Who Cares Who's On Board?

Is Cooking Welded to Gender?

2011-08-24T12:10:00.006-04:00

Sometimes I google on my own site name just to see what turns up. It always gives me pause to see what a gender-related issue cooking is. As far as I know most of the online users are still men, but women come out in force to give their opinions about cooking. In publishing a site like mine, I've sometimes wondered if I'm walking into a wind.

A surprisingly large number of women believe that if a man cooks dinner for them they are being courted, or at least seduced. In the first 20 search results I found these titles:

The Seductiveness of a Man Who Cooks
Is A Man Who Cooks The Ultimate Turn On?
Why is it sexy when a man cooks?

You get the idea. It reminds me of a particular episode of a well known TV game show. They asked all the women in the audience how many times in their life a man had proposed marriage to them. The average answer was 3. They asked all the men in the audience how many times in their life they had proposed marriage to a woman. The average answer was one. The women believed something was being offered that was not being offered.

You might think that men who cook are swarming with amorous young ladies. This sarcastic post doesn't bear that out.

In a few cases women took rather imperious positions. One tried to make a case that women were somehow genetically predisposed to be superior cooks. There were also a few examples of women ridiculing men in the kitchen. Although a few men deserve this ridicule, many women richly deserve it as well.

………………………………………………..

The above foolishness aside, the great majority of duty cooks in the US are still women. They aren’t all good at it, and they don’t all enjoy it, but for what it’s worth they do it. Understandably, most of the thousands of cooking sites are authored by women. Most are focused on quality, craftsmanship and pride, as it should be. A few sites are able to combine cooking and health, as I hope to do myself in a low-key way.

There is an undercurrent of “girly food” – women writing recipes that women like. Some of it is stuff I would spit out, like Fried Zucchini Flowers Stuffed with Ricotta Cheese. Most of it is sugar – cakes, cookies, ice cream and candy. What’s up with all the sugar?

………………………………………………..

So here I am, a man incurring on a woman’s world. Ladies, I am not here to court you. I am not here to seduce you. If you think your gender makes you a better cook, show me. But step on it. I’ve been waiting a long time and I haven’t seen anything yet.

………………………………………………..

I Mourn for Lemons

2011-06-28T17:52:00.013-04:00

All the lemons now are GMO, from California. Florida no longer exists. They have a skin half an inch thick. You can hit them with a hammer and they won't be damaged. You can set them in a sunny window for a month and they won't soften. You need three lemons to get the juice you used to get out of one. And you need a pair of pliers to juice one of them.

The shipper no longer needs to incur any losses due to shipping damage. These lemons could survive a crash landing on the Moon. The shipper's profits are up. The supermarket no longer needs to incur any losses due to spoilage. These things will look the same in a month as they do today. Supermarket profits are up. The losses have been passed along to you. The only thing that's down is the quality of the product.

Thanks a bunch Monsanto! May you soon rot in Hell!

On Medicare

2011-03-31T03:09:00.002-04:00

A woman sent me a letter saying she wanted to help me select a Medicare “plan.” It sounded like she was after money, but since I will need to enroll in Medicare this year, I called her to learn anything I could. I was shocked and angered at what I learned.

In short, the only thing I can get from Medicare is hospitalization coverage, and even that has a deductible. Everything else – office visits, medicine, dental, eyeglasses – everything – requires a “plan.” In other words, you have to pay for it. The cost for the “plan” is pretty much the same as paying cash to the doctor. Medicaid is a joke. It is only made available based on income level. In my town, you would need to live in your car to qualify for Medicaid.

I began to get upset. I’ve paid FICA taxes my whole working life for this. I actually thought I’d have health insurance, real health insurance like we had on the job 30 years ago. Instead I will go on paying for just about everything. Right about here, the woman told me our government was in the insurance business. I recognized the same “fiscal conservative” bullshit I’ve heard for the past 20 years. We live in a “welfare state.” Social services are “entitlements.”

I was seeing red. The woman could tell. She said she didn’t want to go on with the conversation. I said I didn’t either, I was upset enough already.

