on their team.
Most of them don't know how to fill out a job application or write a personal resume -- they hire someone else, or order a before-mentioned subordinate to do it for them. And, by God, that person had better get it right!
Listen, people.
If you need help, you need help. Paper isn't going to help you -- people are.
If you want the work done, you need working people, not someone who has studied how "Star Trek Changed the World," and "Ghosts in the Bible." It doesn't matter how brilliant the essays or how deep the understanding of these topics. Unless you're exploring the final frontier or Ghost-busting haunted lands in the Middle East, those are not the skills that will move your product.
If there is special training needed, provide it yourself. That way your workers won't be distracted by how Jack and Joe do it, or what the professor told them was right or wrong. If you need specialised training: provide it.
Schools provide students.
Employers provide employees.
You need working people to do the work.
Forget the educated idiots. If that's your criteria, your product isn't a necessity. It's a luxury, and that is reason enough why your business is going down in troubled times.
If you desperately need workers -- hire some. We're out here.
There are jobs out there, they insist. Companies are begging for workers.
Until you are ready to apply.
Then you are given the list of qualifications and conditions of employment. These terms usually involve higher education.
Companies are whining and crying -- and sometimes losing profits and shareholders -- because they can't fill the jobs.
Can't.
Applicants don't meet their standards.
If you ask me, it's their own faults. They have set their standards too high. If a job needs done, it needs done. Pieces of paper accumulated don't make anyone more employable, yet companies are insisting that they "need" employees with more degrees, more education.
More education, at least to me, has made people less employable. They no longer know (if they ever did) how to work as a team member. They can't follow orders. They won't follow a chain of command. They don't know how to ask subordinates for help; to get the job done; to be on their team.
Most of them don't know how to fill out a job application or write a personal resume -- they hire someone else, or order a before-mentioned subordinate to do it for them. And, by God, that person had better get it right!
Listen, people.
If you need help, you need help. Paper isn't going to help you -- people are.
If you want the work done, you need working people, not someone who has studied how "Star Trek Changed the World," and "Ghosts in the Bible." It doesn't matter how brilliant the essays or how deep the understanding of these topics. Unless you're exploring the final frontier or Ghost-busting haunted lands in the Middle East, those are not the skills that will move your product.
If there is special training needed, provide it yourself. That way your workers won't be distracted by how Jack and Joe do it, or what the professor told them was right or wrong. If you need specialised training: provide it.
Schools provide students.
Employers provide employees.
You need working people to do the work.
Forget the educated idiots. If that's your criteria, your product isn't a necessity. It's a luxury, and that is reason enough why your business is going down in troubled times.
If you desperately need workers -- hire some. We're out here.
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Fall is Coming
An old favorite of mine, from when my little ones were little ones. Caught myself singing a version of this to the grandbaby last week.
Fall Is Coming
Fall is coming, oh me, oh my
Fall is coming, the leaves will die
Fall is coming, and winter soon
Fall is coming, and the harvest moon
Fall is coming, the year's most gone
Fall is coming, summer soon gone
Fall is coming, and will soon be here
Fall is coming, the end of the year
Fall is here, the leaves have turned
Fall is here, summer is yearned
Fall is here, and life slows down
Fall is here, Summer's crown
Fall is here, and winter is coming
Fall is here, the harvesters are running
Fall is here, let's get everything in
Before winter comes in, cold as sin.
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Officially silly Road Signs.
Governing organizations are always looking for ways to cut costs. One way for the Departments of Transportation (DOT), whether state, county, township, or town, might be to take a look at some of the silly and unnecessary road signs they
1) have manufactured
2)have installed (temporarily or permanently) and
3)pay maintenance for.
The first such sign that comes to mind is one that proclaims "Limited sight distance."
Huh?
Bet that sign is a real treat for ESL drivers. Or the illiterate. We draw pictures of stopsigns and deer and curvy tire marks in the rain, and post "limited sight distance" for the non English readers.
That sign is a poser for intelligent English speakers.
But, never fear -- if you're still driving, you've probably figured it out.
It means that you can't see very far.
Since my eyes are connected to my brain -- a rudimentary necessity for driving, one would think -- I can SEE that I can't see very far. You don't have to tell me that.
Then there are the ever-popular "No Edge Lines".
Duh!
You think I need a sign to tell me that the white line isn't there anymore? I had to pass a vision test to get my license, ya know. Most drivers do. And a white line on a black road is usually obvious, so when it isn't there -- most people notice it. No signage needed.
I saw a new one last night. "Pass With Care." Okay, that's fine, but what I want to know is -- where are the roads where it's acceptable to pass without care?
I'm not sure if I want to know so I can avoid those areas or so I can drive them. I suppose it will depend on how suicidal I'm feeling when I leave my driveway. Or maybe after I've been driving roads where I can't see very far, and the white lines at the side are wearing cloaks of invisibility.
I might want to Pass Without Care after that ordeal.
1) have manufactured
2)have installed (temporarily or permanently) and
3)pay maintenance for.
The first such sign that comes to mind is one that proclaims "Limited sight distance."
Huh?
Bet that sign is a real treat for ESL drivers. Or the illiterate. We draw pictures of stopsigns and deer and curvy tire marks in the rain, and post "limited sight distance" for the non English readers.
That sign is a poser for intelligent English speakers.
But, never fear -- if you're still driving, you've probably figured it out.
It means that you can't see very far.
Since my eyes are connected to my brain -- a rudimentary necessity for driving, one would think -- I can SEE that I can't see very far. You don't have to tell me that.
Then there are the ever-popular "No Edge Lines".
Duh!
You think I need a sign to tell me that the white line isn't there anymore? I had to pass a vision test to get my license, ya know. Most drivers do. And a white line on a black road is usually obvious, so when it isn't there -- most people notice it. No signage needed.
I saw a new one last night. "Pass With Care." Okay, that's fine, but what I want to know is -- where are the roads where it's acceptable to pass without care?
I'm not sure if I want to know so I can avoid those areas or so I can drive them. I suppose it will depend on how suicidal I'm feeling when I leave my driveway. Or maybe after I've been driving roads where I can't see very far, and the white lines at the side are wearing cloaks of invisibility.
I might want to Pass Without Care after that ordeal.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Nick Mom? Are you kidding me?
Please say you are kidding me!
Please say this is a tryout or a special session or something.
Please, please don't say you are seriously depriving the sleep deprived mothers of junior insomniacs the presence of Nick jr 24 hours around the clock.
And for what?
Momedies? Tearjerkers?
No!
The kids are being booted off for stand up comedians!
You have to be kidding me.
Moms all over the world are being punished for all the moms who tried the comedy gig back when Nickelodeon did the funny mom contest. Now we all have to watch all the not-quite winners while our children or grandchildren scream and howl instead of going to sleep with familiar friends luring them into slumber.
I didn't know of this horrid desecration until my granddaughter came to stay for a week. Her favorite shows, just before bedtime, have been Pocoyo and Ni Hao Kai-Lan. They come on at ten o'clock, and signal bedtime, lights out, sit down and shut up time.
That is, they did come on at ten o'clock.
Now, ten o'clock heralds the beginning of Nick Mom.
Some person (or committee -- I neither know nor care) at Nick jr decided that children go to bed by ten o'clock, and that the Moms are going to be watching tv. And instead of watching a good murder, or a good-cry movie, these moms, who have their obedient little angels all tucked in -- these women want to watch stand up comedians.
Not me. When I got my teeny tots tucked in (or should I say stuck in? Sometimes it seemed I needed strait jackets and restraints.) I had to finish dishes, fold laundry, things of that sort.
When I did get to watch tv, I wanted something that would offer escape from the day to day being a mom -- not something that would plunge me into other mom's woes. Yes, I have stories, too. Yes, I could make them funny or dramatic. Yes, my kids are more funny/messy/silly/noisy/fussy. Let me tell you... .
But when I'm done being Mom, I want to be someone and somewhere else. Not watching endless reflections of myself on a kiddie channel on the tv.
I don't advocate watching tv as anything but a tool to use with consideration and deliberation when raising children. But when used properly, it is useful.
As a bedtime cool down or as entertainment for a wakeful child, I guess that we, as parents and grandparents, will be turning, turning, turning away from Nick jr at night. Our children may soon find the Disney jr or Sprout characters even more endearing. Then we will no longer have to bother with Nickelodeon at all.
And their Moms can all entertain one another with one-liners all night long.
Please say this is a tryout or a special session or something.
Please, please don't say you are seriously depriving the sleep deprived mothers of junior insomniacs the presence of Nick jr 24 hours around the clock.
And for what?
Momedies? Tearjerkers?
No!
The kids are being booted off for stand up comedians!
You have to be kidding me.
Moms all over the world are being punished for all the moms who tried the comedy gig back when Nickelodeon did the funny mom contest. Now we all have to watch all the not-quite winners while our children or grandchildren scream and howl instead of going to sleep with familiar friends luring them into slumber.
I didn't know of this horrid desecration until my granddaughter came to stay for a week. Her favorite shows, just before bedtime, have been Pocoyo and Ni Hao Kai-Lan. They come on at ten o'clock, and signal bedtime, lights out, sit down and shut up time.
That is, they did come on at ten o'clock.
Now, ten o'clock heralds the beginning of Nick Mom.
Some person (or committee -- I neither know nor care) at Nick jr decided that children go to bed by ten o'clock, and that the Moms are going to be watching tv. And instead of watching a good murder, or a good-cry movie, these moms, who have their obedient little angels all tucked in -- these women want to watch stand up comedians.
Not me. When I got my teeny tots tucked in (or should I say stuck in? Sometimes it seemed I needed strait jackets and restraints.) I had to finish dishes, fold laundry, things of that sort.
When I did get to watch tv, I wanted something that would offer escape from the day to day being a mom -- not something that would plunge me into other mom's woes. Yes, I have stories, too. Yes, I could make them funny or dramatic. Yes, my kids are more funny/messy/silly/noisy/fussy. Let me tell you... .
But when I'm done being Mom, I want to be someone and somewhere else. Not watching endless reflections of myself on a kiddie channel on the tv.
I don't advocate watching tv as anything but a tool to use with consideration and deliberation when raising children. But when used properly, it is useful.
As a bedtime cool down or as entertainment for a wakeful child, I guess that we, as parents and grandparents, will be turning, turning, turning away from Nick jr at night. Our children may soon find the Disney jr or Sprout characters even more endearing. Then we will no longer have to bother with Nickelodeon at all.
And their Moms can all entertain one another with one-liners all night long.
Friday, October 5, 2012
Discussing "THE" Debate
from Dictionary.com
de·bate (d
-b
t
)
I'm beginning with the formal definition of debate here. Seems like there are many who have no comprehension of what the word means. Sadly,it is supposedly intelligent people who lack this understanding of the definition. Newscasters, reporters, editors.
There was a Presidential Debate the other night.
Not, as the name implies, a debate between presidents. Nor was it a debate about presidents, except tangentially. It is a pre-election debate for presidential candidates. One of the candidates is the current president.
A debate, as you can see from the definition, is basically a discussion -- just like the one we're having here. (Not exactly, since you lack the ability to respond as I'm speaking.)
Discussion of this, of that -- it can even be considered an argument, but that usage has, until now, meant in a formal sense. Not petty kindergarten squabbling.
This is important, at least to me, because there was very little attention paid to or reported on any actual debate topics. The debates had barely started when the media morons began trumpeting "Romney is winning!"
How the Blankety-blank blank does anyone win a discussion?
How do they win a discussion when that discussion has barely begun?
It didn't get any better, folks. I don't know what the debates were about. I don't know what subjects were introduced, what answers either candidate had, or whether either had a solution that was markedly different from the other guys.
