Shocking The Senses

Unemployment Benefits

- December 15th, 2010 // No Comments » // Thoughts

I am in the most part for limited extension of unemployment benefits.  However, I also understand that perpetual unemployment benefits can (and does) disable a person’s drive to work and succeed.  I hear the left commenting about how the right wing (I’m pretty much in the center) sentiment that unemployment benefits need to end is akin to supporting starving out children and old folks.

For me, this seems irrational and illogical, akin to a straw man argument I suppose.  I don’t understand how exactly supporting an individual for years upon years is beneficial to anyone.  It takes money from the workers, and distributes it out to those who are unemployed.  Rob the productive for the non-productive.

The organizations that maintain the records and monitors the attempts to find work of those on unemployment is increasingly swamped.  Shoot, the number of people out of work in the US alone is in the double-digit-millions.  According to a friend who was recently unemployed, the requirements for maintaining your weekly check is that you call the unemployment office once a week and report a minimum of two “find work” attempts.  The whole system is automated and the only check and balance is an occasional random audit.

Now, like I said, yes I do support limited unemployment benefits.  So, what’s the answer?

The programs appear to be state managed, but federally funded, and applying is as simple as filling out an online form.  I would propose that the process be modified so there is more accountability and drive for those on unemployment to actually actively pursue employment.  Also, dramatically increase the requirements, for instance raising the number of weekly job attempts to 5 or 6.  I’d actually be willing to pay an additional small temporary tax to fund employment of new workers to monitor and manage these programs, and carry out active unemployment auditing on a more regular basis.

I believe that this would help with curbing the possibility of people “riding the unemployment train”.  It doesn’t mean that there won’t be people who play the system still, but it would sure make it harder.  And, if the tax proposition to fund it was written with a built in time limit, you’d probably be able to get more people on board.

I’m spitballing with this just a bit, but I’ll see if I can’t do some research to further flesh out the proposition.  Let me know if you have any thoughts/opinions on whether something like this would/wouldn’t work.

Expensive

- December 7th, 2010 // No Comments » // Thoughts

We got our first taste of what our baby’s disease is going to cost us in the future.  He was diagnosed with a cold and an ear infection yesterday and what typically is prescribed for the pain and infection contains drugs he can’t have, lest he go into anaphylactic shock.

The medication for his ear infection was just under $100, after insurance.  Oh, and he threw up the first dose…  Poor guy.

Couple that with the multiple doctor visits because of the nature of his condition, it’s not much now but considering that kids get an average of 2-6 ear infections a year before age 2, it will get there.  Also, there’s no telling what else he might end up with before puberty, and what will have to be avoided to.

So I’m paying for daycare and I’m getting little medical bonuses with it too!  Fun!

(Sorry for another rant)

Uncle Sam’s Retail Outlet

- December 6th, 2010 // No Comments » // Thoughts

In case anyone missed this on Fox News last week, an interesting website…

Government Liquidation

Urticaria Pigmentosa, what?

- December 3rd, 2010 // No Comments » // Thoughts

As some of you may know, my son was born with a rare disease called Urticaria Pigmentosa.  In a nutshell, he overproduces histamines in his body, making his skin red and splotchy and overly prone to stimulation (boils and lesions that clear up in about 24 hours).  The condition affects 200,000 people at any given time around the world, but he has a version of it that covers his entire body.  Very rare indeed.

Well, okay, we’ve been dealing with it for a while now.  He’s just about 7 months old now and has had it his whole life.  At his last Dermatology visit, the doctor wanted us to see an Oncologist (cancer doc… scary).

So like any good parents, we had a freak out period.  The appointment was yesterday, and initial findings appear to be good.  The disease doesn’t appear to affect anything but his skin.  The final blood tests won’t be in till next week, but I’m much less worried than I was.  In the mean time he’ll continue eating, pooping, playing and sleeping.

Now on to something amusing.  People in public who interact with us and the kiddo.  “Chicken Pox?”, “What’s wrong with him?”, “What’s wrong with his skin?”, “Oh my, he is all splotchy!”.

