This book was a fast read for me—not even two hours. Amazing, since I fall asleep after three pages.
Charles Murray, author and member of the Manhattan Institute (a libertarian think tank), sets out a plan to end welfare and all other “transfer” programs with a simple direct-payment plan.
The barely-over-200-page tome, published by the American Enterprise Institute (an economic think tank), proposes to end the welfare, Social Security, and Medicare systems we currently have, and replace them with an annual $10,000 check to every citizen who is 21 or older.
This check would start on the 21st birthday, and end at death.
Mr. Murray goes on to show in his book how this replacement plan is actually cheaper to run than our current entitlement plans, and would cost less per person in the end—but I have questions:
1. Who funds the $10,000 per person annual checks?
2. Do immigrants and aliens get in on the action, or just natural-born citizens?
3. What about incarcerated people?
Mr. Murray’s goal is to reinstill some rather old-fashioned family values back into society in order to earn this $10,000 annual check—cutting down on the number of out-of-wedlock births, encouraging marriage, encouraging low birth numbers, and encouraging “satellite families” to live together and pool their money for the benefit of all.
Privacy and individuality are not encouraged with this plan.
Further, he proposes to place demands on that check by recommending that some deductions come out:
1. an estimated $3000 for medical insurance
2. an estimated $2000 for retirement savings
3. a number set by a judge to pay any child support due
These deductions would be taken and managed by Uncle Sam. All annual check proceeds would be tax-free. All annual checks would go directly into a bank account, accessible by Uncle Sam for insuring child support payments, medical insurance premiums, and retirement contributions. He will also be able to directly deposit and freeze accounts as needed.
In this proposed system, we would no longer have Social Security cards. Instead, everyone would have passports with scannable barcodes—either issued at birth and used for program registration, or issued at the inception of the program.
Work would become an option to us, and it would still be taxable. If mothers want to stay home with their kids, they can now do so, making more money than the current welfare system provides them (in cash and benefits). If mothers marry the fathers, they can pool their checks and make even more to offset the loss of income, or use that money to pay for daycare. If both parents work, and that work provides health and retirement benefits, then they can elect NOT to have federal deductions taken out of their annual checks.
In this plan, “family unity” is encouraged, even if it isn’t true family. An example: if six or seven guys want to go in on renting a house in Cape Cod and spend the rest of their lives sailing or windsurfing, they can do it by pooling their money—up until someone decides to drop out of the arrangement. Because the money is completely portable, so is the person (to a point).
In all, the people who would benefit most from this plan are young married parents, single mothers, those married without kids, and the homeless. Everyone else would just be getting a leg up, but it would be a very important leg.
The plan is doable, but I still have questions. The book is intriguing, spells out everything in black and white, and uses very little “intelellectualese”. If you’re a would-be policy wonk, or just interested in ways to end the entitlement state, this is a good read. Short but good, and it will never come to fruition with the current political realities we have now.
Friday, December 29, 2006
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Post-Holiday Commentary
As you all know, I’m Atheist, so I sat on the sidelines and watched the annual spectacle unfold around me. Unfold it did, and in big, new ways.
If Jesus is the reason for the season as many say, then how on earth did a baby shower get so out-of-control? Frankincense and myrrh would have never made it this year!
The lunacy involving the trees and household decorations came awhile back with the entrance of Martha Stewart. From there, it went high-tech and Hollywood: outdoor lights covering every single square inch of property, in varying colors set to the beat of loud music; front lawns covered in holiday-colored props ranging from Santa and his sleigh to full-blown mockups of Santa’s workshop, complete with elves, toys, and other assorted characters; Santa portrayed as Elvis, the Grinch, a Hell’s Angel biker, an Oscar celebrity, and a robot; and gifts ranging from the simple plastic gift card all the way to cars, diamonds, fur, and plasma screen TVs that can’t fit through the front door!
It seems the shopping craziness this year has been detoured toward the decorating craziness, with neighbor outdoing neighbor, and whole blocks competing for attention—some even charging admission to see their displays. There was a mock-up of Hollywood and Oscar night, a mock-up of the North Pole, a mock-up of the Las Vegas strip, and a mock-up of the Trump Towers—all with Santa in the shot somewhere.
Has anyone stopped and though about the monumental amounts of energy wasted on such frivolousness, and for what? As time-consuming as it all was to build and put up, it all has to come right back down, and be stored somewhere…and then comes that dreaded electric bill.
It’s getting to be as bad as the 4th of July fireworks each year—more and more, better and better. Where does it all end? When can we say we’ve had enough?
Someone found the cord and plugged the Christmas Machine back in. Now, someone else needs to cut the cord and dim the lights once and for all.
Can anyone venture a guess as to how much it cost for one guy to have a separate power transformer box mounted in his yard just so he could put out his VERY ostentatious display each year? The thought makes me sick.
As if the OUTSIDE lunacy wasn’t enough, we still carry on the lunacy INSIDE with trees decorated ala Martha, presents wrapped and decorated ala Martha, and tables draped and laden ala Martha, Rachel Ray, or the HGTV “Decorating for the Holidays” show. The “baby shower” origins have been twisted and disposed of completely in the name of retail free-for-all, in hopes that retailer can wring a little black ink out for the year.
What else makes me sick is the thought of miles of colorful wrapping paper, coupled with miles of ribbons and tape, all going into the trash—but not until they’re removed from presents under the tree. It’s true, and it’s pathetic, but then someone very wisely designed the reusable gift bag. Someday, more of us will catch onto the reusable GIFT.
Someday, the dumpster in my apartment complex won’t be overflowing with crumpled and torn gift wrap, discarded trees, and large intact boxes every December 25th. Someday, parents of the kids around here will catch on to the fact that newly-gotten toys break after a week of playing with them, or worse—sink to the bottom of the toy box, forgotten, in favor of the neighbor kid’s new Nintendo Wii (which will also succumb to rough-housing).