As a matter of fact, I don't know if there were any other candidates present or if it was just the two Mr. BigBucks BigMouths running. They were the only two mentioned. There are other candidates, voters. Some of them have great ideas and reasonable policies. Look them up.
I don't know because no one reported on this. No one cared to do straight reporting for those who couldn't/didn't watch the live event.
And if it were a matter of winning -- so what? If winning a discussion means anything at all, I'm pretty sure it does NOT mean winning the election, although Mainstream Media would like you to think it's in the bag now for their guy.
Mitt Romney won the primaries because he could beat Obama -- not on issues, performance, promises, or politics -- just because he breathes higher class air, I suppose. I have yet to figure that logic. See previous blog:http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7971544013891065437#editor/target=post;postID=8130718494167114723
Now he has 'won' a debate -- what does that mean?
It means he talks faster ?
There's the solution to our problems! A slick fast-talker. He must be made to be President! He out-talked the man who was actually working at running the country (possibly badly, but trying) while he was rehearsing his party lines and preening in his mirror.
I'm saving my vote for the election. That's the only WIN that counts.
de·bate (d
-bt)
v. de·bat·ed, de·bat·ing, de·bates
v.intr.
1. To consider something; deliberate.
2. To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.
3. To engage in a formal discussion or argument. See Synonyms atdiscuss.
4. Obsolete To fight or quarrel.
v.tr.
1. To deliberate on; consider.
2. To dispute or argue about.
3. To discuss or argue (a question, for example) formally.
4. Obsolete To fight or argue for or over.
n.
1. A discussion involving opposing points; an argument.
2. Deliberation; consideration: passed the motion with little debate.
3. A formal contest of argumentation in which two opposing teams defend and attack a given proposition.
4. Obsolete Conflict; strife.
I'm beginning with the formal definition of debate here. Seems like there are many who have no comprehension of what the word means. Sadly,it is supposedly intelligent people who lack this understanding of the definition. Newscasters, reporters, editors.
There was a Presidential Debate the other night.
Not, as the name implies, a debate between presidents. Nor was it a debate about presidents, except tangentially. It is a pre-election debate for presidential candidates. One of the candidates is the current president.
A debate, as you can see from the definition, is basically a discussion -- just like the one we're having here. (Not exactly, since you lack the ability to respond as I'm speaking.)
Discussion of this, of that -- it can even be considered an argument, but that usage has, until now, meant in a formal sense. Not petty kindergarten squabbling.
This is important, at least to me, because there was very little attention paid to or reported on any actual debate topics. The debates had barely started when the media morons began trumpeting "Romney is winning!"
How the Blankety-blank blank does anyone win a discussion?
How do they win a discussion when that discussion has barely begun?
It didn't get any better, folks. I don't know what the debates were about. I don't know what subjects were introduced, what answers either candidate had, or whether either had a solution that was markedly different from the other guys.
As a matter of fact, I don't know if there were any other candidates present or if it was just the two Mr. BigBucks BigMouths running. They were the only two mentioned. There are other candidates, voters. Some of them have great ideas and reasonable policies. Look them up.
I don't know because no one reported on this. No one cared to do straight reporting for those who couldn't/didn't watch the live event.
And if it were a matter of winning -- so what? If winning a discussion means anything at all, I'm pretty sure it does NOT mean winning the election, although Mainstream Media would like you to think it's in the bag now for their guy.
Mitt Romney won the primaries because he could beat Obama -- not on issues, performance, promises, or politics -- just because he breathes higher class air, I suppose. I have yet to figure that logic. See previous blog:http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=7971544013891065437#editor/target=post;postID=8130718494167114723
Now he has 'won' a debate -- what does that mean?
It means he talks faster ?
There's the solution to our problems! A slick fast-talker. He must be made to be President! He out-talked the man who was actually working at running the country (possibly badly, but trying) while he was rehearsing his party lines and preening in his mirror.
I'm saving my vote for the election. That's the only WIN that counts.
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
FYI: A caftan is a DRESS
I recently bought myself a caftan. A nice, long, floaty, silky new dress. I haven't really had any new clothes for a long time -- in my size, they are hard to find. Once found, even harder to afford. So I was really happy to find this dress in a catalogue of inexpensive stuff.
The long flowy lines are a favorite of mine, and were before I got so very fat. Probably something to do with growing up during the hippie era. It should, properly, have a sash of scarves or a belt made of lamp pulls or swing chains, I suppose. And feather earrings and headbands, too, I suppose.
I have been choosing to wear mine plain, to enjoy the freedom of something that fits on me, that moves freely, and is slinky soft sliding across my skin.
That decision is going to have to change, though. I'm going to have to wear a belt. If I had any dress shoes, I supposed I'd have to wear them, too. I do have sandals that hurt my hips after twelve steps and my back after a dozen. I'll pass on the headbands -- my head comes with a built in headband, especially on stormy days.
Everyone thinks I am wearing a nightgown. Even the people in my own home think I am wearing a nightgown.
It's a DRESS, people! A fat lady dress, a hippie dress, but still a dress.
The long flowy lines are a favorite of mine, and were before I got so very fat. Probably something to do with growing up during the hippie era. It should, properly, have a sash of scarves or a belt made of lamp pulls or swing chains, I suppose. And feather earrings and headbands, too, I suppose.
I have been choosing to wear mine plain, to enjoy the freedom of something that fits on me, that moves freely, and is slinky soft sliding across my skin.
That decision is going to have to change, though. I'm going to have to wear a belt. If I had any dress shoes, I supposed I'd have to wear them, too. I do have sandals that hurt my hips after twelve steps and my back after a dozen. I'll pass on the headbands -- my head comes with a built in headband, especially on stormy days.
Everyone thinks I am wearing a nightgown. Even the people in my own home think I am wearing a nightgown.
It's a DRESS, people! A fat lady dress, a hippie dress, but still a dress.
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
What is a Cashier?
I've been trying to find work, like most of America. There are jobs out there, but the hoops we must jump through get stranger and stranger. More and more places are accepting online applications only , or online primarily. Translation: your paper in-store application and your written resume are dropped into the trash can as soon as you are out of sight.
It would be nice if there was some standard form or procedures for online applications. Or a way to copy your filled out application to multiple store locations, for places like McDonald's. For now, you have to fill out the same forms over and over again for jobs under the same corporate umbrella. Please, why can't we just CC the applications? Or better yet, why must we select one location only? Why not allow an applicant to apply at multiple stores with one application? Isn't that the sort of thing computerized applications are supposed to do for both employer and hopeful employee? Eliminate repetition and sort by keywords (keywords being the locations)?
Some sites you have to 'create an account' and log in and out of complete with password and your secret identity Really? I just want a job, not an account. And you'll know who I am as soon as I start the application process. My name IS the first thing you'll ask for, isn't it?
Once we get to the application (if we're lucky) we'll be asked what position we'll be applying for.
'Any' is not one of the options.
Do we want to be a BOU? A QST? A CRR? Aren't there any two or four initial jobs? How about a store team member? Well, since I want to work at your store, I want to be a member of the store team. I'm pretty sure that's a minimum requirement.
What kind of team member? Which spoonful of alphabet soup would we like to be? The better sites have a what-is-this drop down menu that will explain what the initials are. Many won't. I always figure that if I don't know what the letters are, I'm probably not qualified for the job.
But wait -- that means these stores no longer use cashiers! No floor service people!
I'm pretty sure I am not going to shop there, with no one to help me find things.
After much searching and thinking I find a couple acronyms that may qualify as cashier: Customer Service Specialist and Customer Relations Representative. There's also Customer Service Representative.' Customer Relations' and 'Customer Service' seem to be ways to pretty up the job title. And everyone is expected to be a specialist -- or at least called one -- these days. It supposedly makes them feel more appreciated. (Please and Thank You are an easier way to achieve that outcome.)
Who cares? Most people looking for cashier's jobs are looking for cashier's jobs. They don't want to be Representatives. They don't want to be specialists. They want to be EMPLOYED.
Online applications are Okay.
If I were an employer, I'd rather do a walk in so I could see who I'm getting and gather important 'first impression' details, but I can see that online will eliminate a lot of personal prejudice eliminations.
But quit with the initials and the fancy sounding names for common positions! I want to come and help your customers find what they want to buy, and I want to help them buy it and get out so they will come back again. And I want a paycheck. Not an empty title made of fancier words.
I want to be a cashier and shelf-stocker and coffee-maker. No Representing Specialist or Specialized representative.
I am a lifelong (although currently unemployed) cashier and proud of it. It is you who are missing a good employee because I don't know what you call me.
.
It would be nice if there was some standard form or procedures for online applications. Or a way to copy your filled out application to multiple store locations, for places like McDonald's. For now, you have to fill out the same forms over and over again for jobs under the same corporate umbrella. Please, why can't we just CC the applications? Or better yet, why must we select one location only? Why not allow an applicant to apply at multiple stores with one application? Isn't that the sort of thing computerized applications are supposed to do for both employer and hopeful employee? Eliminate repetition and sort by keywords (keywords being the locations)?
Some sites you have to 'create an account' and log in and out of complete with password and your secret identity Really? I just want a job, not an account. And you'll know who I am as soon as I start the application process. My name IS the first thing you'll ask for, isn't it?
Once we get to the application (if we're lucky) we'll be asked what position we'll be applying for.
'Any' is not one of the options.
Do we want to be a BOU? A QST? A CRR? Aren't there any two or four initial jobs? How about a store team member? Well, since I want to work at your store, I want to be a member of the store team. I'm pretty sure that's a minimum requirement.
What kind of team member? Which spoonful of alphabet soup would we like to be? The better sites have a what-is-this drop down menu that will explain what the initials are. Many won't. I always figure that if I don't know what the letters are, I'm probably not qualified for the job.
But wait -- that means these stores no longer use cashiers! No floor service people!
I'm pretty sure I am not going to shop there, with no one to help me find things.
After much searching and thinking I find a couple acronyms that may qualify as cashier: Customer Service Specialist and Customer Relations Representative. There's also Customer Service Representative.' Customer Relations' and 'Customer Service' seem to be ways to pretty up the job title. And everyone is expected to be a specialist -- or at least called one -- these days. It supposedly makes them feel more appreciated. (Please and Thank You are an easier way to achieve that outcome.)
Who cares? Most people looking for cashier's jobs are looking for cashier's jobs. They don't want to be Representatives. They don't want to be specialists. They want to be EMPLOYED.
Online applications are Okay.
If I were an employer, I'd rather do a walk in so I could see who I'm getting and gather important 'first impression' details, but I can see that online will eliminate a lot of personal prejudice eliminations.
But quit with the initials and the fancy sounding names for common positions! I want to come and help your customers find what they want to buy, and I want to help them buy it and get out so they will come back again. And I want a paycheck. Not an empty title made of fancier words.
I want to be a cashier and shelf-stocker and coffee-maker. No Representing Specialist or Specialized representative.
I am a lifelong (although currently unemployed) cashier and proud of it. It is you who are missing a good employee because I don't know what you call me.
.
Monday, September 24, 2012
Saturday, September 22, 2012
Lower the numbers; raise the profits
This is the latest strategy of the health industry. Everybody is sick and needs us -- and our products. Whenever the numbers start to decrease, we'll go back into our laboratories and jiggle some statistics around and we can PROVE that a lower number for the same high-number illness is just as bad for you. Therefore, the lower number indicator means you have the higher number illness and you MUST have our medicine to survive.
I've seen this happen with hypertension. It happens every few years. People, I am sorry to tell you this, but no one has normal blood pressure anymore. It is either low or high, according to the professional experts. The parameter for normal has become so narrow as to be nonexistent.