I guess I’ll have to actually sign up before I know all the facts. Maybe I’ll sign up with the Veteran’s Administration too. I’m concerned they may want to replace my doctor, which I will not allow. Who can know what will happen. For all the cock and bullcrap we read in the paper, and for all the braggadocios blowhards in our Congress, nobody actually knows the whole story.

And so I’ll be using the same plan I’ve had for quite a while - Pay or Die.

Social Engineering Über Alles

2011-02-14T07:44:00.005-05:00

I read this headline today:

US Submariners Learn to Live Without Smokes

I felt sorry for these sailors. These men volunteered to give their lives, if necessary, in defense of our freedoms. And how do we say thanks? We take away one of the few freedoms they have.

Even Hitler, a notorious anti-smoker, did not forbid his troops to smoke.

I openly apologize to all our armed forces for the lack of respect they are shown by their ungrateful country.

How Not to Cook

2011-02-13T15:53:00.018-05:00

Scalloped Potatoes and Ham is a dish my mother made, and that I liked, that I have not yet learned to cook. I found a half ham, sliced, on sale at the grocery store this week, and now I need a good recipe. Good is the operative word. You can easily find 100 recipes in a minute. But wait till you read them.

"Add one box of [brand name] potatoes." Box??

Instant potatoes came around in the 50s, along with Kraft Dinner and Tang. These things were marketed to housewives coast to coast as a way to "forget about the drudgery of cooking." My mother never liked cooking very much - it was obvious to me even at 10 - and she tried every new convenience product on us that came along. If she could get us to eat it we had it over and over. Instant potatoes were on my short "This Sucks" list. Fortunately her Scalloped Potato dish recipe called for real potatoes.

"Add one can of Cream of Mushroom Soup." Don't.

We learned to eat canned food at times when it was the only food available. Later we learned that all those added chemicals probably would not kill us. I cooked with canned soup until I was old enough to want to know what those mystery chemicals were. When I found out, I didn't want them anymore. I especially don't want any MSG.

Where do you think MSG comes from? Do you think it comes from a mine, like salt? Or maybe you think it comes from a tree. Actually, it comes from a chemistry lab. People say, "It's salt, right?" MSG tricks your brain, people. Salt doesn't do that. MSG is suspected of being a carcinogen. Salt is not. You can read about MSG, if you want to.

The web is very democratic. The voice of the artist and the voice of the imbecile are equal. Don't trust every recipe you read.

Don't trust Paula Deen either. Not only does she exaggerate her drawl, but she cooks with canned junk food and claims it is "Southern." I know better than this.

Just use real food, that's all. It is not expensive. It is not difficult or time consuming to prepare. Just read a little bit. If you are not willing to do this you disrespect yourself and dishonor those you feed.

Cook right.

The Law's the Law, Sometimes

2011-02-12T07:09:00.035-05:00

Are some of us "more equal?"

Remember the OJ Simpson murder trial? The man was declared innocent in a court of law. Those who were not satisfied with the verdict simply took the case to a "different" court. Although the same laws of the same land would seem to apply in both courts, and although the law seems to prevent us from being tried twice for the same crime, Simpson was found guilty in the second court. Americans did not question this.

The American anti-smoking movement really got off the ground in 1985, when the EPA asserted that cigarette smoke was as life-threatening as nuclear waste. The movement rolled on like a freight train when the Supreme Court invalidated these findings a few years later, finally succeeding in influencing the laws in other countries around the world. Private money had accomplished what statesmanship could not.

The movement, intoxicated by its own success, has not yet slowed down, although the new anti-smoking laws become more ludicrous every year. A current example is

Federal regulators to formally ban e-cigarette use on planes

For those who don't know, the supposed 5,000 harmful chemicals in cigarette smoke exist only when the tobacco is burned. An e-cig does not burn, creates no smoke, and has no smell. It is just a legal chemical substance (nicotine), not awfully different from any other drug store potion. Ironically, the e-cig is marketed as an aid to those who wish to quit smoking. However, it is not controlled by the Pharmaceuticals Industry. Perhaps this is why it has been targeted.

Again, Americans do not question this. It doesn't need to make sense.

