The New Reality Update

 Here's an update to a post I wrote back in December of 2009.  I read this story in the Huffington Post this morning, so I copied the image and posted the link below. This is a picture and story about a new women's personal pleasure product, the "Vibrator/Alarm Clock". I think it does a nice job of reinforcing the slightly tongue in cheek point I tried to make.  Men, we best watch out, we can be replaced. And by the way, when it comes to sex toys, we seem to be getting the short end of the stick.                                                                                                                                                                                                                            A while back, I fell asleep on the sofa, and woke up about three in the morning. I'm not sure why my wife didn't wake me up and tell me to come to bed, but I have my suspicions. Anyway, the TV was still on, and here were these four women, setting around a coffee table extolling the virtues of various sex toys. "This one comes in four exciting colors and three sizes." " This one vibrates, pulsates, and ........... rotates. " "You can keep this discrete miniature model in your purse." I'm thinking, it rotates? That's going to be a hard act to follow. Discrete miniature model? Judging from most infomercials, I always assumed that women just have smaller bladders than men, and sometimes need to repair their makeup. Who knew they talk about stuff like this in the middle of the night. This show was on regular cable, not CBS, but not the Girls Gone Wild pay for view either. I think it might have been the Lifetime Network.

Now, before I go on with my next observation, let me say that this may offend some people. Don't worry, I'm an equal opportunity offender, and I promise that if you are not offended now, you will certainly get your chance in some later posting.

I've long had a theory about homosexuality. I have no data or personal experience to back this theory, but here it is anyway. I don't think that men choose to be homosexuals any more than people choose to be left handed or redheaded. However, I'm not so sure that the same can be said for all lesbians. I think that some women, like their male counterparts, don't have any choice in the matter, but, I think that some women consider it a matter of personal choice. I suspect that in general, women tend to be less inhibited than men, so the actual act doesn't seem so unacceptable to them. Plus, it seems that women are more able and willing to form close relationships with other women, where as men tend to be a lot more reserved in their friendships with other men.

The point I'm trying to make is that we men may be about to become redundant. Between the availability of sex toys, and the abundance of other women, we may be becoming a poor third choice. Look at the line up on any TV network. It's one show after another showing men behaving badly, or portrayed as hapless buffoons. Let's face it, we don't have a good record either. We've done everything possible to insure women's subservience to men for thousands of years. We've restricted their dress, their ability to vote, the practice of religion, you name it, we've held them back. But now, at least in this country, women have gained a lot of independence, and they are beginning to exercise their independence. So, watch out, if we don't do a better job, we can be replaced. Here's the link to the new vibrator/alarm clock.  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/11/wake-up-vibe-alarm-clock_n_4764599.html?utm_hp_ref=technology&ir=Technology

Omission/Commission

 So, I went to visit my mom at the nursing home this afternoon, and, in order to escape the crowded little closet they call a room for two, I wheeled her across the hall to the lounge.  As near as I can tell, the only thing worse than being in a nursing home is having to visit one on a regular basis.  Actually, my boredom while visiting brings on a heightened sense of awareness of the goings on around me.  I'm getting quite friendly with some of the inmates, although I have to renew their friendship each time I come by.  Just today, I met a man wheeling his guitar down the hall in his wheelchair.  I asked if I could play it, and when I strummed a chord, I realized that not only was it out of tune, it was missing one string, and the other strings were not in the right order.  I told him I would bring him some new strings the next time I visit, and I'm looking forward to finally playing in front of  people who can appreciate my talent.

I expect that the home will provide a lot of fodder for my sick sense of humor, so I will keep you, my dear reader, posted as anecdotes present themselves.  Back to the lounge.  There are only two distractions in the lounge.  One is that it is the direct pathway from the hall to the interior courtyard where the inmates go to wheeze and smoke.  Often they will stop in front of the fake fireplace under the TV to warm themselves  after their latest disappointing attempt at suicide by cigarette.  I'm pretty sure the fireplace does not put out any actual heat, but it looks warm.  The other distraction is the TV itself, which is a nice big flat screen with a remote that both does not have batteries, and is not a TV remote.  I figured this out almost right away.  Since 95% of the inmates are wheel chair bound, and the TV is mounted on the wall, it tends to be tuned to the same station almost all of the time.  I'll give you two guesses as to the station, and a hint.  It is not tuned to MSNBC.