Instead of carrying all this nonsense to higher and higher heights, shouldn’t we get back to the roots of the day by honoring and gifting local babies born on Christmas Day of each year? The money we spend (or throw away) now could go a long way in helping a newborn’s college fund, or insuring a new family’s good start in life—or even help out a soon-to-be-harried mother. This, I think, would be a more sensible way to honor the birth of Jesus (or anyone else) instead of the holiday insanity we have now.
Would Jesus (or anybody else) approve of this “paying it forward” plan? I think so, especially when compared to what we do NOW. So many people complain of not having enough, yet everyone seems to have enough to throw away (in so many ways) on this spectacle of a holiday.
I’d like to propose a new way to celebrate “Christmas”: plant a tree, give a gift to a local newborn or its family, and have a buffet instead of a Martha-style feast. On second thought, we’d find ways to spin THAT way out of control too.
I guess I’ll just go back to long-range observation. I can hardly wait to see what new boundaries New Year’s has to bring--then there’s Valentine’s Day, St. Patrick’s Day, Easter…the list goes on, and I’ll be watching.
If Jesus is the reason for the season as many say, then how on earth did a baby shower get so out-of-control? Frankincense and myrrh would have never made it this year!
The lunacy involving the trees and household decorations came awhile back with the entrance of Martha Stewart. From there, it went high-tech and Hollywood: outdoor lights covering every single square inch of property, in varying colors set to the beat of loud music; front lawns covered in holiday-colored props ranging from Santa and his sleigh to full-blown mockups of Santa’s workshop, complete with elves, toys, and other assorted characters; Santa portrayed as Elvis, the Grinch, a Hell’s Angel biker, an Oscar celebrity, and a robot; and gifts ranging from the simple plastic gift card all the way to cars, diamonds, fur, and plasma screen TVs that can’t fit through the front door!
It seems the shopping craziness this year has been detoured toward the decorating craziness, with neighbor outdoing neighbor, and whole blocks competing for attention—some even charging admission to see their displays. There was a mock-up of Hollywood and Oscar night, a mock-up of the North Pole, a mock-up of the Las Vegas strip, and a mock-up of the Trump Towers—all with Santa in the shot somewhere.
Has anyone stopped and though about the monumental amounts of energy wasted on such frivolousness, and for what? As time-consuming as it all was to build and put up, it all has to come right back down, and be stored somewhere…and then comes that dreaded electric bill.
It’s getting to be as bad as the 4th of July fireworks each year—more and more, better and better. Where does it all end? When can we say we’ve had enough?
Someone found the cord and plugged the Christmas Machine back in. Now, someone else needs to cut the cord and dim the lights once and for all.
Can anyone venture a guess as to how much it cost for one guy to have a separate power transformer box mounted in his yard just so he could put out his VERY ostentatious display each year? The thought makes me sick.
As if the OUTSIDE lunacy wasn’t enough, we still carry on the lunacy INSIDE with trees decorated ala Martha, presents wrapped and decorated ala Martha, and tables draped and laden ala Martha, Rachel Ray, or the HGTV “Decorating for the Holidays” show. The “baby shower” origins have been twisted and disposed of completely in the name of retail free-for-all, in hopes that retailer can wring a little black ink out for the year.
What else makes me sick is the thought of miles of colorful wrapping paper, coupled with miles of ribbons and tape, all going into the trash—but not until they’re removed from presents under the tree. It’s true, and it’s pathetic, but then someone very wisely designed the reusable gift bag. Someday, more of us will catch onto the reusable GIFT.
Someday, the dumpster in my apartment complex won’t be overflowing with crumpled and torn gift wrap, discarded trees, and large intact boxes every December 25th. Someday, parents of the kids around here will catch on to the fact that newly-gotten toys break after a week of playing with them, or worse—sink to the bottom of the toy box, forgotten, in favor of the neighbor kid’s new Nintendo Wii (which will also succumb to rough-housing).
Instead of carrying all this nonsense to higher and higher heights, shouldn’t we get back to the roots of the day by honoring and gifting local babies born on Christmas Day of each year? The money we spend (or throw away) now could go a long way in helping a newborn’s college fund, or insuring a new family’s good start in life—or even help out a soon-to-be-harried mother. This, I think, would be a more sensible way to honor the birth of Jesus (or anyone else) instead of the holiday insanity we have now.
Would Jesus (or anybody else) approve of this “paying it forward” plan? I think so, especially when compared to what we do NOW. So many people complain of not having enough, yet everyone seems to have enough to throw away (in so many ways) on this spectacle of a holiday.
I’d like to propose a new way to celebrate “Christmas”: plant a tree, give a gift to a local newborn or its family, and have a buffet instead of a Martha-style feast. On second thought, we’d find ways to spin THAT way out of control too.
I guess I’ll just go back to long-range observation. I can hardly wait to see what new boundaries New Year’s has to bring--then there’s Valentine’s Day, St. Patrick’s Day, Easter…the list goes on, and I’ll be watching.
How’s YOUR Resolution?
I say "how" and not "what" because I'm talking about a different resolution than the made-and-broken New Year's one, followed by the made-and-broken Lent give-ups.
To resolve is to change, and change isn't easy--nor is it done in a day, or even a week. Then there's the monumental change vs. the small-but-manageable change. Some small changes can easily become monumental ones, like quitting smoking or drinking--vowing to cease one simple activity isn't so simple when your body has adapted to the new inputs, and now can't seem to live without them.
Then, there's the RIGHT kind of resolution: to change slowly, for the better, long-term. I'm talking purpose, meaning, and clarity here. This has to do with a different kind of "vision" than what happens in your eyes--it's what happens in your mind.
From the time we were born, expectations have been placed upon us that may have absolutely nothing to do with our own personal wishes, strengths, or desired outcomes. New Year's and Lent resolutions only serve to put further expectations upon ourselves--goals we aren't likely to reach in the short OR long term.
This New Year's, resolve to give up resolving--new year resolutions are mostly made while drunk and over-joyful anyway, with no real thought about it. And because there's no real though about it, there is no game plan made, no support structure in place, and no real guidance as to how or why to do it in the first place.
I just read about 3/4 of the way through Goal-Free Living, and I have to say I've already been practicing it for years without realizing it. All those hopes, dreams, and expectations of my parents, teachers, friends, and later, employers never really seemed to come to fruition--I had my eyes too firmly fixed on the prize trying to please everyone but myself.