It's been happening about every five years with diabetes. Numbers that were low-normal just a few years ago are now borderline high. Diabetes can now be diagnosed by one high reading in a doctor's office, instead of making a patient undergo that intolerable glucose tolerance test, or instead of tracking the blood sugar levels over an extended period of time.
I read a study yesterday that says that "over 60% of people are obese"
Now, I'm not a scientist, nor have I studied health. Another thing I am not is a math genius. But I vaguely remember things about averages and norms and suchlike. When something is in the 60% range, that, mathematically, means it's pretty much the average, the norm.
Just because someone educated drew a line on a paper and said everyone above this line is sick doesn't mean they are.
There are still doctors who go by the older numbers if their patients aren't in distress. They are few and far between and often work in isolated, rural areas. They don't go along to get along with the insurance companies. They ask "Why?"
When they ask "Why?" they become estranged and ostracized.
They generally don't want to practice that kind of medicine anyway, so they go to where they are over-needed and where they are listened to.
What really bothers me about medicine by the numbers is that it leaves out the element of change. Evolution, or mutation, or whatever you want to call it. Humans began as five-foot tall bipeds who could live thirty years.
Science and scientists have had no problem with embracing our growth and evolution from that standard.
Imagine if some nearsighted observer in the Whatever-ithic era said that anyone over 5'2" was an aberration, and had an illness and needed to be treated for it. Maybe had the afflicted eating weeds known to stunt the growth. Would we still be five foot and old at thirty?
No, we would not. Change and growth are not aberrations. At first as those numbers begin to trickle in, they are an anomaly, and yes, worthy of study. Worthy of tracking. Maybe even worthy of treatment, until it reaches the point where there are more 'anomalies' than there are 'normals'.
Once that point is reached, it is the duty of responsible scientists, researchers, and statisticians to take another look at a new definition of normal, a new average. Not to hit the panic button and start name-calling those they are trying to help.
We're not getting sicker -- we're getting different. We're changing, evolving, mutating.
We are growing.
I've seen this happen with hypertension. It happens every few years. People, I am sorry to tell you this, but no one has normal blood pressure anymore. It is either low or high, according to the professional experts. The parameter for normal has become so narrow as to be nonexistent.
It's been happening about every five years with diabetes. Numbers that were low-normal just a few years ago are now borderline high. Diabetes can now be diagnosed by one high reading in a doctor's office, instead of making a patient undergo that intolerable glucose tolerance test, or instead of tracking the blood sugar levels over an extended period of time.
I read a study yesterday that says that "over 60% of people are obese"
Now, I'm not a scientist, nor have I studied health. Another thing I am not is a math genius. But I vaguely remember things about averages and norms and suchlike. When something is in the 60% range, that, mathematically, means it's pretty much the average, the norm.
Just because someone educated drew a line on a paper and said everyone above this line is sick doesn't mean they are.
There are still doctors who go by the older numbers if their patients aren't in distress. They are few and far between and often work in isolated, rural areas. They don't go along to get along with the insurance companies. They ask "Why?"
When they ask "Why?" they become estranged and ostracized.
They generally don't want to practice that kind of medicine anyway, so they go to where they are over-needed and where they are listened to.
What really bothers me about medicine by the numbers is that it leaves out the element of change. Evolution, or mutation, or whatever you want to call it. Humans began as five-foot tall bipeds who could live thirty years.
Science and scientists have had no problem with embracing our growth and evolution from that standard.
Imagine if some nearsighted observer in the Whatever-ithic era said that anyone over 5'2" was an aberration, and had an illness and needed to be treated for it. Maybe had the afflicted eating weeds known to stunt the growth. Would we still be five foot and old at thirty?
No, we would not. Change and growth are not aberrations. At first as those numbers begin to trickle in, they are an anomaly, and yes, worthy of study. Worthy of tracking. Maybe even worthy of treatment, until it reaches the point where there are more 'anomalies' than there are 'normals'.
Once that point is reached, it is the duty of responsible scientists, researchers, and statisticians to take another look at a new definition of normal, a new average. Not to hit the panic button and start name-calling those they are trying to help.
We're not getting sicker -- we're getting different. We're changing, evolving, mutating.
We are growing.
Adventures in Freeloading: Don't be an Ashley Carter.
Adventures in Freeloading: Don't be an Ashley Carter.: Many years ago, I picked up a couple books at a yard sale. They were "Taproots of Falconhurst" and "Scandal of Falconhurst" by Ashley Carte...
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
What drugs to test?
There's been so much garbage floating around (and some information) about drug testing for welfare benefits. I've been trying to avoid the topic, but the shouters are getting louder all the time. I'd like to get my two cents worth in while someone may still be listening.
First of all, drug testing is not cost effective at this time. Each test will cost more than benefits collected per individual. The counter to this argument is that if testing becomes more common, price will drop. The law of supply and demand and all that. Generally if everybody wants it, it goes to the highest bidder, not the lowest, but then again, if you can sell at a high price to a few or a low price to many, you probably end up with the same amount of other people's money in your pocket.
In this case, it would be (again) government money and it will go into the pockets of the pharmaceutical and other Health Care Bandits already-rich-people's pockets. Be wary of anyone suggesting this argument. It's likely the money will, one way or another go into their pockets.
And then they'll want more.
Next, the "I have to take a drug test to get a job, so you shgould have to take one, too" argument. First heard in the back yard when I was about three, later heard many times in the playground. Haven't you people learned anything yet?
Life ain't fair.
Deal with it.
Also, who says you have to take a job where you need a drug test? If you don't want to take the test, find another job. I've been working for nearly forty years and never had to take a drug test. If I had to, it wouldn't be a problem for me. But if I choose to take it to get the job, that will be on me, not on the rest of the world.
Not on you.
None of your business.
Third, I would like all these Hallelujah Hollerers to ponder what they are calling drugs. Are they going to shout about legal vs, illegal drugs?
These days doesn't that depend largely on where you live? Can a state that has legal medical marijuana, for example, then deny someone benefits because according to federal law marijuana is an illegal substance?
What then about their own laws?
What if a person is taking something for a chronic condition that somehow skews the drug test results?
Should they have to do without because 'the test says so'?
And let's talk about the legal drugs. Here, I can speak from personal experience. My siblings and I went just a little hungry more than once because money was spent on cigarettes. A two pack a day habit could pay for a lot of spaghetti. Heck, it could even buy a few days worth of Baloney, although even that has become increasingly expensive.
Cigarettes kill. They kill the imbiber: slowly, painfully, over many years and many hospital stays and treatments and procedures that raise health care costs for us all.
It kills or creates illness with secondhand smoke. Not to be allowed, and now illegal in public places.
Alcohol kills. It kills the imbibers, slowly, painfully, over many years and many hospital stays and treatments and procedures that raise health care costs for us all.
It kills innocents. Beaten children, casualties of drunk driving, etc. Not to be supported.
Will you test and test and retest for alcohol in the system? Or nicotine? Will you deny children housing benefits because dad can't stay off the bottle? Will you deny them food because Mom needs a beer every hour?
I'm NOT saying that recipients are beer-guzzling, cigarette-smoking drug addicts.
I am an intelligent person and I know that it is only worst-case stories that make the newspapers, television, and politicians' tongues. For everyone that fits that stereotype there are (probably) a half dozen people -- families -- that are quietly going about their business, wondering if they should pay the water bill this month or maybe they had better refill a prescription or have some necessary but expensive medical test done. There are families that have had their food benefits reduced and they are reduced to having to buy canned vegetables now, with possible lead and sodium content, because the cost of fresh produce in groceries is too high and farmer's markets can't accept the food assistance.
What I am saying is drug testing is either too broad or too specific a weapon, and as with most weapons the ones most damaged will be the innocent.
I am saying that if we do away with financial free will -- well, once they start taking away money from one group, what is to stop them from making more and more and more laws to take it away from more and more and more individuals?
They have already started with taxes and have you ever seen this process reverse?
First of all, drug testing is not cost effective at this time. Each test will cost more than benefits collected per individual. The counter to this argument is that if testing becomes more common, price will drop. The law of supply and demand and all that. Generally if everybody wants it, it goes to the highest bidder, not the lowest, but then again, if you can sell at a high price to a few or a low price to many, you probably end up with the same amount of other people's money in your pocket.
In this case, it would be (again) government money and it will go into the pockets of the pharmaceutical and other Health Care Bandits already-rich-people's pockets. Be wary of anyone suggesting this argument. It's likely the money will, one way or another go into their pockets.
And then they'll want more.
Next, the "I have to take a drug test to get a job, so you shgould have to take one, too" argument. First heard in the back yard when I was about three, later heard many times in the playground. Haven't you people learned anything yet?
Life ain't fair.
Deal with it.
Also, who says you have to take a job where you need a drug test? If you don't want to take the test, find another job. I've been working for nearly forty years and never had to take a drug test. If I had to, it wouldn't be a problem for me. But if I choose to take it to get the job, that will be on me, not on the rest of the world.
Not on you.
None of your business.
Third, I would like all these Hallelujah Hollerers to ponder what they are calling drugs. Are they going to shout about legal vs, illegal drugs?
These days doesn't that depend largely on where you live? Can a state that has legal medical marijuana, for example, then deny someone benefits because according to federal law marijuana is an illegal substance?
What then about their own laws?
What if a person is taking something for a chronic condition that somehow skews the drug test results?
Should they have to do without because 'the test says so'?
And let's talk about the legal drugs. Here, I can speak from personal experience. My siblings and I went just a little hungry more than once because money was spent on cigarettes. A two pack a day habit could pay for a lot of spaghetti. Heck, it could even buy a few days worth of Baloney, although even that has become increasingly expensive.
Cigarettes kill. They kill the imbiber: slowly, painfully, over many years and many hospital stays and treatments and procedures that raise health care costs for us all.
It kills or creates illness with secondhand smoke. Not to be allowed, and now illegal in public places.
Alcohol kills. It kills the imbibers, slowly, painfully, over many years and many hospital stays and treatments and procedures that raise health care costs for us all.
It kills innocents. Beaten children, casualties of drunk driving, etc. Not to be supported.
Will you test and test and retest for alcohol in the system? Or nicotine? Will you deny children housing benefits because dad can't stay off the bottle? Will you deny them food because Mom needs a beer every hour?
I'm NOT saying that recipients are beer-guzzling, cigarette-smoking drug addicts.
I am an intelligent person and I know that it is only worst-case stories that make the newspapers, television, and politicians' tongues. For everyone that fits that stereotype there are (probably) a half dozen people -- families -- that are quietly going about their business, wondering if they should pay the water bill this month or maybe they had better refill a prescription or have some necessary but expensive medical test done. There are families that have had their food benefits reduced and they are reduced to having to buy canned vegetables now, with possible lead and sodium content, because the cost of fresh produce in groceries is too high and farmer's markets can't accept the food assistance.
What I am saying is drug testing is either too broad or too specific a weapon, and as with most weapons the ones most damaged will be the innocent.
I am saying that if we do away with financial free will -- well, once they start taking away money from one group, what is to stop them from making more and more and more laws to take it away from more and more and more individuals?
They have already started with taxes and have you ever seen this process reverse?
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Tree Aid: Concert in the Park.
I've had a hard time figuring if when and how to write about this, and I hope I haven't left it until too late to reach an audience. Preferably a large audience with deep pockets, but I don't think I know anyone like that.
The biggest drawback to my whole-hearted support is the venue. The Village of Bethel has reacted with prejudice to other events held in Burke Park. They somehow found it appropriate to blame the misconduct of individuals on the the hosts of the events, and closed down the party. So far as I know, they have also NOT refunded any of the money paid by said hosts. Win/Win for Bethel. They get to keep the money and NOT have the event through no fault of the party providers.
