“There's more to life than a little money, you know. Don'tcha know that? And here ya are, and it's a beautiful day. Well. I just don't understand it.”.- Marge Gunderson, from the movie Fargo.
Fargo, the award-winning movie by the Coen brothers, is one of my all-time favorites. Of course the characters and their accents are exaggerated, but if you’ve spent much time in that part of the world, you can recognize and appreciate the exaggerations. The movies and television do the same thing with Texans and Southerners and people from “Noo Joisee”. It’s all part of story telling plus it saves a lot of time and wasted dialogue.
Recently, a NLOL (nice little old lady) from Grand Forks, North Dakota (just go north out of Fargo on I-29, can’t miss it) made headlines. Her name is Marilyn Hagerty. Marilyn writes the Eatbeat column for the Grand Forks Herald. She is about the same age as the other, more famous Marilyn would have been if she were still alive. Marilyn Hagerty is 85, could pass for 70 and my guess is that she too was a hot little number back in the day.
Ms. Hagerty recently did a review of the new Olive Garden restaurant in Grand Forks. It was a very positive review and I can only imagine that the waiting time for a table there has increased considerably. Grand Forks has a population of just over 50,000 and the Greater Grand Forks area population is around 100,000. Most of the nation only hears about Grand Forks when the Red River floods. (That would be the “other Red River”, not the one I live near which is more famous and flows in the right direction.) Grand Forks is actually quite nice. The economy is diverse and the unemployment rate is low (less than 3% based on the latest BLS report). Life is good in Grand Forks and an Olive Garden restaurant was long overdue.
However, as so often happens in this age of instant information, Ms. Hagerty’s review of the new Olive Garden went viral. It seems that people in the big cities, especially those on the east and west coasts (aka blue states) got a real hoot out of Ms. Hagerty’s review.
It was just so…well, it was just so Fargo. Couldn’t you just see Marge Gunderson, “with child” and in uniform sitting there chowing down with her duck-carving chubby hubby Norm? And when the review mentions “two, long warm breadsticks” what sharp wit among us could let that pass by with a phallic reference? And who could possibly hold back laughter when Ms. Hagerty wrote “All in all, it is the largest and most beautiful restaurant now operating in Grand Forks. It attracts visitors from out of town as well as people who live here.” How embarrassing. Clearly, the Grand Forks Chamber of Commerce needs to shut this lady down.
Interestingly, her review got so much attention on the internet that Ms. Hagerty ended up on national television. She was initially interviewed on a couple of the early morning news/talk shows and later got on during primetime and late night. She is a delightful lady and didn’t seem to be upset that so many people were making fun of her Olive Garden review. She admitted that when she was told that she had “gone viral”, at first she had no clue what that meant. Watching and listening to the interviewers speak with Ms. Hagerty, I could sense that they were a bit uncomfortable. Instinctively, they seem to know there is something fundamentally out of whack with our culture when a nice, little article, by a NLOL, about a new restaurant opening in and nice, little city in the nation’s heartland becomes a joke.
My guess is that early on, as the “virus” was spreading, it wasn’t widely known that the article had been written by this sweet little 85 year old lady. Then we meet this sweet little 85 year old lady and suddenly everyone is trying to figure out how to “make nice” and put a “heart-warming” human interest spin on the whole thing without sounding as down-home and corny as the article they were making fun of in the first place.
So what’s my point? Just this: when you get away from the 5-star, $$$$ restaurants where for a lot of money someone will tell you what you are eating (because otherwise you would have no clue) and how it was prepared (so you will be convinced you could never cook such a meal) and somehow you still go home hungry because smaller portions make better “presentations”; you end up eating with real people in real places like Grand Forks, North Dakota, U.S.A
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Anger Management
I had a “fit” the other day. That’s what we call them in Texas; when a person gets really pissed off. I didn’t just have “a fit”. I had a “cussin’ fit”. A “cussin’ fit” is about three-quarters of the way up the “fit” severity rating scale for me. Men and women have different “fit” severity levels down here. For example you won’t find “hissy” or “bitch” fit ratings on the men’s scale. (Point of clarification: that would be the straight men’s scale.) A “cussin’ fit” is worse than a ‘foot-stompin’ or ‘door-slammin’ fit. Not quite as bad as a “burn-rubber-throwin’-gravel-shoot-‘em-the-finger-drive-away” fit. And not nearly as bad as a “fist-through-the-wall, throwin’ whatever you are big enough to throw” fit. No need to go into the reason for my cussin’ fit. Suffice it to say that I was really irritated. As I grow older, thankfully, it takes longer for something to bother me. But rub me in the wrong place long enough, then rub it again at the wrong time and I go off. Once that first f-bomb comes out of my mouth, the rest of the cuss words just start flying.