I was frequently touted as being the black sheep of the family, and was told one day that I march to the beat of my own drummer. Goal-Free Living taught me that I was merely trying to stay flexible and open to new ideas, new directions, and new desires. I was always keeping my options open--even at a young age--but nobody understood that.
Turn the clock forward to today--most of us are deeply entrenched in the nose-to-grindstone, workaday world with no source of inspiration or innovation. Only invocation seems to come from authority figures these days, and if you don't tow the line, you put yourself in jeopardy of losing whatever security you held for yourself.
Because your nose is pointed down (so to speak), you are cut off from seeing what else may abound in your world--all the other opportunities that may exist, but cannot make themselves known to you for your simple head angle and attention span.
In short, we're all too wrapped up in satisfying other people's goals--just like at home.
Instead of asking the well-beaten question of "what makes you happy", ask yourself what needs doing, and can you do it? Too many of us (including me) don't know what will make us happy, so we need to back off and learn how to fill voids. In the book, one woman says she found her calling in the dumpster--she was dumping her trash, and saw a whole lot of brand-new sneakers in the dumpster. After rescuing them, she tried to find some sort of social service agency or charity to give them to, and not finding any, she herself became the Shoe Lady. Since then, the Shoe Lady has been collecting shoe contributions from retailers for the last 20 years, and has been outfitting low-income people of all ages and sizes.
Another woman was out on her stoop and noticed a whole lot of kids out in the street begging in her neighborhood. After talking with one, she learned that these kids were latchkey kids, left alone with no key, and therefore, no access to food or a bathroom. After finding no help from charities or a social service program, she herself set up an after-school place for these kids to stay in safety until Mom got home.
Sometimes we possess skills we didn't even know we had--none of the people mentioned in the book had degrees in anything even relating to what their calling turned out to be. It's like telling a child to mop the floor--it needs doing, and you have provided a mop, bucket, and cleaning water, but that's all. If the child really is interested in a clean floor, he will figure out how to get the floor mopped. He may ask for help, he may go to the library or internet, he may ask friends, or he may even experiment. It will take time, but the floor will eventually get clean, and a need will have been filled. With time and practice, the floor will get cleaner in less time. Then, that kid will be teaching others how to mop, and may grow up to own a janitorial service--one with a twist, such as specializing in homes of the disabled, nursing homes, or other places where people cannot mop for themselves.
When you look around you, do you see a need that should be filled? Are you prepared to fill it any way you can? Does it bother you enough to do something about it?
Go ahead and take a look around--your next job opportunity or business opportunity might be just off to the left of your immediate field of vision. Shed those blinders of "success", "expectation", and "duty", and try something different...without a net for safety. The lack of safety net is just the thing to get someone in gear and keep him there--always innovating, always scrambling, and always willing to see opportunity and where it may take him.
After so many years of having those blinders on, how IS your resolution? Do you now see opportunity and voids that need filling? Make this a new way to make resolutions--by actually fulfilling them (through filling voids) for the long-term, and for them to end up being your calling.
To resolve is to change, and change isn't easy--nor is it done in a day, or even a week. Then there's the monumental change vs. the small-but-manageable change. Some small changes can easily become monumental ones, like quitting smoking or drinking--vowing to cease one simple activity isn't so simple when your body has adapted to the new inputs, and now can't seem to live without them.
Then, there's the RIGHT kind of resolution: to change slowly, for the better, long-term. I'm talking purpose, meaning, and clarity here. This has to do with a different kind of "vision" than what happens in your eyes--it's what happens in your mind.
From the time we were born, expectations have been placed upon us that may have absolutely nothing to do with our own personal wishes, strengths, or desired outcomes. New Year's and Lent resolutions only serve to put further expectations upon ourselves--goals we aren't likely to reach in the short OR long term.
This New Year's, resolve to give up resolving--new year resolutions are mostly made while drunk and over-joyful anyway, with no real thought about it. And because there's no real though about it, there is no game plan made, no support structure in place, and no real guidance as to how or why to do it in the first place.
I just read about 3/4 of the way through Goal-Free Living, and I have to say I've already been practicing it for years without realizing it. All those hopes, dreams, and expectations of my parents, teachers, friends, and later, employers never really seemed to come to fruition--I had my eyes too firmly fixed on the prize trying to please everyone but myself.
I was frequently touted as being the black sheep of the family, and was told one day that I march to the beat of my own drummer. Goal-Free Living taught me that I was merely trying to stay flexible and open to new ideas, new directions, and new desires. I was always keeping my options open--even at a young age--but nobody understood that.
Turn the clock forward to today--most of us are deeply entrenched in the nose-to-grindstone, workaday world with no source of inspiration or innovation. Only invocation seems to come from authority figures these days, and if you don't tow the line, you put yourself in jeopardy of losing whatever security you held for yourself.
Because your nose is pointed down (so to speak), you are cut off from seeing what else may abound in your world--all the other opportunities that may exist, but cannot make themselves known to you for your simple head angle and attention span.
In short, we're all too wrapped up in satisfying other people's goals--just like at home.
Instead of asking the well-beaten question of "what makes you happy", ask yourself what needs doing, and can you do it? Too many of us (including me) don't know what will make us happy, so we need to back off and learn how to fill voids. In the book, one woman says she found her calling in the dumpster--she was dumping her trash, and saw a whole lot of brand-new sneakers in the dumpster. After rescuing them, she tried to find some sort of social service agency or charity to give them to, and not finding any, she herself became the Shoe Lady. Since then, the Shoe Lady has been collecting shoe contributions from retailers for the last 20 years, and has been outfitting low-income people of all ages and sizes.
Another woman was out on her stoop and noticed a whole lot of kids out in the street begging in her neighborhood. After talking with one, she learned that these kids were latchkey kids, left alone with no key, and therefore, no access to food or a bathroom. After finding no help from charities or a social service program, she herself set up an after-school place for these kids to stay in safety until Mom got home.