Yes, if you have a party at your home, and people get drunk, you are responsible for the damages, and it is your responsibility to ask the offenders to leave.
But you haven't paid out your money to have the party in your own home. When you pay someone else, the problems become somewhat theirs. If they don't want to handle the problems, and cancel the party, they need to refund the money. You see this on The People's Court every few days.
But, when all is said and done, the issues of Saving the Trees and Property Rights is more important than the venue.
The Concert is to help raise funds for the legal team. Now, there's been some talk about the legal team not doing much for "all" the money that's been raised. First of all, litigating against the government is time consuming and finicky, nit-picking work. It is done behind the desks and in the libraries and through paper after paper in the courthouses. Quite simply, it is not visible.
If you want to see visible proof that the legal team is making a difference, I suggest a drive around Bethel. In Burke Park itself stand several trees that were inoculated, not eviscerated, amputated, mutilated, and finally removed. They are still there, standing tall, helping to make today's event a success.
Drive the long lane past the schools and ball parks. See that line of trees? Every year, those trees burst or bloom into color in the autumn, creating a colorful backdrop for the return to school. This year, and for many years to come, the display of Fall Colors will not be as bright nor as varied as it has been, but there will be Fall Color.
It will be there in part because the legal team for the BethelALB group has so far preserved these trees. Had the USDA and ODA had their way, followed the original plan, there would be few of those background trees still standing.
Drive through Bethel itself. Don't you love the cool shady streets? That is, where they still exist. Compare the north side of town with the south side, where the tress have been coming down. And that's only the infested trees!
Again, had there been no legal defense team, there would be NO shaded street left in Bethel.
Look in your own yard. How many of your trees are maple? Box elder? Birch? Willow? If the Asian Longhorn Beetle is on your neighbor's property, are YOU ready to let the government remove your trees because of your neighbor's problem?
That's what it's all about, folks.
So, go to the concert today or not. That's up to you. You don't need to attend the concert to support the defense fund. You can make a donation through the web page www.bethelalb.com . You can buy any of the many products being sold to increase funding and raise awareness. You can approach a member of the ALB group and hand them cash, saying it's for the Defense of Trees.
The biggest drawback to my whole-hearted support is the venue. The Village of Bethel has reacted with prejudice to other events held in Burke Park. They somehow found it appropriate to blame the misconduct of individuals on the the hosts of the events, and closed down the party. So far as I know, they have also NOT refunded any of the money paid by said hosts. Win/Win for Bethel. They get to keep the money and NOT have the event through no fault of the party providers.
Yes, if you have a party at your home, and people get drunk, you are responsible for the damages, and it is your responsibility to ask the offenders to leave.
But you haven't paid out your money to have the party in your own home. When you pay someone else, the problems become somewhat theirs. If they don't want to handle the problems, and cancel the party, they need to refund the money. You see this on The People's Court every few days.
But, when all is said and done, the issues of Saving the Trees and Property Rights is more important than the venue.
The Concert is to help raise funds for the legal team. Now, there's been some talk about the legal team not doing much for "all" the money that's been raised. First of all, litigating against the government is time consuming and finicky, nit-picking work. It is done behind the desks and in the libraries and through paper after paper in the courthouses. Quite simply, it is not visible.
If you want to see visible proof that the legal team is making a difference, I suggest a drive around Bethel. In Burke Park itself stand several trees that were inoculated, not eviscerated, amputated, mutilated, and finally removed. They are still there, standing tall, helping to make today's event a success.
Drive the long lane past the schools and ball parks. See that line of trees? Every year, those trees burst or bloom into color in the autumn, creating a colorful backdrop for the return to school. This year, and for many years to come, the display of Fall Colors will not be as bright nor as varied as it has been, but there will be Fall Color.
It will be there in part because the legal team for the BethelALB group has so far preserved these trees. Had the USDA and ODA had their way, followed the original plan, there would be few of those background trees still standing.
Drive through Bethel itself. Don't you love the cool shady streets? That is, where they still exist. Compare the north side of town with the south side, where the tress have been coming down. And that's only the infested trees!
Again, had there been no legal defense team, there would be NO shaded street left in Bethel.
Look in your own yard. How many of your trees are maple? Box elder? Birch? Willow? If the Asian Longhorn Beetle is on your neighbor's property, are YOU ready to let the government remove your trees because of your neighbor's problem?
That's what it's all about, folks.
So, go to the concert today or not. That's up to you. You don't need to attend the concert to support the defense fund. You can make a donation through the web page www.bethelalb.com . You can buy any of the many products being sold to increase funding and raise awareness. You can approach a member of the ALB group and hand them cash, saying it's for the Defense of Trees.
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
Sunday, September 9, 2012
Grandparent's Day: Another Hallmark Holiday
Many people think of today, Grandparents Day, as a Hallmark Holiday.
So what if it is? If it's not your cup of tea , don't celebrate it. When you see commercials or reminders, make sure not to think of your grandparents. Even if you remember only unkindness or downright cruelty, remember that every time you remember them, you are honoring this made-up holiday that you don't respect.
Every day, these days, seems to have been set aside by some group or government to commemorate Something-or-other. For millions of people, any day is a special commemoration for the individual because it's their birthday.
Birthdays are (locally) about presents and cakes and gimmes. Breast Cancer Awareness and similar 'events' often call for fundraising in many different ways, although the focus and the honorees may be survivors or contenders or a thousand other _________--ers.
There is nothing wrong with this. Why not?
So, some holidays -- these so-called Hallmark Holidays -- encourage people to buy cards (preferably Hallmark, I suppose) and flowers. Some of these holidays are newer, like Grandparents Day and Sweetest Day. Others have been around for centuries, like Valentine's Day.
What difference does it make?
Many of you complain about the "crass consumerism" of these special days.
If you're crass that's your fault.
If you're a consumer, that's your choice.
So what if it is? If it's not your cup of tea , don't celebrate it. When you see commercials or reminders, make sure not to think of your grandparents. Even if you remember only unkindness or downright cruelty, remember that every time you remember them, you are honoring this made-up holiday that you don't respect.
Every day, these days, seems to have been set aside by some group or government to commemorate Something-or-other. For millions of people, any day is a special commemoration for the individual because it's their birthday.
Birthdays are (locally) about presents and cakes and gimmes. Breast Cancer Awareness and similar 'events' often call for fundraising in many different ways, although the focus and the honorees may be survivors or contenders or a thousand other _________--ers.
There is nothing wrong with this. Why not?
So, some holidays -- these so-called Hallmark Holidays -- encourage people to buy cards (preferably Hallmark, I suppose) and flowers. Some of these holidays are newer, like Grandparents Day and Sweetest Day. Others have been around for centuries, like Valentine's Day.
What difference does it make?
Many of you complain about the "crass consumerism" of these special days.
If you're crass that's your fault.
If you're a consumer, that's your choice.
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Dream it; Do it; Or Quitcher Whining.
My husband is watching yet another reality show about gold mining or fishing or deep sea ice diving (or ice driving) or whatever excuse this bunch of "men" are using as an excuse to not have to live a real life, like the rest of us have to do.
I don't know why he watches these shows. I don't know why anyone watches many of these shows. I think there's supposed to be a "Man against Nature" challenge, and we're all dreaming of ourselves as winning against the impersonal, implacable elements.
But what you hear during these programs is a lot of whining. "Oh we need 35 per yard and we're only getting six. It's all the machine's fault." "Oh no, if we don't find something, I'm going to go to jail for child support. The boss better find us a better place to work; it's his fault this isn't working." And the self sacrificing Valiant "I do this for my kids. So they'll have something. That's why I'm 2000 miles away and unavailable by telephone."
1) Take care of the machine, and don't over work it. It's a machine, dumbass.
2) If you're worried about paying support, get a real job with a regular paycheck in a regular amount.
3) Maybe, just maybe what your kids really need is a father. Ever thought they might like to see you every now and then? They might like to call you in an emergency and have you there in a half hour or two? They might even appreciate a hug or a handshake, depending on age or gender!
One of the gentlemen earlier today was talking on and on about his "Big Dream" of making "THE Big Strike." Then he'll never have to worry again.
We all have Big Dreams. Almost all of us dream of winning the lottery, especially when that old Power Ball gets way up there. We don't abandon our families to chase that dream. We don't spend money they could use for food or heat while we travel to another state to be closer to the winning-ticket-vending places, do we? And blame the machine for not printing us the winning numbers? Or the clerk for not selling us the right numbers? Because we are trying so hard to realize our dream, the failure couldn't be our fault, could it?
(Of course, that could be why we don't get made into TV shows.)
Another Big Dream of mine is to be a published, income-earning writer. If I never become that, though, it's no one's fault but mine. Yeah, there are publishers turning their backs on a good thing, and editors who don't know what they're missing -- but I'm the one who didn't write right enough to attract them. I'm the one who used the wrong approach or followed the wrong path to their doors.
I'm the one who is dreaming big and doing little.
But at least I'm not on national cable television crying and whining and telling the world that I am a big LOSER because someONE or someTHING is stopping me. (I admit to whining about it amongst my colleagues and kinfolk, but that is a little different.)
There's nothing wrong with dreaming of a gold mine, but you take care of your family first. You handle your responsibilities first.
You get a day job, for those you love, and you pursue your dream on your own personal private time.
Or you make yourself famous for being a loser at life.
The choice is yours.
I don't know why he watches these shows. I don't know why anyone watches many of these shows. I think there's supposed to be a "Man against Nature" challenge, and we're all dreaming of ourselves as winning against the impersonal, implacable elements.
But what you hear during these programs is a lot of whining. "Oh we need 35 per yard and we're only getting six. It's all the machine's fault." "Oh no, if we don't find something, I'm going to go to jail for child support. The boss better find us a better place to work; it's his fault this isn't working." And the self sacrificing Valiant "I do this for my kids. So they'll have something. That's why I'm 2000 miles away and unavailable by telephone."
1) Take care of the machine, and don't over work it. It's a machine, dumbass.
2) If you're worried about paying support, get a real job with a regular paycheck in a regular amount.
3) Maybe, just maybe what your kids really need is a father. Ever thought they might like to see you every now and then? They might like to call you in an emergency and have you there in a half hour or two? They might even appreciate a hug or a handshake, depending on age or gender!
One of the gentlemen earlier today was talking on and on about his "Big Dream" of making "THE Big Strike." Then he'll never have to worry again.
We all have Big Dreams. Almost all of us dream of winning the lottery, especially when that old Power Ball gets way up there. We don't abandon our families to chase that dream. We don't spend money they could use for food or heat while we travel to another state to be closer to the winning-ticket-vending places, do we? And blame the machine for not printing us the winning numbers? Or the clerk for not selling us the right numbers? Because we are trying so hard to realize our dream, the failure couldn't be our fault, could it?
(Of course, that could be why we don't get made into TV shows.)
Another Big Dream of mine is to be a published, income-earning writer. If I never become that, though, it's no one's fault but mine. Yeah, there are publishers turning their backs on a good thing, and editors who don't know what they're missing -- but I'm the one who didn't write right enough to attract them. I'm the one who used the wrong approach or followed the wrong path to their doors.
I'm the one who is dreaming big and doing little.
But at least I'm not on national cable television crying and whining and telling the world that I am a big LOSER because someONE or someTHING is stopping me. (I admit to whining about it amongst my colleagues and kinfolk, but that is a little different.)
There's nothing wrong with dreaming of a gold mine, but you take care of your family first. You handle your responsibilities first.
You get a day job, for those you love, and you pursue your dream on your own personal private time.
Or you make yourself famous for being a loser at life.
