An Even Quicker Note

Quick Notes

Maybe it's not such a big deal that Kerry trails Bush in fundraising by $100 million; I mean, if Bush is going to use his advertising dollars proving he's a clueless jerk, then Kerry can just spend his limited funds on stuff like bumper stickers and victory parties.

Finally, I try to avoid strolling down Memory Lane too often, but I ran across my original inspiration for this web log while (finally) transferring files from my old computer (IBM 386, circa 1990 — hey, it still works great!) to my "new" one (which is almost 2 years old now). When I started this blog, I figured I'd use it mainly to chronicle my outdoor adventures, which I used to write up, strictly for my own edification, using good old World Perfect 5.0. Here's a sample entry:

2000 09 18 Mon 21:56 linville gorge walkabout. 50°.
     left lettered rock ridge trailhead 1445; hawksbill trail to lower climbers access trail, that trail to its apparent end, then offtrail (incl brief class 2/3 rock scramble) up to upper climbers access trail, then down that to main hawksbill trail up to top. rain moved in at this point, fine stinging needles of mist. put on my jacket. then offtrail south towards spence ridge trail. navigated a bearing of 180° towards table rock, veering east (left) to avoid travel on slippery rocks. intersected well-defined east/west trail while still descending, followed it only a few minutes west before it petered out. back-tracked this trail to its discreet emergence onto FR 210. followed FR 210 to spence ridge trailhead, not a long way on the road. descended spence ridge trail, running as much as possible to river and crossed on log bridge. fell off log into river but since i was already wet it didn't matter. backtracked to road, followed road back to lettered rock ridge trailhead. arrived 1915 (elapsed hiking time 4.50 hrs). home 2115. didn't see another person. very pleased with this one.

La Agrodolce Vita

We've had at least some small bit of snow on the ground here since January 25^th, the longest period of continuous snow I can recall here (I know I'm stretching the definition of "snow," but I do live in the South, remember). I'm one of a tiny handful of folks in town who are less than overjoyed at Spring's grand entrance. I actually enjoy snow and cold weather; probably my ancestry has more than a little to do with that. Fortunately, I'm sure there'll still be some snow hanging around the mountains of New England later this month when I get up there.

School continues to roll along smoothly. I haven't really allowed myself to think too much about after. Having lived so cozily in my quiet little world for so many years, I find it hard to imagine uprooting myself. This is what I want, this little town with all its charms and flaws, with its quiet streets and hidden stories. I've lived here most of my life, and this place is as much a part of me as my skin. Sure, I'd like money enough (and time) to travel, to be able to give more, and yes, to live a little more comfortably. Also, I'd like to spend time with one particular wonderful Someone more than once every few weeks. But that's really all I want that I don't have, and I hope to have that and my home, too. I ache at the thought of not being here to see the daffodils come up here next Spring, although I reserve the right to bitch about how fast the snow melted.

Music In My Head:

• Claude Debussy — "Claire de Lune"
• Olivia Newton-John — "A Little More Love"
• The Breeders — "Flipside" and "I Just Wanna To Get Along"
• Baltimora — "Tarzan Boy"
• Soul Coughing — "Super Bon Bon" (Propellerheads remix)
• Celia Cruz — "Quantanamera"

More, please....

All Work and No Play...

No, not really, but I did daydream about it briefly, before I went back to work. Clearly, I'm spending too much time parked in front of a PC. I mean, when the best part of your day is the hour you spend at the gym, things are not as they should be. Today, I didn't even go to the gym. Nothing's really all that bad, but nothing's really all that good.

I do like Volvo's YCC concept car:

From the outset in December 2002, when Volvo's top executives approved the project, every aspect of the car's design and production has been overseen by women, a first in the automotive industry.

The result: A car that's designed to be nearly maintenance free, requiring an oil change only every 31,000 miles. When it's time for an engine inspection, the car sends a wireless message to a local service center, which notifies the driver.

The vehicle doesn't have a hood — the whole front end lifts up for easy access by a mechanic, since the designers didn't envision doing much engine work themselves. You fill up the tank using a roller-ball valve opening, like many race cars have, because it's simpler and less messy than removing a gas cap.

The engine is a low-emission, gas-electric hybrid.

"You get the power, and you're environmentally OK at the same time," said Tatiana Butovitsch, the project's communications manager.

Gull-wing doors allow easy access to space behind the driver's seat. The bottom of the rear seats fold up, similar to theater seating, providing more storage space. The car also has dirt-repellant paint and glass, exchangeable seat covers with matching carpet and sensors that guide the driver for easier parking.

[full story]

I'm also pleased that John Kerry has wrapped up the nomination so quickly, more especially that the Democratic challengers didn't rip each other to shreds this primary season.

The Republicans owe much of their recent success to their unity, their willingness to put aside even large differences of opinion on most subjects, always keeping in mind their most fundamental goal: whomping the other party's ass. Looks like the Democrats have finally seen the light. Praise the Lord, and pass a can of WhoopAss!

Finally, I can't help but be pleased that so many mayors around the country are stepping up to defend the rights of same-sex couples. Any mayor considering such moves, though, should probably take the time to read their state's constitution before stepping into this political minefield. The difference between San Franscisco mayor Gavin Newsom's actions, and those of New Paltz, NY mayor Jason West, is that California's constitution specifically forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation, while New York's doesn't. Other states with a legal basis in place to support same-sex marriage are Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin. [source]

Ultimately, though, I think this issue will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Just this evening, I discussed this issue with a friend (OK, a Friend). I tried to explain that the Founding Fathers set up our system of government to allow the States to manage their own affairs as much as possible, which is why each state has its own constitution. Within each State, that constitution trumps any laws which conflict with it. I'm no legal scholar, but my understanding is that within each State, state law (again, with the constitution supreme) trumps federal law as long as the state law doesn't infringe on people's basic rights. For example, no state could pass a law, even as an amendment to their constitution, barring citizens' rights to free speech.