Sometimes we possess skills we didn't even know we had--none of the people mentioned in the book had degrees in anything even relating to what their calling turned out to be. It's like telling a child to mop the floor--it needs doing, and you have provided a mop, bucket, and cleaning water, but that's all. If the child really is interested in a clean floor, he will figure out how to get the floor mopped. He may ask for help, he may go to the library or internet, he may ask friends, or he may even experiment. It will take time, but the floor will eventually get clean, and a need will have been filled. With time and practice, the floor will get cleaner in less time. Then, that kid will be teaching others how to mop, and may grow up to own a janitorial service--one with a twist, such as specializing in homes of the disabled, nursing homes, or other places where people cannot mop for themselves.
When you look around you, do you see a need that should be filled? Are you prepared to fill it any way you can? Does it bother you enough to do something about it?
Go ahead and take a look around--your next job opportunity or business opportunity might be just off to the left of your immediate field of vision. Shed those blinders of "success", "expectation", and "duty", and try something different...without a net for safety. The lack of safety net is just the thing to get someone in gear and keep him there--always innovating, always scrambling, and always willing to see opportunity and where it may take him.
After so many years of having those blinders on, how IS your resolution? Do you now see opportunity and voids that need filling? Make this a new way to make resolutions--by actually fulfilling them (through filling voids) for the long-term, and for them to end up being your calling.
Monday, December 18, 2006
Question for the Millenium
How does one "spend" Christmas? It's not legal tender or anything.
This question was on the blog of Hubby's friend (don't know where it is--am looking and will post a link), and it boggles the mind.
This question was on the blog of Hubby's friend (don't know where it is--am looking and will post a link), and it boggles the mind.
Friday, December 15, 2006
Now for the Bonus Round...
By now you've probably heard all the foofarah about Wall Streeters gettng record bonuses this year--and how Goldman Sachs actually UNDERpaid its employees during the year and made up for it with those bonuses.
That's the cruel joke on Wall St.--underpay your staff, overwork your staff, shower them with bonuses from the piles of money they raked in on your behalf, then stick 'em with the consequences.
The dark side of this windfall: taxes. When paid as a bonus, that money doesn't count as wages, tips, or salaries--in other words, no taxes have been paid on it. It's completely up to you to pay those taxes and declare that bonus as income.
Go ahead--try to have a Merry Christmas on what's left over, because that bonus may just be the thing to bump you into a whole new bracket, or worse--AMT. Meanwhile, the company skates away scott-free and tax-free, leaving you to spend your bonus on that shiny new tax bracket!
Next time, I hope the workers opt for comp time--time to rest, do what you want, and not incur any taxes. Perks and benefits would have been a nice, tax-free addition as well.
WWWD: I'd have opted for a paid month or two off (or even a shortened work year) instead of a half-million-dollar bonus.
According to the TV interviews I saw, the lucky brokers are looking to buy things from a vacation home to a fancy car--all the way to a small yacht with their windfall. This will only incur more taxes (and maintenance fees) for them later on in the form of property tax, sales tax, mooring fees, etc.--and these taxes and fees are what make the NE econmomy go round and round. Realtors have even said in the interview that they depend heavily on "bonus time."
Boeing used to have the same effect on the Seattle economy, but no more. The Big Three auto manufacturers also used to have a similar effect on their local economies, especially the Norfolk, VA area. Now that the Ford plant is closing here, the North Carolina border real estate market will undoubtedly soon tank--it seems Ford kept two states going with one assembly plant.
In some homes this year, Santa Claus will be replaced by Uncle Sam for chimney-shimmying, and an audit notice may replace typical stocking-stuffers.
That's the cruel joke on Wall St.--underpay your staff, overwork your staff, shower them with bonuses from the piles of money they raked in on your behalf, then stick 'em with the consequences.
The dark side of this windfall: taxes. When paid as a bonus, that money doesn't count as wages, tips, or salaries--in other words, no taxes have been paid on it. It's completely up to you to pay those taxes and declare that bonus as income.
Go ahead--try to have a Merry Christmas on what's left over, because that bonus may just be the thing to bump you into a whole new bracket, or worse--AMT. Meanwhile, the company skates away scott-free and tax-free, leaving you to spend your bonus on that shiny new tax bracket!
Next time, I hope the workers opt for comp time--time to rest, do what you want, and not incur any taxes. Perks and benefits would have been a nice, tax-free addition as well.
WWWD: I'd have opted for a paid month or two off (or even a shortened work year) instead of a half-million-dollar bonus.
According to the TV interviews I saw, the lucky brokers are looking to buy things from a vacation home to a fancy car--all the way to a small yacht with their windfall. This will only incur more taxes (and maintenance fees) for them later on in the form of property tax, sales tax, mooring fees, etc.--and these taxes and fees are what make the NE econmomy go round and round. Realtors have even said in the interview that they depend heavily on "bonus time."
Boeing used to have the same effect on the Seattle economy, but no more. The Big Three auto manufacturers also used to have a similar effect on their local economies, especially the Norfolk, VA area. Now that the Ford plant is closing here, the North Carolina border real estate market will undoubtedly soon tank--it seems Ford kept two states going with one assembly plant.
In some homes this year, Santa Claus will be replaced by Uncle Sam for chimney-shimmying, and an audit notice may replace typical stocking-stuffers.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Credit and Identity in Shreds
You’ve probably all heard the warnings, as well as the sales pitches, to shred your papers before tossing them out—tons of companies are eager to assist you in this chore. Cross-cut if need be.
Is anyone telling you that shredding may not be enough?
Of course not—banks and retailers galore are receiving applications that have been shredded and taped back together, and GRANTING CREDIT on them!
This is absolute candy for the ID thief.
I’d like to propose one additional step in document destruction just to ensure nothing can be taped back together once it gets fished out of the trash: throw it away in different garbage cans that have differing dump times.
Here’s how it works: a credit application comes in the mail, or maybe some of those pesky balance transfer checks—something with all your confidential information on them. To destroy them, tear up or shred, separating the piles into however many different trash cans you have around your home (kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, office, etc.). Then distribute your pile of document shreds among your various trash cans, because they don’t all get dumped at the same time in the same can. This way, even if an ID thief were to get a hold of your shreds, he wouldn’t be able to reassemble the shredded document because parts of it would be missing.