My cussin’ fits have a sort of symphonic quality to them. There is the opening, the allegro. In my case, one might call it an allegro agitato and it often begins with a question such as “what the f--- ?” Then there is the second movement, the adagio, where I slow it down and try to restrain my self while muttering long-drawn out calls of the good Lord’s name including a middle initial on occasion. Then there is the third movement. Now the curse words fill the air…verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs…come one come all…be creative. The same root curse word can be used over and over as long as one keeps interchanging the use of ‘ing’, ‘er’ and ‘ed’ at the end of the word. Usually I end the third movement abruptly and there is a long silence. Then the fourth and final movement begins quietly with an expression of disappointment and desperation, building ever more loudly and rapidly to the main theme, closing with a crescendo of expletives comparable to a Fourth of July fireworks display.
The duration of this symphony usually depends on what the other person has to say. Back in my youth I rarely got past the first movement without moving on to punching or throwing something or someone. As I’ve gotten older and wiser, I tend to patiently wait for my audience to shut up and return to their seats. Then I pick it right back up without missing a beat. I can be world-class cusser with great rhythm and timing when I put my mind to it.
But after the fit, I feel like s—t. I know that my explosion has hurt the other person and it’s hurt me. Whatever I have ever said or done in the past to express my faith and core beliefs has just been wiped out. I am now “that guy”…the big hypocrite who preaches doing the right thing and taking the “high road”. But, in the heat of the moment, I say all the wrong things and to hell with the high road. It’s not about being angry. It’s about how one manages that anger. And even now, this late in life, I still struggle with it. More often than not, I win. But, this week I lost and that just makes me sad.
My cussin’ fits have a sort of symphonic quality to them. There is the opening, the allegro. In my case, one might call it an allegro agitato and it often begins with a question such as “what the f--- ?” Then there is the second movement, the adagio, where I slow it down and try to restrain my self while muttering long-drawn out calls of the good Lord’s name including a middle initial on occasion. Then there is the third movement. Now the curse words fill the air…verbs, nouns, adjectives, adverbs…come one come all…be creative. The same root curse word can be used over and over as long as one keeps interchanging the use of ‘ing’, ‘er’ and ‘ed’ at the end of the word. Usually I end the third movement abruptly and there is a long silence. Then the fourth and final movement begins quietly with an expression of disappointment and desperation, building ever more loudly and rapidly to the main theme, closing with a crescendo of expletives comparable to a Fourth of July fireworks display.
The duration of this symphony usually depends on what the other person has to say. Back in my youth I rarely got past the first movement without moving on to punching or throwing something or someone. As I’ve gotten older and wiser, I tend to patiently wait for my audience to shut up and return to their seats. Then I pick it right back up without missing a beat. I can be world-class cusser with great rhythm and timing when I put my mind to it.
But after the fit, I feel like s—t. I know that my explosion has hurt the other person and it’s hurt me. Whatever I have ever said or done in the past to express my faith and core beliefs has just been wiped out. I am now “that guy”…the big hypocrite who preaches doing the right thing and taking the “high road”. But, in the heat of the moment, I say all the wrong things and to hell with the high road. It’s not about being angry. It’s about how one manages that anger. And even now, this late in life, I still struggle with it. More often than not, I win. But, this week I lost and that just makes me sad.
Saturday, March 3, 2012
I've Got $4 a Gallon, Do I Hear 5 ?
“Y'all thought ol' Spindletop and Burkburnett was all the oil there was, didn't ya? Well, I'm here to tell you that it ain't, boy! It's here, and there ain't a dang thing you gonna do about it!”