Today, I am watching the Entertainment Industry run hog wild in the US and in the governments of many other countries. They have made a mockery of US copyright law, and in certain cases have infiltrated the US government. Every year they become bolder. The boldest example I have seen so far is

MPAA Threatens to Cut Google from Internet

The expression "Too big for their britches" comes to mind.

In each case, private entities have gamed our legal system and won. In each case the private entity is bigger and more powerful, and has less regard for the rights of a greater number of individuals than the entity before. In each case our legal system grows weaker, and the freedom that only money can buy increases. The pigs are running the farm now.

We respect money more than the law, more than we respect one another. We will reap what we sow.

On Cooking

2011-02-09T13:28:00.002-05:00

Cooking is a survival skill. The better you can cook, the better you survive. Cooking also helps you to be of some use to the people around you, too. Those who do not cook should start. Those who actually brag that they cannot cook - I've heard them - are imbecilic.

I began learning to cook 30 years ago. I cook almost everything I eat. With few exceptions I like my own cooking better than anyone else's. I can get dinner for two on the table in half an hour, if I need to.

Men don't cook because they think women are supposed to. Women don't cook because they think women are supposed to. Mothers don't teach their children to cook because they can't cook themselves. And the Food Industry laughs all the way to the bank.

Do you think MSG is food? Do you think salt is bad for you? Do you think eggs are bad for you? Do you eat meat from animals that are fed excrement? Do you think a tomato is supposed to look the same on the shelf for a month? Can you even pronounce the last three ingredients in any prepared food? Do you know that a Monsanto man runs the FDA?

No, you don't need to become a chemist. But in between chemist and complete idiot there is a middle ground. Go there.

Intellectual Property

2011-02-03T17:24:00.002-05:00

"The artist has the right to profit from his own work." That's the catch-phrase. It's entirely valid too. It is the spirit of US copyright law.

And then we have the letter of the law, slightly different from the spirit of the law. The artist can sell the rights to his own creation. The Corporation can purchase all the rights of the artist, so far as a given work is concerned. Once this has been done, the artist can be damned and go to hell.

Finally, we have the actual implementation of the law. US Government agencies, heavily staffed by corporate attorneys, go door-to-door shutting down small companies accused of harming corporate profits. Industry attorneys go around the free world to influence and coerce other governments to abide by US copyright law. The harm is never substantiated, and prosecutions go forward nonetheless. In time, the money and the power of the Corperation, to one degree or the next, prevails.

Does the implementation of US copyright law benefit the artist? I think no. Does the implementation of the law honor the spirit of the law? I say no.

I am 100% in line with the spirit of US copyright law. I am out of line with the actions of my government, in the name of the Corporation.

The purpose of our government is not to increase corporate profits.

Cooking for One

2010-10-11T17:39:00.007-04:00

Yesterday in the supermarket I began reading the list of ingrediants in Goya Sazon. I knew it! The first one listed was msg. That accounted for the yuck taste in my mouth a few hours after dinner. And to think I'd been using it for years. Giving up smoking may have made my sense of taste even more acute than it was before. I put the package back on the shelf.

I commented to the woman shopping next to me in the aisle, "This stuff" I held it in my hand "is loaded with msg. I can't believe I've been using it for years." The woman turned to see who had spoken to her, and her eye beams focused on my grocery list. She answered, "Oh, you have a list!" She ignored what I said, and the product I held. She grinned as if she had met a circus clown, to see a man with a shopping list in his hand.

This wasn't the first time I'd seen this behavior.

I once engaged a woman at the office in casual Monday morning chat. The subject of Sunday morning breakfast came up. I allowed that I had made bacon and eggs. The woman came at me from left field, eyes wide open and radiant with disbelief. "YOU made BACON?!" she exclaimed, as if she had known me for years when actually she knew nothing but my first name.

I can read your shopping cart. I can tell if you cook for one, or two, or if children live in your house. I can tell if you cook at all, or care about your health. Because I can see these things I freely admit that few men cook, and virtually none are the full-time duty cooks in a family situation. This, ladies, I give you. I think quite a few of you want to moan and groan, to one degree or another, about the burden of "women's work." That's swell. But if you happen to see an exception to your view of the world, try not to make fun. Groan, or make fun - take your pick.