Those missing parts would then appear in your main trash some time later, after the thief has grown tired of fishing and moved on. He still wouldn’t be able to reassemble anything unless he kept the original pieces—this could mean a long wait.
WWWD: Wenchypoo does not own any other shredder than the ones at the ends of her arms, so she tears up sensitive mail and divides it into three piles—one for the kitchen trash, one for the bathroom trash, and one for the office trash. This way, should anyone be homing in on her discards, they’d have to wait a good long time for the missing pieces. She also has the added bonus of an apartment complex dumpster that gets dumped daily, further ensuring a good mix of outgoing trash.
DO NOT flush any mail bits, as they might jam up your pipes, depending on your plumbing (mine is from the Colonial Era, I swear!).
I do this with anything that has any amount of ID thief fodder—Social Security numbers, account numbers, birthdates, full names, etc. I tear it up into small pieces, then distribute the pieces into pile 1 (kitchen), pile 2 (bathroom), and pile 3 (office). This way, an ID thief can only get possession of one pile at a time, and would have to dig through an entire dumpster (or the dump proper) to get any third of my documents. Since the bathroom and office trash take longer to fill up, they get dumped days (or even weeks) behind the kitchen trash.
Shredding alone and throwing it away in one lump is not the total answer to ID theft protection, because of those clever folks at 3M—the scotch tape people. By separating your lump and varying the dump times, this adds another layer of protection that’s cheap and easy to do.
Is anyone telling you that shredding may not be enough?
Of course not—banks and retailers galore are receiving applications that have been shredded and taped back together, and GRANTING CREDIT on them!
This is absolute candy for the ID thief.
I’d like to propose one additional step in document destruction just to ensure nothing can be taped back together once it gets fished out of the trash: throw it away in different garbage cans that have differing dump times.
Here’s how it works: a credit application comes in the mail, or maybe some of those pesky balance transfer checks—something with all your confidential information on them. To destroy them, tear up or shred, separating the piles into however many different trash cans you have around your home (kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, office, etc.). Then distribute your pile of document shreds among your various trash cans, because they don’t all get dumped at the same time in the same can. This way, even if an ID thief were to get a hold of your shreds, he wouldn’t be able to reassemble the shredded document because parts of it would be missing.
Those missing parts would then appear in your main trash some time later, after the thief has grown tired of fishing and moved on. He still wouldn’t be able to reassemble anything unless he kept the original pieces—this could mean a long wait.
WWWD: Wenchypoo does not own any other shredder than the ones at the ends of her arms, so she tears up sensitive mail and divides it into three piles—one for the kitchen trash, one for the bathroom trash, and one for the office trash. This way, should anyone be homing in on her discards, they’d have to wait a good long time for the missing pieces. She also has the added bonus of an apartment complex dumpster that gets dumped daily, further ensuring a good mix of outgoing trash.
DO NOT flush any mail bits, as they might jam up your pipes, depending on your plumbing (mine is from the Colonial Era, I swear!).
I do this with anything that has any amount of ID thief fodder—Social Security numbers, account numbers, birthdates, full names, etc. I tear it up into small pieces, then distribute the pieces into pile 1 (kitchen), pile 2 (bathroom), and pile 3 (office). This way, an ID thief can only get possession of one pile at a time, and would have to dig through an entire dumpster (or the dump proper) to get any third of my documents. Since the bathroom and office trash take longer to fill up, they get dumped days (or even weeks) behind the kitchen trash.
Shredding alone and throwing it away in one lump is not the total answer to ID theft protection, because of those clever folks at 3M—the scotch tape people. By separating your lump and varying the dump times, this adds another layer of protection that’s cheap and easy to do.
Monday, December 11, 2006
This Thing Called Hunger Part III: Personal Abdication
I know, I know—I only wrote Part Two a few days ago, but something else popped up in the “hunger” category that just absolutely slayed me.
On the way to Sam’s Club last Sunday, there was a man on the side of the freeway off ramp with a “hungry” sign. This man wasn’t hungry—well, maybe he was hungry RIGHT THEN. He, too, had fallen and couldn't reach his McMeal.
You know how I could tell he was a fraud? He was wearing a leather coat, had a spare tire fat roll, and was cleanly shaven and dressed.
It seems to be time for a WWWD question: what would Wenchypoo do in this situation? For starters, I’d hock or sell off everything I absolutely didn’t need for survival. Second, I’d take advantage of all the resources these so-called “poor” people have available to them, like the wide array of free meal outlets and such. The LAST place you’d see me would be next to a freeway off ramp begging for money.
What I DID do was to keep driving by, for fear I'd lurch off the road and kill him purposely, sparing the public from any more of his deception. Doing society a favor still lands you in jail, sadly.
Bums, street musicians, and the so-called “blind ”and“ homeless vets" you’re likely to see in any metro area, on any sidewalk or roadside, are personally abdicating their care and feeding to you, the taxpayer and hapless bleeding heart citizen. They're doing this to themselves willingly because it’s easier (and tax-free) than getting a real job and joining society proper.
When I lived in Italy, there was a little town called Mondragone (supposedly the birthplace of Al Capone) that was literally infested with street people—easy for a town the size of a thimble. Unfortunately, the nearest autostrada exit to my town took me right through this town first. Every motorist in the area was accosted at every stoplight with windshield washers, musicians, begging women with babies, and people in damaged wheelchairs—the scam parade in action. A local in my town told me that those scamsters make enough tax-free money each year to put their children through college and live a life of veritable luxury!
Another pitiful, tear-jerking sight where personal abdication in boxcar lots goes on is at the Mexico border: when we lived in Texas, we visited a border town and crossed into Mexico on foot. We had to cross a fairly wide fenced bridge that was absolutely crammed with “trolls” (the people underneath it) who had plastic milk jugs tied to really long bamboo poles to reach the bridge sides—they were begging from underneath! Of course, there were elderly, infirm, and mothers with small children—the usual riffraff fare. Ahead of me, I noticed nobody putting money into anybody’s jug. BEHIND me was a different story: one woman had brought rolls of quarters with her expressly for the purpose of giving something to everyone with a jug out. The beggars had found a bleeding heart that day.