-Jett Rink
Back in January of 2011, I wrote about the risks our economy faces when energy prices increase dramatically. In late December, I made my predictions for 2012. (OK, so I was wrong about the Packers, but New England did get to the SB and lost. So I get partial credit). One of my predictions was this:
“Big trouble in the Middle East. Things will come to a head this year and the results will drive up oil prices and cripple the global economy in the second half of the year.”
I also made this prediction:
“The U.S. economy overcomes the impact (of these predictions), limps along and fairs better than many of our global competitors.”
The first one about rising oil prices seems to be coming true and ahead of schedule. This is really bad news for our economy. If gas prices go up a $1 per gallon it effectively takes $125,000,000,000 (that would be billions) annually out of our consumer economy. Apply a 2 or 3 multiple to the benefit of those dollars being spent on consumer goods and services (not only here but in those countries that make so much of the stuff we buy) and the impact is truly devastating. While I still think the second prediction is accurate: the U.S. economy will out-perform most of our global competitors; the rising cost of energy will very likely knock the legs out of the recovery.
Unfortunately, there’s not much we can do to avoid the negative consequences this time around. We’ve piddled and fiddled around on expanding our pipeline and refining capacity. So even though we’ve increased domestic production, it’s not going to help us much in the short run. Plus we live in a global market where demand for oil is increasing. If the rest of the world is willing to pay $5 or $10 for a gallon of gasoline, we won’t be getting it for $3.
In the long-run we’ll figure out ways to live more fuel efficiently. We don’t have much of a choice. Ten years from now I predict that over half of our commercial vehicles will run on natural gas. 80 percent of the cars on the road will be getting 40+ mpg. Global oil production as well as domestic production will far exceed most current projections. We will still live in a world that runs on fossil fuel. But in the short run, we are in for some serious pain at the pump. And at a time when the government cannot afford to “cover” the increased cost of transportation; we’ll just have to live with it. Whoever ends up in the White House for the next fours years (and I did predict that it would be President Obama), is going to have a very bumpy ride.
-Jett Rink
Back in January of 2011, I wrote about the risks our economy faces when energy prices increase dramatically. In late December, I made my predictions for 2012. (OK, so I was wrong about the Packers, but New England did get to the SB and lost. So I get partial credit). One of my predictions was this:
“Big trouble in the Middle East. Things will come to a head this year and the results will drive up oil prices and cripple the global economy in the second half of the year.”
I also made this prediction:
“The U.S. economy overcomes the impact (of these predictions), limps along and fairs better than many of our global competitors.”
The first one about rising oil prices seems to be coming true and ahead of schedule. This is really bad news for our economy. If gas prices go up a $1 per gallon it effectively takes $125,000,000,000 (that would be billions) annually out of our consumer economy. Apply a 2 or 3 multiple to the benefit of those dollars being spent on consumer goods and services (not only here but in those countries that make so much of the stuff we buy) and the impact is truly devastating. While I still think the second prediction is accurate: the U.S. economy will out-perform most of our global competitors; the rising cost of energy will very likely knock the legs out of the recovery.
Unfortunately, there’s not much we can do to avoid the negative consequences this time around. We’ve piddled and fiddled around on expanding our pipeline and refining capacity. So even though we’ve increased domestic production, it’s not going to help us much in the short run. Plus we live in a global market where demand for oil is increasing. If the rest of the world is willing to pay $5 or $10 for a gallon of gasoline, we won’t be getting it for $3.
In the long-run we’ll figure out ways to live more fuel efficiently. We don’t have much of a choice. Ten years from now I predict that over half of our commercial vehicles will run on natural gas. 80 percent of the cars on the road will be getting 40+ mpg. Global oil production as well as domestic production will far exceed most current projections. We will still live in a world that runs on fossil fuel. But in the short run, we are in for some serious pain at the pump. And at a time when the government cannot afford to “cover” the increased cost of transportation; we’ll just have to live with it. Whoever ends up in the White House for the next fours years (and I did predict that it would be President Obama), is going to have a very bumpy ride.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Sticks and Stones
I grew up in a time (1950s-60s) and place (Texas, USA) when stereotyping was just an easy way of keeping society organized, not to mention the source of some great jokes. Back in those days stereotyping was truly granular. We are talking micro-stereotyping. Within the same county you had “cedar-hikers” and ranchers. The “cedar-hikers” lived on poorer land that had been taken over by cedar brush. The stereotypical “cedar-hiker” was a poor hard-scrabble countryman who farmed a little, raised goats, had a cow or two, made moonshine or had close kinfolks who did, and also harvested cedar for fence posts. Cut up some cedar posts, hike into town and sell them. Cedar-hiker. I have family from the hard-scrabble cedar country, but as far as I know they were never cedar hikers. They actually carved out a decent living raising cotton and peanuts along with some livestock.