One of the most basic American legal principles is that we're all created equal, i.e., that we all have the same rights — you know, Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness, and all that. Doesn't marriage fall under Pursuit of Happiness? Well, maybe you married folk are laughing about the "happiness" part, but seriously, I believe an honest reading of the U.S. Constitution favors the rights of same-sex couples to marry.

Another fundamental principle of our legal system holds that a person's rights end at the point they begin to infringe on another person's rights. Opponents of same-sex marriage argue that allowing gays to marry does infringe on their rights, by harming the institution of marriage. I ask: How? No, really, I want to know — in what tangible way do same-sex marriages harm heterosexuals? I've yet to hear a satisfactory answer to this question, but anyone is welcome to leave a comment.

I have to get to bed now, so I can get up tomorrow and (sigh) work. I know it's just school, and that when I get a job, I'll look back on this time and wish life could be this easy again. Or maybe I won't. Anyway, at least tomorrow I'll get to the gym. This weekend, I'll actually get outdoors! Assuming I can restrain my malicious impulses that long....

Posted by Me at 23:37 link

If You've Nothing Nice to Say...

For a while recently, school and family demanded more of me than usual. Okay, they still demand a lot, but not as much as they demanded last week. Mom traveled to Florida, leaving me responsible for her large, unruly mob of animals. Since her return Thursday, I've indulged in the decadence of sleeping late and even a little goofing off (gasp!).

I could've blogged, but I found I didn't want to. I checked out the news, and although many fascinating people did many fascinating things, I didn't have anything nice (or even interestingly naughty) to say about any of it. Much to my chagrin.

Maybe it's natural to feel one's mind dulled after a taxing time.

Also, we had a fairly significant snow event, as if in answer to my plea, the perfect opportunity to try out my new sled! Unfortunately, I didn't. By the time I finished my schoolwork Thursday (thanks to the Internet, some of my classes continue even when officials cancel school), I felt too tired to head out. Friday, temps quickly rose above freezing and by mid-morning, melt poured off the roof, chilling my sledding enthusiasm considerably. I find melting snow illogically depressing, to a ridiculous degree, as if a dear friend were wasting away in front of me. I finally headed out anyway after noon, only to find conditions so miserably soggy that I knew I'd have 1) no fun; and probably 2) a cold if I stayed out. By the time the world froze again that evening, I was again too tired to venture out. Yesterday, the remaining snow melted more, leaving no hope of sledding this time. Tragedy!

Another factor plays a role, too, one I hate to admit: I'm starting to believe a lot of Mankiw's gospel of Free Market Economics. Don't worry, I'm not switching to the Republican Party (shudder), and I'm not going to replace my poster of the High Himalaya with one of Milton Friedman, but I must admit that, if the law of supply and demand is true, then I have to re-evaluate a number of my beliefs. Rent control and the minimum wage are lousy ways to solve housing and wage equity problems. Tariffs and quotas won't satisfactorily solve the offshore outsourcing problem, either. Those are big issues, and I find that changing my beliefs about them demotivates me.

Maybe what demotivates has less to do with my beliefs about how to solve society's major problems, and more to do with what seems to be a general lack of interest in solving the problems among those who could actually do something about them. When faced with the apparent fact that a binding minimum wage (i.e., a minimum above what otherwise would be the natural market price for unskilled labor) naturally creates a labor surplus (i.e., unemployment), the question immediately arises in my mind: Well, then, what does work?. After a time, a better question becomes clear: What works best? Unfortunately, it seems a lot of economists seem to take the failings of non-free-market-based solutions (such as the minimum wage) to mean that the problems aren't solvable, or that they aren't really worth solving.

Mankiw tries to throw out a bone here, suggesting that the earned income tax credit is a type of wage subsidy designed to ease the burden on lower-income workers. He suggests, with obvious reluctance, that the EITC could "raise the living standards of the working poor without discouraging firms from hiring them." He goes on to fret, though, that such solutions aren't that great, since they require spending tax money. It's clear Dr. Mankiw (by the way, his name rhymes with "thank you" — or more appropriately, "spank you"!) never depended on the income from a low-wage job. I agree with him that wage subsidies could make a difference — in fact, I think real wage subsidies might even come close to solving the problem — but getting an extra $500 back to supplement a $10,000 a year salary doesn't lift someone out of poverty.

Of course, neither party suggests that we chip in significant federal funds to subsidize people's wages enough to eliminate poverty.

My instructor made an excellent point, that since medical care devours so ridiculously much of lower-income workers' incomes (often to the point that they can't afford it), nationalizing our health care system would be as effective as significant wage subsidies. Every other prosperous nation has a national health system, and contrary to popular belief, those systems work. In Britain, for example, people live longer, healthier lives than they do in the States — and per capita medical costs there are less than half what they are here. What's up with that? Why don't we nationalize the health care system, like, yesterday? The only reason I can think of is that like the Grinch's, the average American's heart seems to be a couple of sizes too small.

So you see, I really don't have anything nice to say!

If you want to read positive stuff from me, check out my fitness file. Or keep checking back here. I may feel better soon.

Posted by Me at 18:20 link