As I crossed and saw the waves of people under and near the foot bridge, standing around and begging, I understood the enormity of life as dictated by the Catholic church, birth control (or the lack of it), and basic education. Thank God I’m an American with a choice and a pretty good BS detector.
On the way to Sam’s Club last Sunday, there was a man on the side of the freeway off ramp with a “hungry” sign. This man wasn’t hungry—well, maybe he was hungry RIGHT THEN. He, too, had fallen and couldn't reach his McMeal.
You know how I could tell he was a fraud? He was wearing a leather coat, had a spare tire fat roll, and was cleanly shaven and dressed.
It seems to be time for a WWWD question: what would Wenchypoo do in this situation? For starters, I’d hock or sell off everything I absolutely didn’t need for survival. Second, I’d take advantage of all the resources these so-called “poor” people have available to them, like the wide array of free meal outlets and such. The LAST place you’d see me would be next to a freeway off ramp begging for money.
What I DID do was to keep driving by, for fear I'd lurch off the road and kill him purposely, sparing the public from any more of his deception. Doing society a favor still lands you in jail, sadly.
Bums, street musicians, and the so-called “blind ”and“ homeless vets" you’re likely to see in any metro area, on any sidewalk or roadside, are personally abdicating their care and feeding to you, the taxpayer and hapless bleeding heart citizen. They're doing this to themselves willingly because it’s easier (and tax-free) than getting a real job and joining society proper.
When I lived in Italy, there was a little town called Mondragone (supposedly the birthplace of Al Capone) that was literally infested with street people—easy for a town the size of a thimble. Unfortunately, the nearest autostrada exit to my town took me right through this town first. Every motorist in the area was accosted at every stoplight with windshield washers, musicians, begging women with babies, and people in damaged wheelchairs—the scam parade in action. A local in my town told me that those scamsters make enough tax-free money each year to put their children through college and live a life of veritable luxury!
Another pitiful, tear-jerking sight where personal abdication in boxcar lots goes on is at the Mexico border: when we lived in Texas, we visited a border town and crossed into Mexico on foot. We had to cross a fairly wide fenced bridge that was absolutely crammed with “trolls” (the people underneath it) who had plastic milk jugs tied to really long bamboo poles to reach the bridge sides—they were begging from underneath! Of course, there were elderly, infirm, and mothers with small children—the usual riffraff fare. Ahead of me, I noticed nobody putting money into anybody’s jug. BEHIND me was a different story: one woman had brought rolls of quarters with her expressly for the purpose of giving something to everyone with a jug out. The beggars had found a bleeding heart that day.
As I crossed and saw the waves of people under and near the foot bridge, standing around and begging, I understood the enormity of life as dictated by the Catholic church, birth control (or the lack of it), and basic education. Thank God I’m an American with a choice and a pretty good BS detector.
Saturday, December 09, 2006
This Thing Called Hunger Part II: Parental Abdication
I saw something on TV that nearly made me jump out of my skin with anger—a woman asking for donations of food for a program she created to send food home with kids in special backpacks. I didn’t get her name or the name of the program.
This food wasn’t for every kid, mind you—only the “special” ones who made ample use of the school breakfast and lunch programs.
She then began the old sing-song about children going to bed hungry, going to school hungry, and how malnourishment affects their ability to learn. I agree that malnourishment affects learning ability, but she was asking for donations to programs in big cities only, and for donations of foods that can easily fit in backpacks that kids will eat on the weekends—in short, this program is NOT for the families, but the children themselves, and is filled with junk foods.
When pressed for the types of foods to be donated, she expressly mentioned gelatin cups, fruit cups, pudding cups, snack-size bags of chips, cookies, and crackers, fruit roll-up-type snacks, yogurt cups, fun-size candy bars, applesauce cups, etc.
The yogurt I could get behind, but that was all. The rest is high fructose corn syrup-laden garbage as far as I’m concerned, and I’m not contributing to the dental and health delinquency of a minor!
It’s bad enough that parents who can’t afford to have these kids in the first place abdicate their care and feeding to the public in wholesale lots: public school and Head Start breakfast and lunch programs, soup kitchens, church dinners, food banks, and now weekend food donated by other parents. This woman’s program would leave only one meal a day to be fed by parents themselves to their own children, if that.
This made me think of all the other programs in the area and how they’re easily abused by slacker parents—around here, we have an area-wide school supply drive for so-called “needy” kids, then a yearly Angel Tree to provide so-called “needy” kids a brand new Christmas present, then a community-wide Easter Egg Hunt in a large city park, and various canned food drives throughout the year. Combine these with the school feeding programs, church clothing drives, church and soup kitchen meals, food banks, WIC programs, and unnamed wealthy people donating large numbers of brand new sneakers to various “needy” children, and I began to see how it is that so-called “poor” people can actually get by quite comfortably, and with little personal effort or outlay. Needless to say, there are many children signed up for programs who don’t rightly belong there!
There's no incentive for parents to do better for themselves and their kids, especially when free stuff is being given away throughout the calendar year.
Why should I feel sorry for people who can’t (or in some cases won’t) feed their own children? Instead of providing food for these “special” backpacks, I’d like to provide boxes of condoms for the kids’ parents—but that would be politically incorrect and frowned upon as insensitive. Besides, condom use by these people would inevitably put the food bank, Angel Tree, school supply drive, and school breakfast and lunch people out of jobs.
If you think about it, you wonder just how many parents out there have abdicated the job of feeding and clothing their kids to other people, whether truly deserving or not. Exactly where are the checks and balances for programs such as these? Who is checking for income verification? Last I heard, it was “sign your kid up and get started” for most of these programs, and there wasn’t a time limit or kid limit for them. Not even guilt prevents some people from incorporating these programs as the “norm” in their lives—free stuff is free stuff, no matter where it is and how they have to get it.