I grew up expecting to live a traditional life, but things didn't turn out that way. At one point I realized I was being held hostage by my own ideas about male-female relationships. In order to lower my own expectations I taught myself to cook. That was 30 years ago. I'm a better cook than any woman I ever met, mom included.

Poor put-upon American woman, stay out of my kitchen.

I Know Why American Women Love IKEA

2010-09-24T17:11:00.006-04:00

I've never been to IKEA. The design is too sterile for me. It reminds me of the 60s, when bookshelves were made out of cinder blocks and 1x12s, and cable spools were tables. It is one step short of Soylent Green, where street vendors hawked "genuine plastic."

But the women where I used to work loved it. They raved about it. To hear them after they had been there, you would think they had been to visit the palace of the Queen. One even bragged about having eaten lunch there, as if she had been to a fancy Manhattan dinner club instead of a big-box retailer courting the disappearing middle class. I didn't get it.

IKEA sends me a print catalog every year. Normally I flip through it and trash it. Recently though I put a very small reading table in my bathroom, and the IKEA catalog has been on display there for two weeks. I've made friends with it.

One picture showed a man in the kitchen serving lunch to two or three children. He was a young man, with longish hair and a mustache. It was a wispy little mustache, only a little bit darker than I've seen on some women. I took note when I saw him in another picture, in another part of the catalog, working at the kitchen sink. Did I see the hand of the Marketing Department? Were they selling something other than bookcases? Now I was curious.

There were many pictures of women in the catalog. Some were sleeping. Some were visiting other women. One was painting her toenails. Some simply stood admiring their furniture. Not a single photo showed a woman doing any constructive work. No kitchen work, no child-rearing. None at all. Only the man did that. The young wussy-looking man.

The only difference between marketing and propaganda is the purpose. Dr.Joseph Goebbels is the father of both of these. Feminism has always been a sugar-coated turd. This is how IKEA takes the money of women.

Don't like what I said? Say so.

Who Cares Who's On the Ballot?

2010-09-07T15:11:00.005-04:00

I began voting over 30 years ago. I talked myself into it. I said, it doesn't matter if neither are perfect, one is always worse than the other. Lately though, it is getting harder to buy into the hoax. Lately, both parties are looking pretty bad.

Tea Partyism is no choice. It is nothing more than fascism wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. It is like "Killer Klowns from Outer Space" ~ funny, until they smile and you see their pointed teeth. I have to say, though, that Political Correctism isn't any better. It is just as dogmatic and just as mind-numbing as Tea Partyism. Both groups are always predictable in an over-medicated sort of way. Both groups are corporatists. Both groups are all black or white, with no room for subtle variations. Both groups have become extremists.

I've never been an Independent. One party has always looked better than the other to me. But now, when I see one side lambaste the other in the headlines, or in an online forum, they look like dingalings to me no matter which side they're on.

I used to say, I feel sorry for the working class Republican, who believes that by identifying with wealth and power, it will rub off on him. Democrats, I thought, were the party of the working man. And they were. But when all the blue collar jobs went to Asia, they had to get a new shtick. They became the "Say yes to anything so long as it isn't a white heterosexual male" party.

I can't live in either of these dream worlds. I have too much perspective, and I read too much, and I remember too well. I may have voted for the last time. Think they'll miss me?

Taking the Kid With You

2010-02-05T14:12:00.004-05:00

REF: http://www.gizmag.com/airport-ride-on-carry-on-chair/14085/

When I saw this article I asked myself, why does she have the kid with her in the first place? Sure, she could be going to visit grandma. It's more likely, though, that she just hasn't any choice.

People didn't always feel the need to take their kids with them every where they go, as they do today. Even if you don't do it, you've seen it. In fact, it was considered rude and inconsiderate. Kids can be very disruptive. It is just not appropriate to bring them everywhere. If you've ever listened to a kid in a movie theater scream all the way through the movie, you know what I mean.

I was left at home when my parents went out to grownup functions. They got the young girl three doors down to babysit. Even my working class parents could afford it. I think I liked it better than being dragged along. Everyone benefited from this. I did. My parents did. The people they visited did. When my parents got home, I was sleeping.

We don't do that today though. Things have changed.