I think I’m going to go ahead and let people diagnose themselves.  If they think he has a contagious rash, I’m going to go right along with it.  “Yeah, you might want to back off, he’s really contagious and it makes your stool really runny too.” (Not a lie, he’s still on formula even though we started him on solids a while ago).  “Oh, ma’am, have you had Chicken Pox yet?  It is very dangerous for adults to contract it!”

My decision is based on the looks of horror and disgust that (occasionally) pass across people’s faces upon first examination.  Classic example of knee-jerking.  I mean, come on… (directed at those types)

1. We’re out in public.
2. He’s not sneezing on you.
3. You haven’t touched him.
4. You didn’t even consider asking first.

So, a little rant.  I’m done now.  Seriously, the baby is actually not affected by his condition emotionally.  He’s the happiest little squirt I have been around in recent years.  Man, I love that kid.

My lovely child, know this…

- December 2nd, 2010 // No Comments » // Thoughts

A few things I have learned in my short stint of existence:

1. If you are going to get married, make sure it is for the right reasons. Don’t fall into the trap of lust and desire, though make sure desire at least exists.  If you’ve already conceived a child, I don’t believe it’s necessarily a good idea to get married solely on that basis.  It can lead to resentment and anger.  Marriage should have a foundation of communication, understanding, and a mutual agreement to support each other through the ordeals of life.  A true contract between two souls, with each one being completely honest, forthright and willing to divide their life for the good of another.  If it is mutual, then by its very nature both parties will benefit.
2. After you are married, wait a few years to have a child. During this time, explore each other intellectually.  Understand your spouse’s world view and what they want from their life.  Push each other toward your individual goals and stand not in the way of personal progress.  You are still an individual with goals and aspirations.  These things should not vanish because of the union.  That idea is contrary to the notion of success and prospering.  When it is finally time to attempt to conceive, you will be secure in the knowledge that the two of you are compatible.
3. Communication in your relationship is like water to a fish. Without it, you will both die.  None of this silence is golden crap when it relates to your union.  I’m not condoning perpetual argument and conflict, but when there’s a problem, it needs to be voiced in a calm, collected, discussion.  Shouting matches accomplish nothing besides pissing each other off, so do not do it.  The occasional bout of anger is unavoidable for most people, but keep it brief and make sure it leads into discussion.  This whole concept is difficult for “feelers” so if you’re one and have a propensity for acting like this, grow up and cut the crap.
4. Analytical thought is not just for scientists and researchers. It should be applied to every decision you make.  Even something as small as “Do I want fries with that?” needs to be processed.  Fat content, caloric content, the effect on your satiation, cholesterol level, alternative choices possible, cost, profitability, gastric processing, digestive system handling, etc etc.  You don’t need to write an essay every time you’re trying to decide between paper and plastic.  All of the above should have been at some point pre-considered, making an on the fly decision a consideration of how your life is structured and by its very essence, a rapid one.
5. You absolutely will not always get what you want. Don’t deceive yourself into thinking it is a possibility.  That doesn’t meant you should “settle” and begrudgingly accept sub-par choices.  Quite the contrary, process and internally accept these alternate options.  If you want a burger and there’s not one available, make a ham sandwich and be happy with it.  None of the “Oh… fine… *pout pout pout*”.  Just be happy with what is available.  To act otherwise is childish and immature in most cases.

Think about the points above.  Don’t just read this and discard it like so many used egg cartons.  Consider the structure, and how it could possibly affect your life.

Paid to Do Nothing.

- December 1st, 2010 // 4 Comments » // Finance, Thoughts

(2010 stats) Your average congressman makes $174,000 USD per year. This doesn’t include special roles like the Speaker or Majority/Minority leaders which make roughly $20,000 USD more.

That is their base salary.  It also doesn’t include any perks (Any insurance they are receiving, transportation, meals, etc).

The 2010 house calendar indicates that (excluding the listed holidays and weekends) they worked 200 days in 2010, and this doesn’t include any of the vacation days they might have taken.  I read an unsubstantiated claim that the average work days in the past 10 years is 140 for the whole of Congress.  I will work with the 200 number I verified.  I will also assume a standard 8 hour work day.  (I might mention that with weekends and days off, the average American works 240 days a year at 8 hours a day).  Now, I don’t have any disillusions that they are ‘working’ when out of the office too, dealing with constituents, etc.  However, I’m going to deal with the hard numbers I have.