The choice is yours.
Monday, August 27, 2012
Hailey and the Cricket
Hailey, age 4, has developed a bug phobia. When she sees one, she screams and runs and cries.
I am one mom/grandmom/aunt/sister who has no patience -- and I mean NO PATIENCE -- with that behavior. Unless it's a wasp. But that's one bug, one specific kind of bug, not any and all. Anyway, I have no patience with that. Time to nip it in the bud. (Or in the bug. just to be funny.)
This is somewhat natural for the age, I suppose. I never paid a lot of attention to it when my girls went through it, because of that no patience policy I may have mentioned. The sudden appearance of any critter is startling and evokes an "oh!" or an "Eek!"
I told Hailey's mom I'd like to slap silly whoever taught Hailey to act that way, but that it wouldn't be satisfying to do so, because said person has already attained that state. (Translation: She's silly to start with.)
Hailey sees two kinds of bugs. Flying bugs are flies. Crawling bugs are spiders.
Size or color doesn't matter. Except in the bathtub. Anything black in the bathtub is a cause for panic, has been for about three years. Instant hysteria, climb up the gramma, refuse to put a toe in the water, plain basic panic. (See, I do know the difference.)
Now, there are flies that get in her swimming pool. Spiders, too. She wouldn't get in the pool with flies and spiders, so I got her a net. The first few times I skimmed it for her. Then I showed her. She still refused to have anything to do with the skimming.
So, mean Mammaw took her and bodily stood her in the center of the pool, wrapped Hailey's little fingers around the net handle, and held on to Hailey's arm and made it swish swish, then showed her how to knock the stuff onto the ground.
After that, it was up to Hailey. If she wants to swim, she either has to swim with the bugs or skim them out herself. Meanie Mammaw would sit on the porch and let her holler, whine, scream,whimper. If she wants to swim, she knew what she had to do. It was up to her, old Meanie said.
The next morning she hopped in the pool, skimmed it and showed the spiders to that old meanie.
This visit Hailey started screaming running through the house and even refusing to go potty because there are crickets hopping around in the almost remodeled bathroom. Someone had to go to the bathroom with her, to protect her from the spiders that jump on her.
So, on one trip to the bathroom, we started talking about the bugs. The jumping spiders that are called cricket and that jump in the wall and make noise.
"They make noise."
"They're singing to you."
"SingING?"
"Yes, they are in the wall singing to you."
Then we experimented with walking around in the bathroom, and how the cricket would stop singing whenever we moved too close to the wall, and then start singing when we'd be quiet and be still.
We headed out of the bathroom, and the cricket chirped twice. I said, "It sang 'good-bye for now.' "
Hailey stopped in her tracks and looked at me. "It was singing TO ME?"
I said yes.
Wonder dawned in her face. "Oh, Mammaw. You mean it's nice?"
I am one mom/grandmom/aunt/sister who has no patience -- and I mean NO PATIENCE -- with that behavior. Unless it's a wasp. But that's one bug, one specific kind of bug, not any and all. Anyway, I have no patience with that. Time to nip it in the bud. (Or in the bug. just to be funny.)
This is somewhat natural for the age, I suppose. I never paid a lot of attention to it when my girls went through it, because of that no patience policy I may have mentioned. The sudden appearance of any critter is startling and evokes an "oh!" or an "Eek!"
I told Hailey's mom I'd like to slap silly whoever taught Hailey to act that way, but that it wouldn't be satisfying to do so, because said person has already attained that state. (Translation: She's silly to start with.)
Hailey sees two kinds of bugs. Flying bugs are flies. Crawling bugs are spiders.
Size or color doesn't matter. Except in the bathtub. Anything black in the bathtub is a cause for panic, has been for about three years. Instant hysteria, climb up the gramma, refuse to put a toe in the water, plain basic panic. (See, I do know the difference.)
Now, there are flies that get in her swimming pool. Spiders, too. She wouldn't get in the pool with flies and spiders, so I got her a net. The first few times I skimmed it for her. Then I showed her. She still refused to have anything to do with the skimming.
So, mean Mammaw took her and bodily stood her in the center of the pool, wrapped Hailey's little fingers around the net handle, and held on to Hailey's arm and made it swish swish, then showed her how to knock the stuff onto the ground.
After that, it was up to Hailey. If she wants to swim, she either has to swim with the bugs or skim them out herself. Meanie Mammaw would sit on the porch and let her holler, whine, scream,whimper. If she wants to swim, she knew what she had to do. It was up to her, old Meanie said.
The next morning she hopped in the pool, skimmed it and showed the spiders to that old meanie.
This visit Hailey started screaming running through the house and even refusing to go potty because there are crickets hopping around in the almost remodeled bathroom. Someone had to go to the bathroom with her, to protect her from the spiders that jump on her.
So, on one trip to the bathroom, we started talking about the bugs. The jumping spiders that are called cricket and that jump in the wall and make noise.
"They make noise."
"They're singing to you."
"SingING?"
"Yes, they are in the wall singing to you."
Then we experimented with walking around in the bathroom, and how the cricket would stop singing whenever we moved too close to the wall, and then start singing when we'd be quiet and be still.
We headed out of the bathroom, and the cricket chirped twice. I said, "It sang 'good-bye for now.' "
Hailey stopped in her tracks and looked at me. "It was singing TO ME?"
I said yes.
Wonder dawned in her face. "Oh, Mammaw. You mean it's nice?"
Adventures in Freeloading: Proud to be an American?
Adventures in Freeloading: Proud to be an American?: I've often said that being taken for granted is the most annoying compliment possible. If so, America must be quite flattered and annoyed! ...
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Yard Sellin'
As you may guess, I'm having a yard sale. It's a time when I have to do something, and this is what I can think of. I never do well holding these sales, but I do well enough.
According to guidelines and how-to articles, I do everything wrong.
I don't buy advertisement in every local publication. Why not? Because the reason I'm holding the sale is because I need money. Not a lot, just enough to get by.
I also don't wash, dry, sand, dust, paint and in general pretty up stuff. The reason for that isn't because I'm lazy. It really isn't. The reason depends on what types of item it is that I'm selling.
I have a box of miscellaneous saucers, bowls, and plates. I just put that type of discard into that box, and when I do a yard sale, I haul the box out to the yard. Besides, even if they were sparkling clean and shiny, anyone buying them is going to wash them anyway before using. (I have to admit, that does sound lazy. So I guess that is a factor.) I don't see the use in unpacking, washing, drying, waiting, repacking (god forbid a speck of water get in the box.) I'm probably not going to sell any mismatched dishes or serving sets of one. Those seldom sell. So I'd end up hauling them in and out and back again, over and over, until I can donate them somewhere.
I have some power tools. I could sand off the metal, I can wash off the gas tanks, I can put in a new spark plug. But I can't start the darned things -- part of the reason I'm selling them. I can't tell anyone how they run. Since I can't start them, I don't know if they run, let alone how well.
Also, I've been burned buying prettied-up gear at yard sales. The seller will tell me, "I just replaced the spark plug." He won't say, "but that wasn't causing the problem." But, because it looks good -- and possibly because of the amount of time and work that went into the prettying-up -- he asks for good money for the item.
My stuff may look old and used -- that's because it is. Unapologetically and unabashedly. But no one has to pay me for sanding and scrubbing.
I have some secondhand bicycles. They were secondhand when I got them. I don't know their pedigree or any event history. I do know that no one in my home is riding bicycles. It's been so long since anyone has ridden that the tires have all gone flat. You fix that with air.
My prices are lower for these reasons.I don't ask pretty prices (although I myself would call them nice-looking.) I ask what would I pay for this at a yard sale. Since I'm a frugal buyer, I add a little more. I know normal people will probably pay more than I would. I'm always open to offers, too, and expect that. Older-looking stuff brings out the haggler in people.
Heck, I'll even barter if you have the right stuff. That's what I'm going to do with any money made -- trade it in for different goods. Your goods even have an added benefit -- you came to me. No gas/driving expense or time.
So bring me a sack of taters or a box of eggs -- I'll give you a box of saucers and a rusty Weed-Eater if that's what you want.
We'll both be satisfied that we got the "best deal EVER!."
According to guidelines and how-to articles, I do everything wrong.
I don't buy advertisement in every local publication. Why not? Because the reason I'm holding the sale is because I need money. Not a lot, just enough to get by.
I also don't wash, dry, sand, dust, paint and in general pretty up stuff. The reason for that isn't because I'm lazy. It really isn't. The reason depends on what types of item it is that I'm selling.
I have a box of miscellaneous saucers, bowls, and plates. I just put that type of discard into that box, and when I do a yard sale, I haul the box out to the yard. Besides, even if they were sparkling clean and shiny, anyone buying them is going to wash them anyway before using. (I have to admit, that does sound lazy. So I guess that is a factor.) I don't see the use in unpacking, washing, drying, waiting, repacking (god forbid a speck of water get in the box.) I'm probably not going to sell any mismatched dishes or serving sets of one. Those seldom sell. So I'd end up hauling them in and out and back again, over and over, until I can donate them somewhere.
I have some power tools. I could sand off the metal, I can wash off the gas tanks, I can put in a new spark plug. But I can't start the darned things -- part of the reason I'm selling them. I can't tell anyone how they run. Since I can't start them, I don't know if they run, let alone how well.
Also, I've been burned buying prettied-up gear at yard sales. The seller will tell me, "I just replaced the spark plug." He won't say, "but that wasn't causing the problem." But, because it looks good -- and possibly because of the amount of time and work that went into the prettying-up -- he asks for good money for the item.
My stuff may look old and used -- that's because it is. Unapologetically and unabashedly. But no one has to pay me for sanding and scrubbing.
I have some secondhand bicycles. They were secondhand when I got them. I don't know their pedigree or any event history. I do know that no one in my home is riding bicycles. It's been so long since anyone has ridden that the tires have all gone flat. You fix that with air.
My prices are lower for these reasons.I don't ask pretty prices (although I myself would call them nice-looking.) I ask what would I pay for this at a yard sale. Since I'm a frugal buyer, I add a little more. I know normal people will probably pay more than I would. I'm always open to offers, too, and expect that. Older-looking stuff brings out the haggler in people.
Heck, I'll even barter if you have the right stuff. That's what I'm going to do with any money made -- trade it in for different goods. Your goods even have an added benefit -- you came to me. No gas/driving expense or time.
So bring me a sack of taters or a box of eggs -- I'll give you a box of saucers and a rusty Weed-Eater if that's what you want.
We'll both be satisfied that we got the "best deal EVER!."
Friday, August 24, 2012
Adventures in Freeloading: I win, I win, I win.
Adventures in Freeloading: I win, I win, I win.: Thinking about competition today. What are we competing for? What is most important in this world, or the next? Everyone has a different ...
Monday, August 20, 2012
Back to the schoolroom
It's back to school time, and the news is out. All over the broadcasts are good schools, bad schools, charter schools, school levies, buses, teachers, backpack programs, and a lot of discussions. Most of the discussions are about costs.
Anyone who thinks free public schools are free hasn't gone to one for more than two generations. When I was a child, we had school fees every year to pay for workbooks to go along with the textbooks. These workbooks were not and are not optional. There are more programs today than there used to be to help parents pay for them, but that's not the point.
The point is that free schools aren't free.
There's been discussion, too, about the school year. About the whole school year concept. The September-to-May concept is fairly recent . School, in my lifetimes, started after Labor Day and ended by Memorial Day. Many things have happened to change that -- standardized Monday holidays, for one thing. Memorial Day isn't the 30th of May anymore.