We don't even know the people next door, much less three doors down. We don't want to know them either. We don't trust them. Grandma and Grandpa are out, since they (or we) don't live around here anymore. The other parent is out, since there isn't one. The result is the woman struggling to get through the supermarket door with one strapped to her torso, another one in a push cart, and two more in tow.

If you think I am describing lower class behavior, think again. The most egregious example I've ever seen of this was a woman in Whole Foods - on opening day, no less, when the place was overcrowded to begin with. She had a triple. The cart had two rows of seating, like bleachers. I couldn't believe the size of it. It was as big as a Smart Car.

So, if you can't go anywhere without bringing your progeny along, you might like the contraption shown in the article I referenced above. Just strap the little bugger in and take off. It looks like a straight jacket with wheels to me, but then, you are entitled.

If this is the best you can do for your kid, strapping her into a piece of wheeled luggage like a goddam baloney, don't have kids in the first place.

Homosexuals in the Military

2010-02-05T14:09:00.002-05:00

I was in the service in the 60s. I served with homosexuals. I knew they were homosexuals. When you're living in a barracks, using communal shower and toilet facilities, you know. They knew I knew, and I knew they knew I knew. Know what happened? Nothing. Homosexuals have served in every army that ever existed since the first army was formed. I know of no record of any war being won or lost on account of it.

In polite heterosexual society, it is understood that a gentleman never, ever, discusses his intimate relationship with a lady with others. Any man who does so is deemed not a gentleman. Any man who would ask is not a gentleman. To me, it is the very reason Bill Clinton was an ass to agree to testify before congress, why they were out of line to ask him the questions they did, and why he was within his rights to lie. Maybe this way of thinking is considered 'old school' today, I don't know. I don't care. To me, it is right.

If you were to ask me what goes on in my bedroom, I would tell you it was none of your concern. If I were to ask you what goes on in your bedroom, I would expect the same answer from you. But I would never ask you. The reason I would never ask you is not because I am too polite, or too old-fashioned. The reason I would never ask you is that I really, honestly, do not care.

The “Don't Ask Don't Tell” legislation was passed during the Clinton administration. Since, when I enlisted in 1964, nobody asked me what went on in my bedroom, and since while I was in, nobody told me what went on in theirs, I never saw the point of the law. It didn't cost me anything though, or constrain my behavior in any way, so I didn't care what the law said. I guessed it fixed something that wasn't broken in the first place.

Today, 15 years later, the law is in the headlines again. The NYT calls the law “odious.” At this point my curiosity has gotten the best of me. What could possibly be wrong with a law that directs us to mind our own business? I began reading the news articles. No matter how many I read, though, I couldn't find any that spoke in plain English. The scourge of Political Correctness has sapped our ability to communicate with one another. I am left to speculate as to what is wrong with the law.

The only recurring thread I can find in the articles is the repeated use of the word 'openly.' The term is never defined, and there is never enough context to deduce its meaning. Guessing would be a bad idea, since the range of possible definitions is broad, indeed. I can only hope it does not mean that soon, we will be required to learn the most intimate details of the private lives of others.

When heterosexuals tell others about their experiences in the bedroom, we call it indiscretion, and consider it to be in bad taste. When homosexuals tell others about their experiences in the bedroom, we call it 'coming out,' and treat it as if it was an act of bravery. Who sold us this double standard? Why did we buy into it? Are we totally unable to think for ourselves? It's time we cut the crap, got real, and stop treating homosexuals as if they were 'special people.'

Adventures in Retirement

2010-01-13T16:51:00.004-05:00

All of us approach retirement differently. Some move to the sun belt to hang around with other retirees. Some become professional grandparents, filling the time with babysitting and taking pictures of their grandchildren. Some replace the children and grandchildren they no longer have, or never had, with puppies and kitties. Some never get used to retirement, and spend the rest of their lives shuffling from one room to the next, from the back yard to the front, trying to avoid thinking by keeping occupied. Some never retire at all, saying they need the money, or that they like their job.

My own decision to retire was quite impromptu. Financially I was quite unprepared, and for years I had visualized my future self slumped over a keyboard, dead. When I lost my job, though, I walked out of the building leaving my tools and possessions behind. I vowed never to go back, regardless of the consequences. I was ready to eat dog food and wear garbage bags, if I had to. So far that has not been necessary.