The “ranchers” lived on the other side of the county where the land was a little better, but not much. They might have tended to keep a few more cattle and occasionally prosper, but to an outsider they didn’t seem any different than the cedar-hikers. But within that small social circle, the difference was real and more than one fist fight was started when some rancher’s kid called a kid from the other side of the county a “cedar-hiker”.
In Fort Worth, there were rich and poor sides of town. Tough neighborhoods and snobby neighborhoods. Fairly or unfairly, you were labeled based on where you lived. And there were certainly ethnic and racial stereotypes. And not all were mean-spirited or ill-intentioned. I am thankful that my family advised me early on that the N-word was not to be used. We called them “colored” people and it was meant with all due respect. We didn’t drink out of their water fountains nor did they drink out of ours. They lived in their neighborhoods and we lived in ours. They made the best BBQ and the only time we used the N-word was when my father stopped by Nigger Jack’s BBQ for an order to go.
My folks regarded Mexicans as hard-working, industrious people and considered them basically “like us”. I went to school with Mexican-Americans and there was plenty of inter-racial dating and marriage. I didn’t really encounter serious racial bias toward Hispanics until I moved to West Texas. I guess there just weren’t enough colored folks out there to fill the bottom rungs on the ladder. And by that time, “colored” had long since been retired. Black was firmly established with African-American coming up fast.
We didn’t have many Asians around back then. The Asian invasion of Texas really came after the Vietnam war. Vietnamese, Thai’s and Cambodians are now well-established and prospering throughout Texas. With globalization we have a fair share of Chinese, Japanese and Koreans here as well. But when I was a kid…not so much, really hardly at all. This was post-WWII. The Japanese were cruel, treacherous people who now made crappy merchandise. The Chinese were a mystery. The China of ancient history was totally different from Communist China and the looming threat they represented. At a personal level we just didn’t have relationships with a lot of Asian people. Interestingly enough, we did have one kid in our school who was half-Asian. He was well-liked and well-received by all of us. I am ashamed to say that I honestly don’t know his specific ancestry. It just wasn’t a big deal to us. And I’m sure we made comments about Gooks, Slopes, Chinks, and Nips without even thinking.
Which brings me around to Jeremy Lin, the Chinese(Taiwanese)-American basketball sensation who recently burst on to the national sports scene with the NY Knicks. A reporter actually lost his job by going with this headline, “Chink in the Armor” after a Knicks' loss. I really can’t defend the reporter. I heard about the uproar over the headline before I actually knew the specifics. I told my wife that I bet he used the word “Chink”. Twisted minds think alike. I mean it’s just too obvious. He should have been fired for bad writing if for no other reason.
Overall, I think it’s a good thing that we are more sensitive toward stereotyping and making hurtful, demeaning comments based on stereotypes. And clearly, the “Chink in the Armor” headline was just way over the top. But it does beg the question, when is it ok to comment on an individual in terms of their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, political affiliation, religious beliefs, financial status, age, weight, etc.? Clearly there are times and circumstances when these factors are necessary and relevant in communicating information about the individual. But just as clearly there are times and circumstances where making comments about such things will get you in big trouble.
My advice is just don’t go there if there is even the slightest chance that it might be offensive. But, I have to admit that I have a hard time taking my own advice on this one. I am not easily offended and can pretty well take it as well as dish it out. Plus, I’m not all that in tune with other people’s sensitivities. So if anything in this blog or previous entries has offended you or someone you know, I can only say that I am truly sorry and JUST GET OVER IT.