The school year somehow changed into a certain number of days in school instead of a season of education. I have a lot to say about this ridiculous concept. My daughter had to make up absent days one year by going to school during her Christmas vacation. She didn't have to learn anything -- she wasn't making up tests, or reviewing chapters she missed due to her injury. She just had to have her butt in a seat at the school building, so they could have the requisite numbers of students on the minimum number of days.
Education is not the goal of school. Attendance is.
Some of this -- most of it -- is due to funding formulas. #of students, multiplied by # of days = $$$. Never mind the learning. No child can learn in 52 days, they absolutely need to have 53 days. It's the law.
It's the law.
Schooling should never have been made a matter of law.
Once it was a matter of law, it should have remained a matter of local law.
Not state.
Not Federal.
Not run by dollar dictators who want only a return on their investment.
To get that return, they turned to athletics. The games children play at recess for fun have become big business and are the secondary purpose of having school.
Again, if you think school athletics are about equal opportunity, you haven't been living in the real world. All sorts of personal gear and equipment have to be purchased. One year it was name brand shoes decided by the coach, because they were best and safest. Problem was, the shoes cost more than the monthly electric bill. Without the proper shoes, the students aren't allowed to play.
Doesn't sound very free or equal to me,and kids have always been pretty good at playing games without help. Just because the town council can get a cut of the gate and the state can run the concessions doesn't seem to me a sound educational platform.
It's back to school time.
At least we don't have to worry (too much) about what's required of us or our children. All we have to do is make sure they get there (Attendance) and encourage them to play games (Athletics.)
That's what school is all about.
Anyone who thinks free public schools are free hasn't gone to one for more than two generations. When I was a child, we had school fees every year to pay for workbooks to go along with the textbooks. These workbooks were not and are not optional. There are more programs today than there used to be to help parents pay for them, but that's not the point.
The point is that free schools aren't free.
There's been discussion, too, about the school year. About the whole school year concept. The September-to-May concept is fairly recent . School, in my lifetimes, started after Labor Day and ended by Memorial Day. Many things have happened to change that -- standardized Monday holidays, for one thing. Memorial Day isn't the 30th of May anymore.
The school year somehow changed into a certain number of days in school instead of a season of education. I have a lot to say about this ridiculous concept. My daughter had to make up absent days one year by going to school during her Christmas vacation. She didn't have to learn anything -- she wasn't making up tests, or reviewing chapters she missed due to her injury. She just had to have her butt in a seat at the school building, so they could have the requisite numbers of students on the minimum number of days.
Education is not the goal of school. Attendance is.
Some of this -- most of it -- is due to funding formulas. #of students, multiplied by # of days = $$$. Never mind the learning. No child can learn in 52 days, they absolutely need to have 53 days. It's the law.
It's the law.
Schooling should never have been made a matter of law.
Once it was a matter of law, it should have remained a matter of local law.
Not state.
Not Federal.
Not run by dollar dictators who want only a return on their investment.
To get that return, they turned to athletics. The games children play at recess for fun have become big business and are the secondary purpose of having school.
Again, if you think school athletics are about equal opportunity, you haven't been living in the real world. All sorts of personal gear and equipment have to be purchased. One year it was name brand shoes decided by the coach, because they were best and safest. Problem was, the shoes cost more than the monthly electric bill. Without the proper shoes, the students aren't allowed to play.
Doesn't sound very free or equal to me,and kids have always been pretty good at playing games without help. Just because the town council can get a cut of the gate and the state can run the concessions doesn't seem to me a sound educational platform.
It's back to school time.
At least we don't have to worry (too much) about what's required of us or our children. All we have to do is make sure they get there (Attendance) and encourage them to play games (Athletics.)
That's what school is all about.
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Writing a Blog
I like writing a blog. (I must like it I have two)I like the informal language and that I can devote as many or as few words as I wish to my chosen topic. I get to choose the topics, too. That's pretty neat.
Blogging, however, has infected my other writing. Once used to the chatty style, it can be difficult to switch to other voices. It -- that casuality -- sneaks into everything I write. Informational articles, reflective essays, editorials, even personal letters and journal entries have all begun to sound like a xhat.
I'm not complaining, just noting. I'm a writer, and blogging has given me a chance to do just that for a larger audience than just family and friends. It's not the only thing I can write, or the only way to write. I have many voices, depending on what I want to communicate.
It's just funny how the 'blog voice' keeps creeping in. It's like the 'y'know's and 'like's that are really annoying when you're waiting for the person to get to the meat of the story being told. It takes attention and practice and active correction to change that speech pattern.
Another good thing is that writing a blog is a way to learn deadlines . I try to -post at least twice a week on this blog. I'm happy if I can do three times a week, but I wonder if that gives my readers enough time to savor whatever I've written. I may be giving them too much credit. Nah, my readers are all intelligent people and many are writers themselves. My other blog (www.areyoumycousins.wordpress.com)I update once a week. It is more of a family oriented/ genealogy / history theme. Because I find those things interesting.
Anyway, I love writing. I love the chance to write on a regular, if self-imposed, basis. I love what I can learn about writing through the actual act of writing.I love what I can learn from my readers.
Heck, I just love to write and I am glad to have an outlet for my genius.
Thanks for letting me share ME with YOU.
Blogging, however, has infected my other writing. Once used to the chatty style, it can be difficult to switch to other voices. It -- that casuality -- sneaks into everything I write. Informational articles, reflective essays, editorials, even personal letters and journal entries have all begun to sound like a xhat.
I'm not complaining, just noting. I'm a writer, and blogging has given me a chance to do just that for a larger audience than just family and friends. It's not the only thing I can write, or the only way to write. I have many voices, depending on what I want to communicate.
It's just funny how the 'blog voice' keeps creeping in. It's like the 'y'know's and 'like's that are really annoying when you're waiting for the person to get to the meat of the story being told. It takes attention and practice and active correction to change that speech pattern.
Another good thing is that writing a blog is a way to learn deadlines . I try to -post at least twice a week on this blog. I'm happy if I can do three times a week, but I wonder if that gives my readers enough time to savor whatever I've written. I may be giving them too much credit. Nah, my readers are all intelligent people and many are writers themselves. My other blog (www.areyoumycousins.wordpress.com)I update once a week. It is more of a family oriented/ genealogy / history theme. Because I find those things interesting.
Anyway, I love writing. I love the chance to write on a regular, if self-imposed, basis. I love what I can learn about writing through the actual act of writing.I love what I can learn from my readers.
Heck, I just love to write and I am glad to have an outlet for my genius.
Thanks for letting me share ME with YOU.
Saturday, August 11, 2012
Soothing Saturday.
What a day this should be. It's cooled off outside -- I'm actually wearing a sweater. The sun is shining, the sky is blue, with fluffy white clouds. There's food in the fridge and the cabinets, and there's a busy little girl with her colors sprawled on my living room floor. She's the sunshine inside the house.
It's been a busy week, and a fairly normal one, I'd guess. A mixture of good and bad, a look at some beginnings and some endings. Scary stuff sometimes, those glimpses into the future.
The most fabulous and the most frightening was Hailey's birthday party. She turned 4, and such a big girl. She had an "Urel' (Ariel) cake, with Sponge Bob and 'Packrit' added to it -- don't tell Disney, they'll sue us. She had a lot of grown up family there, and the one cousin that we can provide her. He's nearly twice her age at this point. She has another cousin, on the other side, but she's too little as yet for celebrating at a party. Hailey would have been glad to see her, though. She fell in love with that baby while they stayed at Hailey's house.Hailey is definitely wishing for a sibling. (What does a 4 year old know?)
Tam had thoughtfully had the party at a facility so her dad could attend. The August weather, in a good year, is hard for him to take. This year, with all the heat and humidity, it's been impossible.
And it very nearly killed him. Not from attending the party, but by leaving. We opened the door to the parking lot, and the parking lot had been baking in the sun all day and especially all evening while we were inside. It took his breath away.
I am being very literal, and I am not exaggerating. Sheer willpower kept that man on his feet to the car and once in the car, barking like a seal, he used his rescue inhaler and gestured for me to just DRIVE! I wanted to drive to the closest hospital, but he just kept waving for me to drive -- get the air moving, that's what he wanted.
It worked. After a couple miles, we pulled over and I hooked him up to his portable oxygen tank and he made it home and hasn't had too much trouble since, but it was a frightening portent of things to come.
A sad commentary on things that are, as well. We had been talking a bit about taking a trip in September or October. A weekend trip, one day going, one day coming back. We had discussed who might go with us (as alternate drivers), how he could use his nebulizer on the road, costs, etc. The nebulizer, we thought, would be the big issue.
It's not. He may have saved his travels "Later" until they've become "Too late." But that's okay.
I'll enjoy him as he is -- that's the best way to love anyone. I'll enjoy him, and our daughters, and our granddaughter and any siblings-for-her that will someday make an appearance.
To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose... .
A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance...
a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
For now we choose to laugh, and dance (metaphorically speaking), and we both speak and keep silence together. The time will come for the other stuff, but for now --
For now, we DANCE.
Monday, August 6, 2012
Listen to the Folks.
The FDA has approved two new drugs for weight loss. They are supposed to work well with diet and exercise. Of course, this is NOT for the morbidly obese. If they are that fat, they had better have bariatric surgery before doing anything. (Ka-ching, Ka-ching! Anyone else hear that?)
Now, I had a couple of different reactions to this. According to my doctors and the doctors of everyone I know, the way to lose weight is "diet and exercise."Nothing else. Oh, if you have metabolism issues, they'll prescribe stuff to help with those, but you want to lose weight -- Diet and exercise. And if you don't lose weight, you aren't dieting or exercising. Never mind Tuesday's heat stroke or Friday's collapse -- if you aren't losing weight, you aren't exercising or dieting. Not even if your stomach is complaining loudly because of its emptiness.
There's a lot of things going on in obesity studies and research, and a lot of it is good. A drug or two that will kick start a dieter over a plateau isn't a bad thing. Bariatric surgery for someone who eats until too full is a good thing. It's not going to help much with someone who doesn't eat all that much to start with. Or a grazer.
Until doctors and nutritionists are able to look beyond this whole "Diet and Exercise" combo, they are not going to make any great inroads in battling the obesity "epidemic'.
The old folks had it right. Some folks are born to be fat. It's in their genes. No, that's not just an excuse. (There have been some intriguing research and discoveries into fat genes.) It's not a stereotype, either. Lately research is finding all sorts of things more prevalent among certain ethnicities, even when environment is not a factor.
Treat the genetic type, and how that body works, and you'll be abler to manage the weight.
One concern that's twinned with the obesity concern is that it is the cause or related to diabetes. There is a connection, but the scientists are so wrapped up in finding a cure (or ongoing treatments; much more profitable) that they are ignoring, once again, folk wisdom.
Diabetes is caused by lack of insulin, which the body (is supposed to) produce(s) in the pancreas. That has been the scientific wisdom for just shy of a century.
What if that's wrong?
What if, instead of producing insulin, the pancreas -- still very much a mystery organ -- stores it? What if, like the ovaries, the human body comes with a measured amount of insulin or the base ingredients to turn (stuff) into insulin? What if our modern refined diet is just using up a lifetime supply in a few years?
The old folk used to tell kids not to eat so many sweets or they'd end up with sugar in their blood.
Science came along and said that's silly, that's not how it works. So everyone eats refined sugars and uses up all their insulin and -- voila -- sugar in their blood at a young age.
Insulin is playing a role in the diet/exercise dilemma as well. No one is sure exactly how that all factors together, but they've discovered things like insulin resistance and glucose intolerance and gluco-this and glycemic-that. If they look, they'll probably be able to relate that to ethnic origins -- genetics.
If they look.