Now,  to paraphrase the "most interesting man in the world" I don't always watch TV, but when I do, it is not Fox News.  But, when in Rome....  First up is Sheppard Smith, a man surrounded by the latest high tech video equipment who I suspect is not smart enough to dial out on a land line.  But enough about him.  I'm not sure who the next host was, although it might have been Neil Cavuto, at least according to the program guide I've consulted in researching this piece of petty journalism.

Once again, I have rambled around to the point I am trying to make, and I hope that my smarter readers will catch the ironic Segue  from  nursing home to Fox News.  Neil is outraged about the poor treatment by the liberal media of  Governor Christie concerning his involvement in a mere traffic jamb, while that same media have given a pass to Hilary Clinton on the Benghazi attack.  One has about as much to do with the other as landing men on the moon is related to Obama care.

Benghazi was a tragedy that might have been avoided if our attention had been focused there, much like the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut might have been avoided during the presidency of  Republican God Ronald Reagan, the bombing of Pearl harbor on Roosevelt's watch, or the 9/11 attack under George Bush. In each case, the most that can be said was that the parties involved were guilty of a crime of omission.

Here's the difference though.  If it turns out to be true that Governor Christie ordered or suggested to someone that the bridge be closed in retribution for some perceived slight by the mayor of Fort Lee, or he had it closed for any of the other theories going around., he is guilty of plotting to close the bridge.  This closing may have resulted in only a traffic jamb, or it may have actually cost lives and or money, but if he ordered or suggested it be done, he is guilty of a crime of commission.

I don't think that most people really appreciate the difference.  If a worker throws a wrench into the gears of a machine to sabotage it, he is guilty of a sin of commission.  If that same worker accidentally drops a wrench into a machine, and the machine is damaged, regardless of the extent of damage, he is only guilty of a sin of omission.  He may have been careless or clumsy, but he did not intend to be so.  In the case of commission, the worker should at least be fired if not prosecuted, but in the case of omission, the worker may or may not be fired, depending on his work record, his value to the company, and his likelihood to continue to drop wrenches into the machinery.  Even most of the inmates should be able to understand this.

Intellectual Apartheid Part Two

In 2010 I wrote a blog post titled  "Intellectual Apartheid" in which I lamented the devaluation off the less mentally endowed workers of America.  I think it was a good post and is worth a read, especially in conjunction with this post.  The original post can be found in my blog Archive's.

So, at the coffee shop on Friday, (Yes, we still meet for coffee every day)  I mentioned that I had been reading about the bell curve for intelligence.  The spread of intelligence works out like this:  About 50% of the population has an IQ of between 90 and 110, 25 percent has an IQ of less than 90, and 25% has an IQ of above 110.  If you use a population figure of about three hundred million souls in America, that means that seventy five million of us have a below average IQ, and of this population, fifteen million have an IQ of less than 70.

I've tried to imagine what it would be like to have an IQ of less than 90.  I estimate that it would, for me, be about the equivalent of walking around all day with a four beer buzz.  I would still be functional, but would be prone to making bad decisions and my math skills would be diminished.  I figure it would be around a two beer buzz for the rest of my coffee klatch.

The big question is, what is to become of these people, what should we expect of them and what should they expect of us.  I grew up and lived most of my life in a time where anyone could get a job in a factory or in some other low skill profession, work forty hours a week, and earn a living wage.  Today, there are not enough low skill jobs to go around, and the existing low skill jobs are low pay and often part time.  Welfare has been converted to workfare, unemployment benefits are running out, and food stamps are under assault.

The drum beat from the right is constant and consistent.  Cut the bums off, they are gaming the system, they are the takers, not makers, they need to retrain and find high tech jobs, health care is not a right, we need less government, we can't afford to support these people. We can't euthanize these somewhat challenged people, although someone I know made a vague hint to the contrary.  They will always be with us, they are our brothers, sisters, cousins, they deserve better.

What to do?  The first and most logical step is to raise the minimum wage to a living wage.  A living wage for all may reduce the profits of corporations, businesses and stockholders, but it will put billions of dollars back into the economy to further fuel growth and provide more jobs.  Second, we have to figure out how to bring back jobs to America that have been outsourced to other countries.  We don't need to produce everything for ourselves, we don't have the manpower to do it, but we need to pick and choose some industries to focus on.  Practically every country in the world practices some form of government managed economy, and so should we.  The practical solution is to apply tariffs to specific products to give America a level playing field on these items.  Third, we should enforce and reinforce existing labor laws that would prevent illegal aliens from finding employment in this country.  If this happens, employers will be forced to use American workers, and as the unemployment rate falls, wages will increase.  This last item is disturbing to me and I'm sure, worrisome to some of you, but we cannot afford to address the rest of the world problems if we cannot address our own.