Some families have been using these programs for years, and for successive children, because they know the safety net exists. This net is so sturdy, they have come to rely on it alone for feeding and outfitting the kids—and they continue to have more.
Are any of the kids actually hungry, going to bed hungry, or in a continuously hungry state? Of course not, but now we’re supposed to be concerned about what these “school food program” kids are going to eat when school’s out for weekends and the summer.
If you can't feed your kid, then it's time to give it up for adoption to someone who can. It's also time to be responsible for once and stop making more kids.
At what point do the parents step in and do the job of providing, and at what point does the rest of the general public get to say “enough is enough”?
I’m saying no to all donations, drives, and holiday volunteering, because I don’t know that who I’m giving for is in real need of my stuff and services, or just another slacker relying on his fellow man to get him by. It’s a shame that it’s come to this, but I’ve long-since grown weary of being taken advantage of—the cleverest marketing pitches don’t even get my attention any more.
So call me Ebenezer—I don’t care. Merry Christmas to some, and bah humbug to the rest (you know who you are). Nobody’s getting the fatted goose in the shop window unless they can pay for it.
______________________________________________________________
Update: On November 28, 2008, I found out what school is doing this--Lincoln Elementary in Newark, New Jersey. Yes, they're still doing it, and now they've added such hideousness as soy milk (like a kid's going to drink THAT!), organic fruit rollups, soy puddings, and veggie chips. The addition of soy to some of the backpack fare doesn't make it any more of an intelligent eating choice, especially when the kids aren't likely to eat it in the first place. Handing out soy to kids is like handing out BPA-laden products to mothers of newborns--both substances are known hormone disruptors.
To my knowledge, this program still has no official name. They also seem to be using brand-new backpacks with every weekend fill--if so, what a waste! Not reusing them week after week is a ludicrous waste.
This food wasn’t for every kid, mind you—only the “special” ones who made ample use of the school breakfast and lunch programs.
She then began the old sing-song about children going to bed hungry, going to school hungry, and how malnourishment affects their ability to learn. I agree that malnourishment affects learning ability, but she was asking for donations to programs in big cities only, and for donations of foods that can easily fit in backpacks that kids will eat on the weekends—in short, this program is NOT for the families, but the children themselves, and is filled with junk foods.
When pressed for the types of foods to be donated, she expressly mentioned gelatin cups, fruit cups, pudding cups, snack-size bags of chips, cookies, and crackers, fruit roll-up-type snacks, yogurt cups, fun-size candy bars, applesauce cups, etc.
The yogurt I could get behind, but that was all. The rest is high fructose corn syrup-laden garbage as far as I’m concerned, and I’m not contributing to the dental and health delinquency of a minor!
It’s bad enough that parents who can’t afford to have these kids in the first place abdicate their care and feeding to the public in wholesale lots: public school and Head Start breakfast and lunch programs, soup kitchens, church dinners, food banks, and now weekend food donated by other parents. This woman’s program would leave only one meal a day to be fed by parents themselves to their own children, if that.
This made me think of all the other programs in the area and how they’re easily abused by slacker parents—around here, we have an area-wide school supply drive for so-called “needy” kids, then a yearly Angel Tree to provide so-called “needy” kids a brand new Christmas present, then a community-wide Easter Egg Hunt in a large city park, and various canned food drives throughout the year. Combine these with the school feeding programs, church clothing drives, church and soup kitchen meals, food banks, WIC programs, and unnamed wealthy people donating large numbers of brand new sneakers to various “needy” children, and I began to see how it is that so-called “poor” people can actually get by quite comfortably, and with little personal effort or outlay. Needless to say, there are many children signed up for programs who don’t rightly belong there!
There's no incentive for parents to do better for themselves and their kids, especially when free stuff is being given away throughout the calendar year.
Why should I feel sorry for people who can’t (or in some cases won’t) feed their own children? Instead of providing food for these “special” backpacks, I’d like to provide boxes of condoms for the kids’ parents—but that would be politically incorrect and frowned upon as insensitive. Besides, condom use by these people would inevitably put the food bank, Angel Tree, school supply drive, and school breakfast and lunch people out of jobs.
If you think about it, you wonder just how many parents out there have abdicated the job of feeding and clothing their kids to other people, whether truly deserving or not. Exactly where are the checks and balances for programs such as these? Who is checking for income verification? Last I heard, it was “sign your kid up and get started” for most of these programs, and there wasn’t a time limit or kid limit for them. Not even guilt prevents some people from incorporating these programs as the “norm” in their lives—free stuff is free stuff, no matter where it is and how they have to get it.
Some families have been using these programs for years, and for successive children, because they know the safety net exists. This net is so sturdy, they have come to rely on it alone for feeding and outfitting the kids—and they continue to have more.
Are any of the kids actually hungry, going to bed hungry, or in a continuously hungry state? Of course not, but now we’re supposed to be concerned about what these “school food program” kids are going to eat when school’s out for weekends and the summer.
If you can't feed your kid, then it's time to give it up for adoption to someone who can. It's also time to be responsible for once and stop making more kids.
At what point do the parents step in and do the job of providing, and at what point does the rest of the general public get to say “enough is enough”?
I’m saying no to all donations, drives, and holiday volunteering, because I don’t know that who I’m giving for is in real need of my stuff and services, or just another slacker relying on his fellow man to get him by. It’s a shame that it’s come to this, but I’ve long-since grown weary of being taken advantage of—the cleverest marketing pitches don’t even get my attention any more.
So call me Ebenezer—I don’t care. Merry Christmas to some, and bah humbug to the rest (you know who you are). Nobody’s getting the fatted goose in the shop window unless they can pay for it.
______________________________________________________________
Update: On November 28, 2008, I found out what school is doing this--Lincoln Elementary in Newark, New Jersey. Yes, they're still doing it, and now they've added such hideousness as soy milk (like a kid's going to drink THAT!), organic fruit rollups, soy puddings, and veggie chips. The addition of soy to some of the backpack fare doesn't make it any more of an intelligent eating choice, especially when the kids aren't likely to eat it in the first place. Handing out soy to kids is like handing out BPA-laden products to mothers of newborns--both substances are known hormone disruptors.