But they won't, or very few will. They'll continue to preach "Diet and Exercise" until they've killed all the people they haven't operated on. And maybe even those. Much easier to follow the party line, blame the patient, than take time to know the patient and actually help them.
The old folks had it right all along.
As usual.
That family is usually fat, and if you eat too much sugar while you're young, you'll end up with sugar in your blood.
Listen to your parents and grandparents, if it's only in your memory. They knew your body and background before doctors knew anything.
Now, I had a couple of different reactions to this. According to my doctors and the doctors of everyone I know, the way to lose weight is "diet and exercise."Nothing else. Oh, if you have metabolism issues, they'll prescribe stuff to help with those, but you want to lose weight -- Diet and exercise. And if you don't lose weight, you aren't dieting or exercising. Never mind Tuesday's heat stroke or Friday's collapse -- if you aren't losing weight, you aren't exercising or dieting. Not even if your stomach is complaining loudly because of its emptiness.
There's a lot of things going on in obesity studies and research, and a lot of it is good. A drug or two that will kick start a dieter over a plateau isn't a bad thing. Bariatric surgery for someone who eats until too full is a good thing. It's not going to help much with someone who doesn't eat all that much to start with. Or a grazer.
Until doctors and nutritionists are able to look beyond this whole "Diet and Exercise" combo, they are not going to make any great inroads in battling the obesity "epidemic'.
The old folks had it right. Some folks are born to be fat. It's in their genes. No, that's not just an excuse. (There have been some intriguing research and discoveries into fat genes.) It's not a stereotype, either. Lately research is finding all sorts of things more prevalent among certain ethnicities, even when environment is not a factor.
Treat the genetic type, and how that body works, and you'll be abler to manage the weight.
One concern that's twinned with the obesity concern is that it is the cause or related to diabetes. There is a connection, but the scientists are so wrapped up in finding a cure (or ongoing treatments; much more profitable) that they are ignoring, once again, folk wisdom.
Diabetes is caused by lack of insulin, which the body (is supposed to) produce(s) in the pancreas. That has been the scientific wisdom for just shy of a century.
What if that's wrong?
What if, instead of producing insulin, the pancreas -- still very much a mystery organ -- stores it? What if, like the ovaries, the human body comes with a measured amount of insulin or the base ingredients to turn (stuff) into insulin? What if our modern refined diet is just using up a lifetime supply in a few years?
The old folk used to tell kids not to eat so many sweets or they'd end up with sugar in their blood.
Science came along and said that's silly, that's not how it works. So everyone eats refined sugars and uses up all their insulin and -- voila -- sugar in their blood at a young age.
Insulin is playing a role in the diet/exercise dilemma as well. No one is sure exactly how that all factors together, but they've discovered things like insulin resistance and glucose intolerance and gluco-this and glycemic-that. If they look, they'll probably be able to relate that to ethnic origins -- genetics.
If they look.
But they won't, or very few will. They'll continue to preach "Diet and Exercise" until they've killed all the people they haven't operated on. And maybe even those. Much easier to follow the party line, blame the patient, than take time to know the patient and actually help them.
The old folks had it right all along.
As usual.
That family is usually fat, and if you eat too much sugar while you're young, you'll end up with sugar in your blood.
Listen to your parents and grandparents, if it's only in your memory. They knew your body and background before doctors knew anything.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
What I Wanna Do
What I really want to do is what everyone (well, working everyone) really wants -- my own business. I could have a nice little niche business -- but it would work so much better (Translation: make more money, interest more people) if I lived somewhere else.
Not that I couldn't live here and commute, as so many, many people do, it's just that IF I'm going to have my own business, I'd expect to have it on my own terms.
Ideal terms would be to have a big ol' house, and the business could be in the front rooms. I'd have a big picture window for displays and for light inside, and inside there would be dimmer areas, for computer work and desk work and things of that nature.
My business is a "Writers World". For profit and pleasure, I'd sell office supplies -- papers, inks, pens, pencils, posterboards. For pleasure, I'd have Book Nooks and Reading Rooms, with coffee and maybe vending machine type snacks. I'd like to offer sandwiches and stuff, but that would be too much starting out. There are necessarily more complicated health and safety standards when selling made to order foods. So, I'd start out with packaged foods. People could pull up a chair, curl up on a couch with any Recycled book from the shelves, tables, or baskets.
Of course, they'll be able to buy the books if they want to. Or trade them. I expect the books to be the real draw for most of my customers.
I'll also have a 'business center' for people who want to work on computers, or draw at desks. Maybe a few phones -- probably not pay phones as I once envisioned -- for those who need to use a public phone of some sort. There are so few, and still a need for them for a few people. It wouldn't be difficult to include a few within an established business. It would be good for those needing this service to have a place to sit and a desk or table top where they could spread out their paperwork and write down their notes from the calls.
I'd have a children's section, and mats, and maybe a play area -- I'd have to check local laws on that. I won't be a babysitter at my business, but I love having kids around as long as someone else is responsible for them. I'd have books for them, and easels and crayons and miscellaneous creative stuff, because kids should have fun. I'd probably need "Not Responsible" signs, and maybe waivers, and would still need an exorbitant amount of liability insurance anyway. (Or I could 'take my chances'. That's usually not a good business option.)
And I'd have a selling section -- I'd sell handmade stuff and arts&crafts and self-published books and even secondhand stuff. I'd have to be careful there, because I could turn anyplace into a Hoarder's Haven with secondhand stuff. I hate throwing usable things away. I'd sell this stuff for a percentage, so I'd probably have a decent chance of making money -- or traffic -- with that aspect.
Lacking the big front rooms, I could rent a storefront. There are plenty of storefronts empty here in town, but they aren't for rent, and, at this time, I couldn't afford them. Doesn't stop me from looking and wanting and wishing, though. That blue house would be perfect. One window for books, baskets, and chairs, the other window for the best of the crafts and clothing.
That's what I ultimately would like to do.
For now, I would be happy to find a flea market close to home where I could sell my recycled books and 'stuff'. They are all too far away and possibly too expensive, especially after adding in gas and food and drink.
But that's what I want to do, and how I think I could start. Would you like to be my customer? I'd love to have you as one.
Not that I couldn't live here and commute, as so many, many people do, it's just that IF I'm going to have my own business, I'd expect to have it on my own terms.
Ideal terms would be to have a big ol' house, and the business could be in the front rooms. I'd have a big picture window for displays and for light inside, and inside there would be dimmer areas, for computer work and desk work and things of that nature.
My business is a "Writers World". For profit and pleasure, I'd sell office supplies -- papers, inks, pens, pencils, posterboards. For pleasure, I'd have Book Nooks and Reading Rooms, with coffee and maybe vending machine type snacks. I'd like to offer sandwiches and stuff, but that would be too much starting out. There are necessarily more complicated health and safety standards when selling made to order foods. So, I'd start out with packaged foods. People could pull up a chair, curl up on a couch with any Recycled book from the shelves, tables, or baskets.
Of course, they'll be able to buy the books if they want to. Or trade them. I expect the books to be the real draw for most of my customers.
I'll also have a 'business center' for people who want to work on computers, or draw at desks. Maybe a few phones -- probably not pay phones as I once envisioned -- for those who need to use a public phone of some sort. There are so few, and still a need for them for a few people. It wouldn't be difficult to include a few within an established business. It would be good for those needing this service to have a place to sit and a desk or table top where they could spread out their paperwork and write down their notes from the calls.
I'd have a children's section, and mats, and maybe a play area -- I'd have to check local laws on that. I won't be a babysitter at my business, but I love having kids around as long as someone else is responsible for them. I'd have books for them, and easels and crayons and miscellaneous creative stuff, because kids should have fun. I'd probably need "Not Responsible" signs, and maybe waivers, and would still need an exorbitant amount of liability insurance anyway. (Or I could 'take my chances'. That's usually not a good business option.)
And I'd have a selling section -- I'd sell handmade stuff and arts&crafts and self-published books and even secondhand stuff. I'd have to be careful there, because I could turn anyplace into a Hoarder's Haven with secondhand stuff. I hate throwing usable things away. I'd sell this stuff for a percentage, so I'd probably have a decent chance of making money -- or traffic -- with that aspect.
Lacking the big front rooms, I could rent a storefront. There are plenty of storefronts empty here in town, but they aren't for rent, and, at this time, I couldn't afford them. Doesn't stop me from looking and wanting and wishing, though. That blue house would be perfect. One window for books, baskets, and chairs, the other window for the best of the crafts and clothing.
That's what I ultimately would like to do.
For now, I would be happy to find a flea market close to home where I could sell my recycled books and 'stuff'. They are all too far away and possibly too expensive, especially after adding in gas and food and drink.
But that's what I want to do, and how I think I could start. Would you like to be my customer? I'd love to have you as one.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
worth working ?
Today the local news is filled with a long wrap-around line of people hoping to work at the new Jungle Jim's that is opening in September. People are so hungry for jobs that they are waiting in summer heat -- and this summer's heat is especially brutal-- for hours. Jungle Jim's is looking for 300 to 400 people, from inexperienced to specialist. They've probably had about 3000 people turn out. That is my estimate from looking at photos and news coverage.
I've been looking for work, too, but that's a more troublesome proposition. If I start work, even just five or ten hours a week, my husband's spenddown for MedicAid will go up, by whatever amount of money I make. Probably the gross amount, not net, but I'm unsure about that. We'll also lose out food assistance, but that's not a deal breaker for just the two of us. But what if we still had children to nourish so they'll grow, and pay attention in school.
And I won't be at home to care for him. He doesn't need nursing or tending, but he can't stand at a stove -- or even a microwave -- long enough to cook for himself. So would he have to go without any time that I work at or through meal time? What if something were to go wrong? What if the electric goes out and he can't use his nebulizer or his oxygen? How will anyone know to help him? How would they help him? What if a water line breaks? He doesn't have the strength or the agility to shut off the water under the sink behind the jars and brushes.
But I still look for work -- I'm pretty sure it's better than not working. Better for us both in terms of community and personal sanity. I know this isolated life makes me edgy, cross, crabby, and mean-as-hell. So, if there's a local job I hear about, I try for it. In a year and a half, I've had two interviews. For the others (about a dozen) I don't make the cut. I'm not sure if it's the beauty check I fail or the background check. Not that it matters.
But I wonder, as I fill in yet another application, if I should get beyond the interview stage, will the job eventually won be worth it. Or will it cost me more -- in more ways -- than staying at home does?
I don't know, but I would like to have the chance to find out.
I've been looking for work, too, but that's a more troublesome proposition. If I start work, even just five or ten hours a week, my husband's spenddown for MedicAid will go up, by whatever amount of money I make. Probably the gross amount, not net, but I'm unsure about that. We'll also lose out food assistance, but that's not a deal breaker for just the two of us. But what if we still had children to nourish so they'll grow, and pay attention in school.
And I won't be at home to care for him. He doesn't need nursing or tending, but he can't stand at a stove -- or even a microwave -- long enough to cook for himself. So would he have to go without any time that I work at or through meal time? What if something were to go wrong? What if the electric goes out and he can't use his nebulizer or his oxygen? How will anyone know to help him? How would they help him? What if a water line breaks? He doesn't have the strength or the agility to shut off the water under the sink behind the jars and brushes.
But I still look for work -- I'm pretty sure it's better than not working. Better for us both in terms of community and personal sanity. I know this isolated life makes me edgy, cross, crabby, and mean-as-hell. So, if there's a local job I hear about, I try for it. In a year and a half, I've had two interviews. For the others (about a dozen) I don't make the cut. I'm not sure if it's the beauty check I fail or the background check. Not that it matters.
But I wonder, as I fill in yet another application, if I should get beyond the interview stage, will the job eventually won be worth it. Or will it cost me more -- in more ways -- than staying at home does?