Granted, these measures are somewhat inflationary, but it would not be the end of the world if the cheap consumer products and services we take for granted cost a bit more.  I'm not advocating a handout, I'm calling for a hand up.

"Corporations are people my friend."

In August of 2011 Mitt Romney, on the first leg of his march to ultimate defeat, blurted out the title quote above, as his unfortunate (at least for him) rebuttal to hecklers at the Iowa state fair.  He got tons of bad press over this and it probably cost him some  votes.  Sadly, he is correct, although not in the context he intended.

How many permutations of the following scenario have each us heard in our lives.  Mr X is caught Diddling Mrs. Y and one or both of them proceeds to deny and lie until their position becomes completely untenable.  Of course the story doesn't always have to be about sex, it can be about drugs, stealing, drinking, beating the dog, child abuse, cheating, the list goes on.   It seems to be a innate part of the human condition, that the first response to any adversity is to protect ones own self interest by denying any wrong doing, even to the point of self denial.  

In April of 1994, Congressman Henry Waxman held a hearing on the regulation of  tobacco products use, where the seven major tobacco company CE Os were asked , under oath, if nicotine is addictive.  Each executive stood up before the congressional committee and denied that nicotine was additive.  The tobacco companies were simply behaving like people, protecting their self-interest regardless of the cost or effects on others.

The greatest and worst example of corporations being people, centers around global warming.  It seems that every company in the country that might lose the least bit of profit by acknowledging the writing on the wall about climate change is hell bent on denying the phenomenon.  Of Course, the oil and gas companies, coal companies, and utilities are the biggest deniers, but they are not the only culprits.

It's really difficult  to understand how a potential long term global disaster of this magnitude can be denied in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  I suspect that it is as if a ship were sinking without enough life boats for everyone, but the captain has offered seats to the highest bidders, the wealthy simply think they can buy their way out of the rising oceans, and sweltering sky.  They may actually be able to survive for a while as we perish, but ultimately, there is no ark.



                          

Christmas Gloom and Doom

Having grown up in a dysfunctional family, I think it's always appropriate to share a little gloom and doom on Christmas.  I watched this video from www.upworthy.com the other day about human overpopulation and exponential growth.  Here's the link: http://www.upworthy.com/a-smartypants-scientist-makes-an-easy-analogy-about-our-planet-and-now-im-scared  .  I hope you will watch this short video, so that you can follow my train of thought.

First of all, let me say that the video is a gross over simplification of a very complex problem, but the analogy the speaker uses is basically on target.  The speaker refers to a test tube filled with food to which he adds one, one celled bacterium. The bacterium reproduces every minute so that in 59 minutes the tube is half filled with bacteria and half empty of food.  In the next minute the bacteria reproduces again, doubling in population, and in that minute the test tube becomes full of bacteria and depleted of food.  The speaker postulates that the human species is in it's 59th minute.  If you look at the historical record, you see that world population growth was relatively flat until the beginning of the industrial age.  World population did not reach one billion until around 1804.  After that, it doubled by 1927, reached 5 billion by 1987, 6 billion by 1999, and is projected to reach 9 billion by 2050.  You can see that this is not exactly exponential growth, but does represent an alarming trend.  It must be also be noted that birth rates are decreasing and the rate of world population growth is decreasing as well, but I'm not sure that's a positive sign, and here's (at least in my mind) why.

I think that any reasonable person would agree that there has to be a finite carrying capacity for the human population on our planet.  I don't know what that number is, but based upon the population growth of the last 200 or so years,  it does seem that our test tube is rapidly filling up.

I remember a similar analogy from back in high school.  In this case, lab rats were allowed to breed without any restraint of food and water, but the increasing population was confined to the same amount of living space.  Eventually the population seized  to thrive, and ultimately collapsed.

So, here we have a two pronged problem.  On the one hand, our population continues to expand, using up available resources, and polluting and taxing our environment, and, on the other hand we have increased competition for the remaining resources.  It must be noted, that even at our current population, over one billion people live in extreme poverty of less than $1.25 income per day.  I doubt that the pie, even if we were all willing to sacrifice our own well being for the sake of humanity as a whole, is big enough to allow the current world population a comfortable life style.