To my knowledge, this program still has no official name. They also seem to be using brand-new backpacks with every weekend fill--if so, what a waste! Not reusing them week after week is a ludicrous waste.
Sunday, December 03, 2006
“All I Know I Learned Way Back in Medical School” Part Four: The Financial Ties That Bind
I know it’s been a good long while since I wrote anything in the “way back in med school” series, but a pertinent issue seems to have made it under my nose for inclusion.
That pertinent issue is financial in nature—specifically, doctors who sit on corporate boards of research firms and drug companies, collecting big bucks for selling out their integrity.
Since it’s been a good long while, I’ll bring you up to speed with links to part 1, part 2, and part 3. Other than the “celebrities spinning their wheels” series, this is the only other one in which I’ve breached the 3-issue trilogy rule of paper decoration.
Back to the finances: over a third of the many doctors who oversee clinical drug trials are tied to either the trial drug manufacturer, or one of its competitors. Patients ought to be alarmed at this number, because it may have a lot to do with trial results being skewed in favor of the drug and speedy FDA approval, only to later be removed from the market, like the recent Vioxx event.
Over 90% of patients enrolled in clinical trials aren’t concerned about this potential conflict of interest—especially cancer patients. In fact, patients are grateful for the drug company-to-drug-trial cooperation with doctors.
I suppose when you’re dying, the last thing you worry about is who’s profiting from keeping you alive a few more weeks.
For researchers, it’s money for nothing and results for free. People sign onto trials voluntarily, receive free treatment, and hope they’re getting the new miracle drug that will save them instead of the placebo. Drug companies send allotted miracle drugs free in hopes of getting good results, even if the drug harms the liver or kidneys (which most drugs do in the end). The more positive the results, the more positive and reassuring the ad campaign that will follow.
We call this “progress.”
Drug companies call this “filling the pipeline” and “shoring up the bottom line” for the investors of their companies—the people they REALLY answer to. The more drugs they invent and get into clinical trials, the more money they stand to make, and the more ads we stand to see in magazines and on TV. And the wheels go round and round…
Medicine is a big money game, and has little to do with actual health. Doctors have become glorified pill salesmen—drug reps in white coats. Sell so many pills, get so many kickbacks from drug companies. And the wheel goes round and round…
Have you ever wondered why fewer and fewer doctors are taking Medicare, Medicaid, and HMO insurance these days? More work for fewer dollars in reimbursement. Drug trials, on the other hand, are merely monitoring of side effects from the drug being tried. Not doctors, but nurses do most of the work—doctors just report the findings. This means more computer time and less people time, and for a lot more money. Sometimes the money’s so good, clinical trial doctors take unnecessary risks with trial drugs and give them to patients who clearly fall outside study parameters, such as people with failing kidneys or pre-existing liver problems, heart problems, or even allergies to similar drugs. Even though the patient will most likely fail the trial and have to be removed, or will leave the study voluntarily due to intolerable side effects, the doctor still gets paid for results, good or bad.
Some doctors are unethical enough to cover up bad trial results, putting the drug company and the money train in jeopardy, or worse, skew results by culling patients who have bad experiences with the drug, keeping only the ones who progress well—all the while getting paid handsomely.
Now who benefits? The personal injury lawyers, that’s who.
That pertinent issue is financial in nature—specifically, doctors who sit on corporate boards of research firms and drug companies, collecting big bucks for selling out their integrity.
Since it’s been a good long while, I’ll bring you up to speed with links to part 1, part 2, and part 3. Other than the “celebrities spinning their wheels” series, this is the only other one in which I’ve breached the 3-issue trilogy rule of paper decoration.
Back to the finances: over a third of the many doctors who oversee clinical drug trials are tied to either the trial drug manufacturer, or one of its competitors. Patients ought to be alarmed at this number, because it may have a lot to do with trial results being skewed in favor of the drug and speedy FDA approval, only to later be removed from the market, like the recent Vioxx event.
Over 90% of patients enrolled in clinical trials aren’t concerned about this potential conflict of interest—especially cancer patients. In fact, patients are grateful for the drug company-to-drug-trial cooperation with doctors.
I suppose when you’re dying, the last thing you worry about is who’s profiting from keeping you alive a few more weeks.
For researchers, it’s money for nothing and results for free. People sign onto trials voluntarily, receive free treatment, and hope they’re getting the new miracle drug that will save them instead of the placebo. Drug companies send allotted miracle drugs free in hopes of getting good results, even if the drug harms the liver or kidneys (which most drugs do in the end). The more positive the results, the more positive and reassuring the ad campaign that will follow.
We call this “progress.”
Drug companies call this “filling the pipeline” and “shoring up the bottom line” for the investors of their companies—the people they REALLY answer to. The more drugs they invent and get into clinical trials, the more money they stand to make, and the more ads we stand to see in magazines and on TV. And the wheels go round and round…
Medicine is a big money game, and has little to do with actual health. Doctors have become glorified pill salesmen—drug reps in white coats. Sell so many pills, get so many kickbacks from drug companies. And the wheel goes round and round…
Have you ever wondered why fewer and fewer doctors are taking Medicare, Medicaid, and HMO insurance these days? More work for fewer dollars in reimbursement. Drug trials, on the other hand, are merely monitoring of side effects from the drug being tried. Not doctors, but nurses do most of the work—doctors just report the findings. This means more computer time and less people time, and for a lot more money. Sometimes the money’s so good, clinical trial doctors take unnecessary risks with trial drugs and give them to patients who clearly fall outside study parameters, such as people with failing kidneys or pre-existing liver problems, heart problems, or even allergies to similar drugs. Even though the patient will most likely fail the trial and have to be removed, or will leave the study voluntarily due to intolerable side effects, the doctor still gets paid for results, good or bad.
Some doctors are unethical enough to cover up bad trial results, putting the drug company and the money train in jeopardy, or worse, skew results by culling patients who have bad experiences with the drug, keeping only the ones who progress well—all the while getting paid handsomely.
Now who benefits? The personal injury lawyers, that’s who.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