There are 435 standard members in the House of Representatives.

There are 100 members in the Senate.

We have a period of time coming up since the Conservative victory in November, 2010 where there is a lot of head butting and “nothing getting done” predicted because of the partisan nature currently.

So lets do some math:

174,000 / 200 days / 8 hours a day = $108.75 USD per hour per member.

$108.75 * 535 members = $58,181.25 USD per hour Congress is in session.

If congress spends even ONE HOUR not getting things done, this costs the American people $58,181.25.  A full week of gridlock would cost $2.3 Million USD!

If January goes the way some are predicting it will, it is going to cost us exorbitant amounts of money.  Nothing compared to the national deficit, but it is a hemorrhaging wound if these partisan politicians settle into a bull horn lock.

My message to Congress.  Get it done.  Make it work.  Stop with the crap.

ETA : I want to point out that the title is a grabber.  I don’t have a real issue with the amount they are paid vs their living expenses.  I just want accountability for productivity.

Don’t make me hit you!

- November 10th, 2010 // No Comments » // Thoughts

I was having a discussion with a friend of mine and we got onto the topic of personal responsibility.  The topic stemmed from a talk about relationships and expectations.  I’d like to touch on that just a bit.  First, a scenario.  A man and a woman are married.  There is a discussion about a problematic financial situation.  There has been much done prior to the situation rearing its head to alleviate the burden of said situation, but it is still stressful for both parties involved.

The man takes the information,  and decides that since as much has been done as can be, he should accept the circumstances and face it with a positive attitude.  The woman (and the roles could be reversed) takes the information, and decides that since it is still an existing problem regardless of what has been done, it is worthy of contempt since it is not necessarily a positive situation.  Thus, facing it with a negative attitude.

Both parties have the same information.  Both parties have the same opportunity to adjust his or her attitude accordingly.  However, both parties choose different conclusions.  I see the same thing happen in religious debates (but that’s another post entirely).  Why does this happen?

I would propose a few possible influential factors, in no particular order:

1. Upbringing.  You are heavily influenced by the years observing your parents interact.  Whether you attest to this or not, it is a factor.
2. Gender.  This is a general point, not definitive but definitely influential.  Societal expectation and grooming cause gender divides in habits, reactions and attitudes.
3. Friends.  Peer pressure is a force to be reckoned with.
4. Perception.  Does the way others view your actions and judge you ultimately affect those actions?
5. You.  This is the ultimate influential factor.  If we all realized that regardless of any other points, in the end, our decision is exactly that, ours.  All others point to this in the end.  Regardless of Upbringing, gender, friends, perception, or anything else.  You take in all that input and process it (or don’t) and act according to how you have allowed your world view to be built.  You choose the attitude to have.  Yes there are exceptions (chemical imbalance, PMS for instance) but they are exceptions.

I think there is a distinct parallel between what actions you choose to execute and whether you are a thinking person or a feeling person.  A feeling person tends to respond to situations with exactly that in mind, emotional response.  A thinking person responds with a more analytical, methodical process.  Is one necessarily better than the other?  Not absolutely.  However, if your actions are influenced by reason and not blind emotional flush, they would for the most part be logical, sensible conclusions.

So, in conclusion, if you are able to be a thinking person, do so.  Don’t discard the feeler in you.  I still use my empathetic side quite frequently, for isntance.  However, I use it to collect data so my thinking side can process it logically.  When faced with difficult situations, one should (whenever possible) attempt to reason through the situation.  Don’t flop down on the couch and cry first.  And, don’t make me hit you.  Not that you can.  It’s my decision in the end

Later I will discuss situations in which this is not possible.

The commute

- November 9th, 2010 // No Comments » // Thoughts

I’ve become acutely more aware of the driving habits of others now that I am a father.  Here I am, with a 6 month old infant in my back seat.  I always did drive the speed limit.  It used to be, I’d pick the lane I knew I’d need to be in down the road a ways, and stick to that lane unless there was a slow driver or construction on the road.  Typically I wind up doing 0-5 mph over.  That is my routine.  All the other people who are in some wretched hurry can just go around me.  Cut me off?  Okay, whatever, turn the other cheek.