In fact, I believe that just the opposite is beginning to happen.  What I see, both around the world, and in our own country, is the hoarding of resources.  The world's uber (sorry, I don't know how to add the umlaut) wealthy control almost all of the available resources, and are increasing unwilling to share, while the rest of us compete for the decreasing remainder, and become both unwilling and unable to share.  We are, like the lab rats, becoming less able to function as a normal society.

I'm not sure what we can do about this dismal situation, but, Like Pascal's wager, here are our choices.  We do nothing, and bet that things will improve.  If we lose that bet, our world is doomed.  Alternatively, we chose to address our problems, and, even though we may still be doomed, at least we will have made some improvement in our own lives and the lives of others, and we have a chance of winning the reward of heaven on earth.

The Trouble With Facebook

The only food picture I've ever taken

Facebook may be the best medium ever invented for the exchange of ideas and opinions.  So, what do I see when I open my Facebook page?  Frk'n pictures of cats and the soup you had for supper and the cake for desert, recipes and religious quotes, dogs and grandchildren, "Criminal Case and Lucky Slots", cartoons, and innumerable cuts and pastes of someone else's opinion or slogan.

Now, don't get me wrong, I've been guilty of most of the above at one time or another, and there's nothing wrong with any of it.  I like knowing what my friends are up to, and I like getting birthday wishes when the time rolls around, and I'm gratified when I see that someone has pushed the "like" button under something I post.  I like to know when someone I care about is sick, or married, or divorced, or has done something exceptional or just kind.

  All that is good, but what I really like is when people post thoughtful comments about someone else's post and even better, when someone posts an original thought in the "whats on your mind" section.  Here is an opportunity to say exactly what you think, without fear of interruption, to be read by most of your friends, and to get feed back from at least some of them.  Even if you offend someone, whats the worst that can happen, you get defriended by a person that you probably weren't that close to anyway.  At least that's the worst that has happened to me so far.

My New Rescue Dog Urc

I've been working on a new do it your self project that requires a dog, so I went to the local shelter and adopted one.  The purpose of my project is to produce electricity for my home.  I've modified an old home treadmill I wasn't using, so the the motor that propelled it now functions as a generator.  I've trained my dog to run on the treadmill and made a little device that drops a single bit of Purina Dog Chow onto a tray every five minutes.  The treadmill generator is attached to a battery which provides current to my refrigerator even when the dog is too tired to run.  I noticed that the dog tends to stop running when he eats his dog chow, so I modified an invisable fence collar to administer a non lethal shock to the dog if the treadmill slows down.  I considered adopting a greyhound for the work, but decided that it's stride is too long for a standard treadmill.  Instead, I obtained a mutt with some hound and Pitt bull mixed in.  The dog was very aggressive and was not very adoptable, but I've found that after ten hours of running on the treadmill, the dog has calmed down quite a bit, and sleeps almost all of the time not at work.  In order to curb protests by the dog, I've considered having him debarked, but I need to do a more through cost/benefit analysis before taking on the additional cost.  The system is not very efficient, but the labor is very cheap, and I'm working on ways to make my worker, err dog, more productive.  I'm gradually lenghtening the time between morsels, and have thought about adding a strong incentive smell to the front end of the treadmill.  The dog is also losing weight, which so far has improved his stamina without any other noticeable effects.  I know that there is a fine line between productivity and starvation, and I'm trying to achieve a happy balance.

In fact, this project is going so well, I'm considering expanding.  I've bought a used shipping container, and I'm purchasing unwanted treadmills (call me if you have one).  I believe that I can (if I make two levels) get twenty workstations in a trailer.  I will collect the electricity and reverse sell it to the power companies like some people do with their excess solar or wind power.  I've decided to export the units to willing municipal animal shelters, and will share the profits with the shelters.  This will increase my profits without the bother of direct worker, I mean dog, contact.  This way I will not get any bad publicity, should there be any worker, there I go again, I mean dog abuse.  The shelters will no doubt become more selective in the kind of dogs they capture.  It makes no economic sense to put a Yorkie or a Chihuahua, either of which might be useful as an actual pet, on a full size treadmill.

I've approached some venture capitalists to provide seed money for my start up,  but I'm willing to let a few of my closest friends in on the venture.  There could be big money in this when it gets off the ground.  I could perhaps, even export the units to China where they have a serious pollution problem from coal fired electric generation plants.  There, they eat their dogs, but have an excess of expendable people.

One of the things I've noticed about my dog, is that his need for food is so strong, that I don't need to keep him on a lease.  Because of this, I named him Urc for unrestrained capitalism.