The “ranchers” lived on the other side of the county where the land was a little better, but not much. They might have tended to keep a few more cattle and occasionally prosper, but to an outsider they didn’t seem any different than the cedar-hikers. But within that small social circle, the difference was real and more than one fist fight was started when some rancher’s kid called a kid from the other side of the county a “cedar-hiker”.
In Fort Worth, there were rich and poor sides of town. Tough neighborhoods and snobby neighborhoods. Fairly or unfairly, you were labeled based on where you lived. And there were certainly ethnic and racial stereotypes. And not all were mean-spirited or ill-intentioned. I am thankful that my family advised me early on that the N-word was not to be used. We called them “colored” people and it was meant with all due respect. We didn’t drink out of their water fountains nor did they drink out of ours. They lived in their neighborhoods and we lived in ours. They made the best BBQ and the only time we used the N-word was when my father stopped by Nigger Jack’s BBQ for an order to go.
My folks regarded Mexicans as hard-working, industrious people and considered them basically “like us”. I went to school with Mexican-Americans and there was plenty of inter-racial dating and marriage. I didn’t really encounter serious racial bias toward Hispanics until I moved to West Texas. I guess there just weren’t enough colored folks out there to fill the bottom rungs on the ladder. And by that time, “colored” had long since been retired. Black was firmly established with African-American coming up fast.
We didn’t have many Asians around back then. The Asian invasion of Texas really came after the Vietnam war. Vietnamese, Thai’s and Cambodians are now well-established and prospering throughout Texas. With globalization we have a fair share of Chinese, Japanese and Koreans here as well. But when I was a kid…not so much, really hardly at all. This was post-WWII. The Japanese were cruel, treacherous people who now made crappy merchandise. The Chinese were a mystery. The China of ancient history was totally different from Communist China and the looming threat they represented. At a personal level we just didn’t have relationships with a lot of Asian people. Interestingly enough, we did have one kid in our school who was half-Asian. He was well-liked and well-received by all of us. I am ashamed to say that I honestly don’t know his specific ancestry. It just wasn’t a big deal to us. And I’m sure we made comments about Gooks, Slopes, Chinks, and Nips without even thinking.
Which brings me around to Jeremy Lin, the Chinese(Taiwanese)-American basketball sensation who recently burst on to the national sports scene with the NY Knicks. A reporter actually lost his job by going with this headline, “Chink in the Armor” after a Knicks' loss. I really can’t defend the reporter. I heard about the uproar over the headline before I actually knew the specifics. I told my wife that I bet he used the word “Chink”. Twisted minds think alike. I mean it’s just too obvious. He should have been fired for bad writing if for no other reason.
Overall, I think it’s a good thing that we are more sensitive toward stereotyping and making hurtful, demeaning comments based on stereotypes. And clearly, the “Chink in the Armor” headline was just way over the top. But it does beg the question, when is it ok to comment on an individual in terms of their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, political affiliation, religious beliefs, financial status, age, weight, etc.? Clearly there are times and circumstances when these factors are necessary and relevant in communicating information about the individual. But just as clearly there are times and circumstances where making comments about such things will get you in big trouble.
My advice is just don’t go there if there is even the slightest chance that it might be offensive. But, I have to admit that I have a hard time taking my own advice on this one. I am not easily offended and can pretty well take it as well as dish it out. Plus, I’m not all that in tune with other people’s sensitivities. So if anything in this blog or previous entries has offended you or someone you know, I can only say that I am truly sorry and JUST GET OVER IT.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Healthcare...WWJD?
It’s been an interesting “dust-up” between President Obama and the Catholic Church the past couple of weeks. Seems as though The Church has taken exception to being forced to provide insurance coverage for contraceptives and “morning after” pills. The latest compromise doesn’t seem to do much other than take The Church off the hook for specifically covering these items and shifting the burden to their insurance carriers (who will bake the cost into the premiums…so The Church is still paying for it…but their hands are clean…Hey Pilate…pass the soap.)