Now, it has all changed.  I get really irritated when people cut me off while my son is in the car.  People who weave in traffic get under my skin too.  Previously I took the stance of  “Okay buddy, you live by the sword, you die by the sword, just stay out of my space and move on.”  Now that I am responsible for this child, I wish I had a way to auto deploy spike strips so these folks would be taken out of commission.

If you’re one of them, I’m sorry to offend.  Also, if you’re one of them… For the sake of my sanity, cease and desist!

Good ol’ Boy

- September 28th, 2010 // No Comments » // Thoughts

Cronyism.  How close to home does this hit?

A manager has a good friend outside of work who wants to hop ship at his current job position, (even in the same company, for instance) and come fill a recently opened position at the manager’s department.  He’s given preferential treatment and edges ahead of several other applicants (regardless of qualification) and pegs the job.

How about this one… Someone performs a job function, and performs it dismally.  This person (“A”) is managed by another individual who just happens to be buddy-buddy with that person (“A”), and turns a blind eye at his or her ineptitude.  Maybe the boss even promotes their buddy to a higher ranking position?

And another… The government of a country has officials that appoint constituents to office  in the guise of “fair appointment”…

I have recently observed a variation of this abuse, in the form of an individual being punished who just happens to not be part of the core machine.  This person is a sentient program embedded in the collective drone mentality.  The punishment seemed to be administered because of a questionable interaction.  Ultimately, the issue was resolved before the punishment, and whatever crisis may have arisen was avoided but this individual was punished anyway whereas I guarantee there are others who wouldn’t have been.  The boat has just… already been rocked.  Yes, there is a history there that really is irrelevant to the situation.  This person didn’t even know of the protocol that was already established to address the situation, they were uneducated about the specifics at no fault of theirs!  Perfectly capable of handling the situation, yet didn’t know one piece of information.  Guess what?  They got the information in short order by making contact with someone who did know!  Reasonable right?  I think so.  Regardless of the nature of the interaction (which by the way, was initiated by another individual).

As a third party looking in on the situation, this perturbs me.  Where is the transparency?  Why are some people treated preferentially?  Where is the meritocracy which makes productive organizations, think tanks, businesses, thrive?  It’s like a crab with an IQ of 160 catching an under current and washing up to the beach and getting wedged in the sand upside down, only to be laughed at by all of the good ol’ boy crabs wandering in and out of the water past him, then he’s picked up by a person, boiled and eaten for good measure.  All the other crabs needed to do was “give him a claw”.

Hopefully that analogy makes sense.  It does in my head.  Then again, so many things do, that apparently aren’t sensible in real life.

So tell me, dear reader, when is Cronyism a reasonable route in regards to business interaction?  And, I don’t want to hear “Well what if my buddy is qualified?” because you are considering qualifications, which is merit related.

Occam’s Razor

- September 1st, 2010 // No Comments » // Uncategorized

Stereotyping, everyone does it, few own up to it.  How about a different angle?

A man walks toward you.  He has his pants hanging down around his knees, gold necklaces around his neck, a baggy coat on with the logo of some sports team, and two gold teeth.  When he passes you, he measures you with his eyes (scans up/down, ending with brief contact).

My first thought, gangbanger.  Or at least, concealed weapon potential.  I’ll admit, I might be wrong, but this is going to be my knee jerk reaction based on years of just “living”.  I’ve lived in dangerous neighborhoods, safe neighborhoods, slummy neighborhoods, upper class neighborhoods.  Television plays a part in the image we build in our heads as well.  Where do THEY get their idea for what to dress an actor in to portrait a certain type of person?

In actuality, the process is scientific.  I view elements of the subject and based on what I think I know about that element, I come to a theory that best fits the situation at hand.  My theory may be ultimately wrong, but it’s a loose interpretation of Occam’s Razor and for my survival at the time, I’m not going to override instinct.  That can be deadly.

So, I’m no stereotyping.  I’m using science!