I always liked my work very well. I was good at it, and I took pride in it. No one ever hated their job more than I did, as thoroughly as I did, longer than I did, though. I liked my work, but hated my job. To say that the 'corporate culture' was not for me would be a considerable understatement. My own retirement began with the resolution to rid myself of all vestiges of corporate servitude.

If you never try to do this, you will never know how deeply the process of working for a living has become ingrained in your actions, your habits and your thought patterns. For years I had thought that all I had to do was to remember what it was I liked to do before I began working, the things I had put aside, and do them. It isn't that easy.

First I started looking for work. I applied for jobs. Finally I received job offers. Only when I turned them down did I realize I didn't want a new master. I had to force myself to stop looking for jobs. I finally stopped getting haircuts too. I realized that $20 a month was better spent on groceries. I realized I no longer had to "look the part." Clean is good enough.

One of the biggest ways working for a living influences our behavior is, it teaches us to function on the reward system. We feel we must compensate ourselves. First, there is the big evening meal. I worked hard all day (at a job that sucked), didn't I? Do I not deserve a hearty meal? I've gotten away from that. Now, I tend to eat more as Adelle Davis recommended, with the biggest meal of the day being breakfast. My taste for starches, and for meat, is being replaced with a taste for fresh vegetables. I have made no effort to discipline myself. These changes have come to me naturally.

In the same way, my need to anesthetize myself has greatly diminished. I have switched from whiskey to wine, and I am satisfied with a quarter of what I used to consume. I have not restrained myself in any way. The need just isn't there anymore.

And then there is the percieved need to buy things -- cars, for example. I have had many new cars in my life. Some were great fun. All have gone to the crusher. Now, the thrill is gone. My present car is 12 years old. It starts and runs fine. There are no puddles underneath it. This is all I want. I don't own an iPhone, or an iPod. I don't own a big-screen TV, and have no plans to buy one. I could have any of these things if I wanted them. I don't want them. I no longer feel the need to compensate myself for going to work.

There is one last habit I have yet to discard, and it's a tough one. I still get up in the morning, sit down behind the computer, and stay there most of the day -- just as I have done for the past 20 years. Some of the time I spend at the keyboard has great value to me. I write, and I correspond, and I enjoy these things. I am also a volunteer ESL tutor, which is very gratifying. Most of the time, though, I am like a dead person watching television. It is very much like sitting in the office.

This will be the last brick in the wall. I'm working on it. Occasionally, something or someone reminds me that I need to unplug, and I appreciate this. It would be easy to continue sleepwalking, and end up slumped over a keyboard dead, after all.

About Our Wars

2009-12-14T19:25:00.005-05:00

We have two wars in progress now. In my life I have seen views about war change. Mind you I do not say evolve, just change.

I was kindergarten age when the Korean War began. I remember when my mother's cousin came to visit us. I don't remember what he looked like, I was only as tall as his knees. I remember he had a uniform on, though. His pants were tucked into his jump boots, and bloused. I can remember sensing an air of respect, too.

When I graduated high school the Viet Nam war and the draft were in full swing. I remember this time very well, because it had a lasting impact on my life. If you get drafted you will go to the jungle. If you go to the jungle, you will be at extreme risk.

Some of our young people went to Canada to escape the draft, and the jungle. I never judged them, not then, and not now. They made a difficult decision and lived by it. This was their right. The thing is, this is not the kind of military we need. We need a military that does not feel entitled to make up its own mind about its orders before following them. In short, we need the kind of military we have today. Still, some still don't get it.

Recently I read a news article about threats on the President's life. Many are received, all are examined, most are discarded, but a few are taken seriously. One such 'person of interest' was a young Marine. He felt authorized to kill the president because he had taken an oath to defend the country “against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” When I read this I thought, if I could have a talk with this kid, I could really straighten him out. Once, I took the same oath. Nowhere in the oath does it say, “in your opinion.” The kid just didn't get it.