This will come as no surprise to those of you who have read my blogs, but I do not like government mandated healthcare. At least not healthcare that is all-in cradle to grave (correction: make that intercourse to grave). I do think that “basic healthcare” is part of our social safety net. There is a need for “public health” services and I expect to pay taxes that will fund those services. There is a place for Medicare and Medicaid as well. But what level of services should those programs provide? As a society we seem to be OK with providing very basic food, clothing and shelter for those who cannot afford it. But when it comes to healthcare, only the best, or perhaps more accurately…the SAME…for everyone. And for that matter, what should be covered under the healthcare umbrella? Contraceptives? Morning after pills? How about gym memberships? Personal trainers? Exercise equipment? A chicken in every pot, an elliptical in every home.
This whole healthcare issue is a tough one for me. When I ask the WWJD question (What Would Jesus Do?), He answers my question by commanding that His disciples “Heal the sick” (Matt 10:8). But then He goes on to say “raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give.” So based on that command, perhaps The Church (including all of us who profess to be followers of Christ) should be leading the march toward universal healthcare coverage. I just can’t figure out how we can do it for free. Perhaps that comes AFTER we’ve raised the dead and driven out the demons.
This will come as no surprise to those of you who have read my blogs, but I do not like government mandated healthcare. At least not healthcare that is all-in cradle to grave (correction: make that intercourse to grave). I do think that “basic healthcare” is part of our social safety net. There is a need for “public health” services and I expect to pay taxes that will fund those services. There is a place for Medicare and Medicaid as well. But what level of services should those programs provide? As a society we seem to be OK with providing very basic food, clothing and shelter for those who cannot afford it. But when it comes to healthcare, only the best, or perhaps more accurately…the SAME…for everyone. And for that matter, what should be covered under the healthcare umbrella? Contraceptives? Morning after pills? How about gym memberships? Personal trainers? Exercise equipment? A chicken in every pot, an elliptical in every home.
This whole healthcare issue is a tough one for me. When I ask the WWJD question (What Would Jesus Do?), He answers my question by commanding that His disciples “Heal the sick” (Matt 10:8). But then He goes on to say “raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give.” So based on that command, perhaps The Church (including all of us who profess to be followers of Christ) should be leading the march toward universal healthcare coverage. I just can’t figure out how we can do it for free. Perhaps that comes AFTER we’ve raised the dead and driven out the demons.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
21
I always liked the number 21. Legal drinking age in most places. A winning hand in Blackjack. The 21 gun salute. 21 is just an all around good number. And now 21 is being put forth as the number of hours we should have in the average work week. That’s right, 21 hours per week is enough. Actually the proposal is for no more than 1092 hours per year which works out to 21 hours per week. But if you’re willing to sacrifice and work 26 hours per week, you can get your work done in 42 weeks. If you choose this option, be sure to hydrate and take frequent breaks.
Seriously, the 21 hour proposal has been put forth by NEF, The New Economics Foundation. NEF is a London based think tank whose aim is “to improve quality of life by promoting innovative solutions that challenge mainstream thinking on economic, environment and social issues. We work in partnership and put people and the planet first.”
NEF claims that “a ‘normal’ working week of 21 hours could help to address a range of urgent, interlinked problems: overwork, unemployment, over-consumption, high carbon emissions, low well-being, entrenched inequalities, and the lack of time to live sustainably, to care for each other, and simply to enjoy life.”
Essentially their message is that the planet is reaching the point where we cannot afford to have people working too much and using the proceeds of that work to consume too much. Very soon there just will not be enough to go around. Already, in most places, there’s not enough work. In many places, there’s not enough room. Many people do not have enough food and are running out of water. Soon there won’t be enough clean air. (And you were worried about beer and toilet paper?)
So the answer is to downsize. Work less, live simpler and smaller, and learn to enjoy the little everyday things. Become a happy wanderer. Think of all the things you could do if you only worked 21 hours per week… (and, oh by the way, only had money for basic food, clothing and shelter.) I guess if you’re living in a hole in the ground somewhere in a third world country, half naked and starving, the 21 hour work week with three hots and a cot is looking pretty good. But, I’ve got to admit that I’m just not feeling it. I like my big house and my big cars and my big screen TVs and my big pantry filled with enough food to feed a small African country.
Do I have more than I need? Yes, absolutely and I thank God for it everyday.