I don't know, but I would like to have the chance to find out.
Saturday, July 28, 2012
Police shut down concert at Burke Park | CommunityPress.com | cincinnati.com
If you read the article, please read the comments also. That's what I really want to share.
Police shut down concert at Burke Park | CommunityPress.com | cincinnati.com
Police shut down concert at Burke Park | CommunityPress.com | cincinnati.com
Who's Hungry Now?
I am getting sick and tired -- and mad -- over the defamatory snide comments and patches and things about food stamps. That includes, big time, the media slanders.
First, some facts.
There are more people than ever needing help,.
These are people who have been working for 25, 30, 50 years and they have never -- NEVER -- had to ask or look for any help whatsoever for daily living. They have been paying into the system for years, even decades, and taking nothing out of it.
They have been living on savings and retirement funds and are 'just now' running out of money.
Or they are just now entering the work force and the unemployment line -- returning soldiers come to mind.
The 'advertisements' for food assistance is NOT advertising. They are Public Service Announcements, meant to inform those who don't know where to begin of a place to start. If it's your son returning to his wife and children from overseas, should they go hungry out of ignorance? If it's your grandparent forced into early unrecompensed retirement, must they starve because they bought things when they were working? Your gramma should stand on the street corner selling her Ipod you gave her for Christmas last year because you don't think a person getting assistance should have 'things'?
I thought not.
These newly broke bought and paid for their stuff when they were working, just like the SuperSnobs have done. When you lose your job or get sick for a year, will you be selling your car? Your house? Your electronics that depreciate faster than an automobile?
I think not.
So quit dumping on people for having things. You don't know where or how they got them, or why. Could have been gifts, for all you know.Things could even not work properly but it's all they have.
You may see they have something. It may be something that you don't. You probably have something that they don't.
Big effing deal. That's life.
Too many people are going hungry, are letting their children go hungry, because of ignorance.
The ignorance of the self-important self-approving.
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Chaos in Colorado & the Right to Know
Last week, there was a shooting in Colorado. No doubt everyone has heard of it by now, and they've heard misleading quotes, incomplete assessments, rumors, outright lies, and everywhere the young man's name all over the news. We've seen it and him and he knows he's going down in the history books, so now he's going to act or claim crazy. (As if a sane person would shoot up a theater and booby trap his own home.)
I'm not naming him. There are enough people and mechanisms doing that, and that is what this young man is eating up. He's FAMOUS! He's INFAMOUS! He's on the Front Page, he's the LEAD Story, he's on YouTube, he's shared and reshared on Facebook and other social media.
Everyone knows his name. He can sit back and wallow now. And that's exactly what he's going to do.
To most of the public, especially the politically attuned, the Horrible Happening is a new reason to scream and open debates about gun control. It is somehow the fault of the guns that they were amassed and misused in this fashion.
To me, the issue should be about the media. The Fourth Estate.
We have freedom of the press. That's a good and wonderful thing.
Until something like this happens.
The media is helpful when there is a question of locating a perpetrator or suspect. The media is at its best when reporting events as they unfold. The media is a force to be reckoned with when someone in the public eye is trying to hide secrets. The media tells us we have a right to know, and they will inform us. They can keep us informed of all rumors and speculations as long as they say they are rumors and speculation. Reporting of the booby traps may have saved lives.
But what, exactly, do we have a right to know about? What is needful and/or entertaining and informative? Do we need to know, on a national level, speculation and gossip?
Is it right to be shoving their microphones into the faces of families waiting for someone to come outside from the scene of a massacre? Is it our right to know when they finally accept the unbelievable unacceptable fact that their loved one is not coming away from the scene?
Is it our right to know what a mother thinks when her son has admitted to this type of horror? Has she no right to the privacy of thought?
Do we have a right to know about every clipped toenail or late bedwetting incident ever in the guilty person's history?
Do we have the right to decide -- believe -- he's guilty before there is any sort of due process?
Does the media have the right to claim our right to know gives them the right to lionize punks and publicity hogs?
There are no easy answers, which is why the problems have been unresolved for so many years. There is a right to know, but who can or should decide what anyone else has the right to know? Is there, or should there be, a time that it's right to know.
Difficult questions that need to be looked at and discussed and worked on as intently as gun control or defining insanity. It's no wonder that policing authorities try to conceal identities and evidence from the press. Irresponsible reporting compromises deaf, dumb, and blind justice.
And then, there are young men like this "joker" who do the deed, then, when the media is fully present, walks up to the police and says "Yeah, I did it," then spends the next three days -- or three months, three years, three decades -- smirking and preening and posing for the cameras.
He has the right to know how important he is
I'm not naming him. There are enough people and mechanisms doing that, and that is what this young man is eating up. He's FAMOUS! He's INFAMOUS! He's on the Front Page, he's the LEAD Story, he's on YouTube, he's shared and reshared on Facebook and other social media.
Everyone knows his name. He can sit back and wallow now. And that's exactly what he's going to do.
To most of the public, especially the politically attuned, the Horrible Happening is a new reason to scream and open debates about gun control. It is somehow the fault of the guns that they were amassed and misused in this fashion.
To me, the issue should be about the media. The Fourth Estate.
We have freedom of the press. That's a good and wonderful thing.
Until something like this happens.
The media is helpful when there is a question of locating a perpetrator or suspect. The media is at its best when reporting events as they unfold. The media is a force to be reckoned with when someone in the public eye is trying to hide secrets. The media tells us we have a right to know, and they will inform us. They can keep us informed of all rumors and speculations as long as they say they are rumors and speculation. Reporting of the booby traps may have saved lives.
But what, exactly, do we have a right to know about? What is needful and/or entertaining and informative? Do we need to know, on a national level, speculation and gossip?
Is it right to be shoving their microphones into the faces of families waiting for someone to come outside from the scene of a massacre? Is it our right to know when they finally accept the unbelievable unacceptable fact that their loved one is not coming away from the scene?
Is it our right to know what a mother thinks when her son has admitted to this type of horror? Has she no right to the privacy of thought?
Do we have a right to know about every clipped toenail or late bedwetting incident ever in the guilty person's history?
Do we have the right to decide -- believe -- he's guilty before there is any sort of due process?
Does the media have the right to claim our right to know gives them the right to lionize punks and publicity hogs?
There are no easy answers, which is why the problems have been unresolved for so many years. There is a right to know, but who can or should decide what anyone else has the right to know? Is there, or should there be, a time that it's right to know.
Difficult questions that need to be looked at and discussed and worked on as intently as gun control or defining insanity. It's no wonder that policing authorities try to conceal identities and evidence from the press. Irresponsible reporting compromises deaf, dumb, and blind justice.
And then, there are young men like this "joker" who do the deed, then, when the media is fully present, walks up to the police and says "Yeah, I did it," then spends the next three days -- or three months, three years, three decades -- smirking and preening and posing for the cameras.
He has the right to know how important he is
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Summer Family Fun.
Today, my sisters are going to a family reunion. It will be the first Schmidt family reunion since my dad died. (I think. I could be wrong about that.) It will be odd to have his family there and he is gone, but life is a winnowing out process, and the sad truth is he wasn't the first to go.
We have lovely weather for the event today. The heat has backed off, the storms that reduced it to cowardice have moved on to vanquish elsewhere. The sun is shining, skies are blue with puffy white clouds. There will be trees and a lake and restrooms and paths and picnic tables and a playground.
A perfect day for a family to reconnect, however briefly.
It grieves me that I won't be there. I love some of my father's sisters, even though I haven't been around them for years. I love them although I know little of their lives and they know less of mine.
Saturday we will be having another family party. This one I'll be able to attend. This one I will attend. Good lord willing and the creek don't rise -- an apt qualification in this case, since the party is being held near Red Oak Creek in Ripley.
I'll see people there that I know, know of, and maybe a couple that I don't know. New victims to observe, new cadences to hear. All within the safety of a family network, and of course an easy exit in case of overwhelming anxiety.
First week of August is busy with birthdays in this family -- thank goodness they aren't all celebrated individually with parties. A person would be constantly on the run (although birthday parties would be more pleasant running than doctor's visits, hospital tests and trying to get prescriptions filled.)
There are fairs, too, and church festivals. It's my firm belief that the only reason it rained three days this week is because Adams County Fair was in progress. It will rain three days the last week of September, when Brown County Fair is in progress. That's just how it works in this part of the country.
Summer is a good time to catch up with everyone. The hard part is catching up with yourself and your own.
Having family is important, having fun is important too.
Having you is important to me.
Have fun and take care.
We have lovely weather for the event today. The heat has backed off, the storms that reduced it to cowardice have moved on to vanquish elsewhere. The sun is shining, skies are blue with puffy white clouds. There will be trees and a lake and restrooms and paths and picnic tables and a playground.
A perfect day for a family to reconnect, however briefly.
It grieves me that I won't be there. I love some of my father's sisters, even though I haven't been around them for years. I love them although I know little of their lives and they know less of mine.
Saturday we will be having another family party. This one I'll be able to attend. This one I will attend. Good lord willing and the creek don't rise -- an apt qualification in this case, since the party is being held near Red Oak Creek in Ripley.
I'll see people there that I know, know of, and maybe a couple that I don't know. New victims to observe, new cadences to hear. All within the safety of a family network, and of course an easy exit in case of overwhelming anxiety.
First week of August is busy with birthdays in this family -- thank goodness they aren't all celebrated individually with parties. A person would be constantly on the run (although birthday parties would be more pleasant running than doctor's visits, hospital tests and trying to get prescriptions filled.)
There are fairs, too, and church festivals. It's my firm belief that the only reason it rained three days this week is because Adams County Fair was in progress. It will rain three days the last week of September, when Brown County Fair is in progress. That's just how it works in this part of the country.
Summer is a good time to catch up with everyone. The hard part is catching up with yourself and your own.
Having family is important, having fun is important too.
Having you is important to me.
Have fun and take care.
Thursday, July 19, 2012
At Long Last, RAIN!
Today, stars danced in the streets and diamonds lined up on the back of my glider and dropped pure crystal beads into the dry grass.
In other words, it rained. Lovely rain.
Not a drought buster, to be sure. Not even good rain in places near to me. When the flash floods warnings go up before the storm warnings come down, you know it isn't a good rain.
But it's still a wet rain, even if the relief is short. It's nice thick dark clouds that keep the sunlight from burning down and baking the ground, from reflecting and refracting and getting hotter from every surface it's bounced off.
When I was little, I used to drape myself over the back of the couch, stare out the window, and watch the raindrops hitting the road. They'd hit and bounce and splatter. I thought it looked like stars dancing in the street.
It still looks like stars dancing in the street.
And why wouldn't the stars dance when some of us are finally getting some rain and some relief? Aren't the heavens supposed to rejoice with us, and isn't that where the stars come from?
Don't they ride the raindrops down, to dance together on the blacktop?
In other words, it rained. Lovely rain.Not a drought buster, to be sure. Not even good rain in places near to me. When the flash floods warnings go up before the storm warnings come down, you know it isn't a good rain.
But it's still a wet rain, even if the relief is short. It's nice thick dark clouds that keep the sunlight from burning down and baking the ground, from reflecting and refracting and getting hotter from every surface it's bounced off.
When I was little, I used to drape myself over the back of the couch, stare out the window, and watch the raindrops hitting the road. They'd hit and bounce and splatter. I thought it looked like stars dancing in the street.
It still looks like stars dancing in the street.
And why wouldn't the stars dance when some of us are finally getting some rain and some relief? Aren't the heavens supposed to rejoice with us, and isn't that where the stars come from?
Don't they ride the raindrops down, to dance together on the blacktop?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)