I realize that it’s only by His grace (or if you don’t believe in such a thing, dumb luck) that I am not living in hole in the ground, half naked and starving. But you know what? I don’t think that the way I’m living is the reason some poor soul is living in a hole in the ground, half naked and starving. And I’m betting that if I start working 21 hours a week and get rid of all my stuff and stop consuming, the result will be more people living in holes, half naked and starving. Someone may pick up the slack and find a part time job as a result of my becoming a conscientious objector to full time employment, but I really don’t think it will solve the world’s problems.
The scary part of all this is that there are a lot of people who think that this type of radical sharing of everything is The Answer. Some will even use the Bible to support their position. They will tell you that hard-driving competitive capitalism is intrinsically evil. That it is at the root of our social, political, environmental and economic problems. That there is only so much juice in the world’s grape and everyone should have the same size straw and the same amount of time to suck. (Sorry, I can’t think of a better way to describe it.)
I can think of a better approach. Offer incentives to create “more juice” and give the juice creators bigger straws and better access to “the grape”. Let the “juice creators” work more than 21 hours a week if that’s what they choose to do. Those who opt to work less get smaller straws and more free time to suck.
Seriously, the 21 hour proposal has been put forth by NEF, The New Economics Foundation. NEF is a London based think tank whose aim is “to improve quality of life by promoting innovative solutions that challenge mainstream thinking on economic, environment and social issues. We work in partnership and put people and the planet first.”
NEF claims that “a ‘normal’ working week of 21 hours could help to address a range of urgent, interlinked problems: overwork, unemployment, over-consumption, high carbon emissions, low well-being, entrenched inequalities, and the lack of time to live sustainably, to care for each other, and simply to enjoy life.”
Essentially their message is that the planet is reaching the point where we cannot afford to have people working too much and using the proceeds of that work to consume too much. Very soon there just will not be enough to go around. Already, in most places, there’s not enough work. In many places, there’s not enough room. Many people do not have enough food and are running out of water. Soon there won’t be enough clean air. (And you were worried about beer and toilet paper?)
So the answer is to downsize. Work less, live simpler and smaller, and learn to enjoy the little everyday things. Become a happy wanderer. Think of all the things you could do if you only worked 21 hours per week… (and, oh by the way, only had money for basic food, clothing and shelter.) I guess if you’re living in a hole in the ground somewhere in a third world country, half naked and starving, the 21 hour work week with three hots and a cot is looking pretty good. But, I’ve got to admit that I’m just not feeling it. I like my big house and my big cars and my big screen TVs and my big pantry filled with enough food to feed a small African country.
Do I have more than I need? Yes, absolutely and I thank God for it everyday.
I realize that it’s only by His grace (or if you don’t believe in such a thing, dumb luck) that I am not living in hole in the ground, half naked and starving. But you know what? I don’t think that the way I’m living is the reason some poor soul is living in a hole in the ground, half naked and starving. And I’m betting that if I start working 21 hours a week and get rid of all my stuff and stop consuming, the result will be more people living in holes, half naked and starving. Someone may pick up the slack and find a part time job as a result of my becoming a conscientious objector to full time employment, but I really don’t think it will solve the world’s problems.
The scary part of all this is that there are a lot of people who think that this type of radical sharing of everything is The Answer. Some will even use the Bible to support their position. They will tell you that hard-driving competitive capitalism is intrinsically evil. That it is at the root of our social, political, environmental and economic problems. That there is only so much juice in the world’s grape and everyone should have the same size straw and the same amount of time to suck. (Sorry, I can’t think of a better way to describe it.)
I can think of a better approach. Offer incentives to create “more juice” and give the juice creators bigger straws and better access to “the grape”. Let the “juice creators” work more than 21 hours a week if that’s what they choose to do. Those who opt to work less get smaller straws and more free time to suck.
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Touching the Ball
When one is recovering from surgery, such as total knee replacement (TKR), one tends to watch more television than normal. One even watches commercials. (How bored am I?) The other day, one commercial actually got my attention. It’s been around a couple of years, but I usually ignore it. Perhaps you’ve seen it. It’s about a championship basketball game, presumably high school. At a critical moment near the end of the game, the ball goes out of bounds. A time out is called. A player on the team that was given possession of the ball tells his coach that he actually touched the ball before it went out of bounds. Possession should go to the other team. The player’s teammates get mad at him for speaking up, but the coach looks him in the eye and says “Good call”.
The commercial is sponsored by the Foundation for a Better Life. The foundation was created in 2001 and entirely funded by a wealthy evangelical Christian, Philip Anschutz. The messages are not overtly religious, but focus on morality and doing the right things. I’m all for it and applaud Mr. Anschutz for putting a big chunk of his considerable wealth into this program.
But, I must admit that I struggle with this particular example of honesty and sportsmanship. The referee is part of the game. If he blows the call, it’s part of the game. The blown call hurts one team and helps the other…it’s part of the game. So here’s the big question…when “the system” makes the wrong call, are we obligated to correct it? If the batter takes a 3-2 pitch in the strike zone, but the umpire calls it a ball, should the batter feel bad about it and try to change the call? Before instant replay how many bad calls were made in football? How many times did the player who benefited from the bad call know it was a bad call? Was the player wrong to benefit from the bad call?
It’s pretty clear to me that referees and umpires are part of sports and their calls, right or wrong, are part of the game. You win some and you lose some. But what about the cashier who gives you change for a $20 when you actually gave them a $10. What about the buyer who pays your full asking price and never ask questions about the merchandise? What about the promotion you get that really should have gone to someone else? Are undeserved wins offset by undeserved losses somewhere on a great cosmic scoreboard? Should we care and if so, should we try to change the score?
The reality is that most of us will tell the cashier that they gave us back too much change. Doing the right thing over an extra $10 feels better than keeping the $10 (unless you’re flat broke in which case you’re more likely to keep the $10 and deal with guilt later.)But most of us will not go out of our way to tell a prospective buyer the “warts and all” about the product. Caveat emptor is the game. And we’re not likely to push someone else ahead of us for that promotion. If the boss thinks I’m better qualified and more deserving, that’s just my good fortune.
So when do you call a foul on yourself? They say that our character is revealed by what we do when no one is watching. That may be true, but it is not complete. Our character is further revealed by what we do about a wrong even when others say it is right. When we touch the ball and no one else knows it. Someone else's call? That's your call.
The commercial is sponsored by the Foundation for a Better Life. The foundation was created in 2001 and entirely funded by a wealthy evangelical Christian, Philip Anschutz. The messages are not overtly religious, but focus on morality and doing the right things. I’m all for it and applaud Mr. Anschutz for putting a big chunk of his considerable wealth into this program.
But, I must admit that I struggle with this particular example of honesty and sportsmanship. The referee is part of the game. If he blows the call, it’s part of the game. The blown call hurts one team and helps the other…it’s part of the game. So here’s the big question…when “the system” makes the wrong call, are we obligated to correct it? If the batter takes a 3-2 pitch in the strike zone, but the umpire calls it a ball, should the batter feel bad about it and try to change the call? Before instant replay how many bad calls were made in football? How many times did the player who benefited from the bad call know it was a bad call? Was the player wrong to benefit from the bad call?
It’s pretty clear to me that referees and umpires are part of sports and their calls, right or wrong, are part of the game. You win some and you lose some. But what about the cashier who gives you change for a $20 when you actually gave them a $10. What about the buyer who pays your full asking price and never ask questions about the merchandise? What about the promotion you get that really should have gone to someone else? Are undeserved wins offset by undeserved losses somewhere on a great cosmic scoreboard? Should we care and if so, should we try to change the score?
The reality is that most of us will tell the cashier that they gave us back too much change. Doing the right thing over an extra $10 feels better than keeping the $10 (unless you’re flat broke in which case you’re more likely to keep the $10 and deal with guilt later.)But most of us will not go out of our way to tell a prospective buyer the “warts and all” about the product. Caveat emptor is the game. And we’re not likely to push someone else ahead of us for that promotion. If the boss thinks I’m better qualified and more deserving, that’s just my good fortune.
So when do you call a foul on yourself? They say that our character is revealed by what we do when no one is watching. That may be true, but it is not complete. Our character is further revealed by what we do about a wrong even when others say it is right. When we touch the ball and no one else knows it. Someone else's call? That's your call.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)