Because of the moderation of our news sources, and because of the absence of a draft, many Americans do not grasp the reality of today's wars. I hear it costs a million dollars to field one man for a year. I hear a gallon of gasoline costs four hundred dollars, delivered. I hear a lot of talk about 'deficit spending' from so-called 'fiscal conservatives.' Very sadly, I hear little talk about the lives of our young men and women. We, as a nation, don't get it.

The Pentagon has spent billions on the development of a 'pain ray.' A pain ray? When I send our troops into combat, I don't want them to make the enemy say 'ouch' and run away. A bullet costs 25 cents. Can we wonder why our defense budget is six time higher than any other country on Earth, but in eight years, we still can't catch bin Laden? Obviously, our politicians don't get it.

This, these wars, are about human life. It has always been so. Nothing has changed. If you don't 'get it,' please try harder.

Legalized Bribery

2009-10-23T12:27:00.000-04:00

The Corporation plays our politicians like a violin because we, the "stewards of democracy," have abdicated our responsibilities as citizens. Many vote without any understanding of the issues. Half don't bother voting at all. Is it any wonder our legislators publicly and openly represent the Corporation?

The individual contributes seven times more to federal revenues than the Corporation, and yet has little influence over our legislators. We can begin by calling lobbying what it is called in any other country -- bribery.

Put a stop to lobbying. Special interest groups that seek to influence our laws may do so by petitioning us, the voters.

Reform campaign financing. Bulldoze “K Street.” Wean our legislators from the Corporate teat.

If we don't do it ourselves, nobody else is going to do it for us.

Living High, Remembering Mom

2009-10-21T19:44:00.002-04:00

I ordered a $54 steak. I just wanted to see what real food tasted like. I received confirmation of shipping yesterday afternoon at 4. It was delivered into my very hands this morning at 9:30.

There was a cardboard box. Inside the box, there was a styrofoam cooler just the right size. The steak was inside the cooler, never frozen, surrounded by five cold-packs. No dry ice. Dry ice is 'chemical.' I put the cold-packs in the freezer thinking, if nothing else, they will help me save electricity.

Something in my subconscious motivated me to buy this steak. After I ordered it, I decided it was my birthday dinner. I got tired of acknowledging my birthday many years ago. It's repetitious, and fairly meaningless, and anyway, we don't get a whole year older in one day. My mother always insisted on taking a meal with me on my birthday, though. It was a chance for her to get out of the house, and besides, to her, it was a day worth remembering. I never fought it, although I wonder if at times, I didn't blame her for the fact I was having a birthday in the first place. The last time I saw my mother alive was a year ago, on my birthday.

The steak itself left nothing to be desired. It was free of antibiotics and growth hormones, and was grass fed. It was graded USDA Prime. And, it was dry-aged for three weeks. No credentials on Earth could ensure higher quality.

I'm a fair hand in the kitchen, and I endeavored to do the steak justice. The baked stuffed potato contained only shredded cheddar and unsalted butter. The pencil-thin fresh asparagus were cooked only until bright green, then dressed in fresh lemon juice and Kosher flake salt. The sliced Portabellos were sauteed in EVO oil, butter, and sliced garlic from a local farm stand. The size of the meal was moderate, but the quality was high indeed. I like cooking for myself. The results are always pleasing, when I put my hand to it.

My mother probably never saw a baked stuffed potato in her life. And she thought vegetables came out of a can. She never liked meat very much at all. She would have approved of my meal, though. I did. I may do this again.

Even Probate Ends

2009-10-11T08:47:00.002-04:00

We've all heard stories about what it's like to go through Probate Court. It is unnecessarily long and drawn out. It takes a month to get an hour's work done. It is frustrating and depressing. It is expensive. And it is likely to generate friction between people who ordinarily would have behaved amicably. It is a very poor way to follow the death of a loved one. If all the anger and anxiety and helplessness experienced during the probate process could be focused in a single day, it would be as devastating as the death itself. It would be kinder, though, than dragging it out.

Even when it ends it ends slowly, first with one signature, then weeks later another, and then months later with a sheaf of papers. My own poor adventure through the probate system ended yesterday with the arrival of a single, small piece of paper. I knew beforehand that this moment would merit a celebration. When the moment came, though, I didn't know how to celebrate. I couldn't think of a single act that would be meaningful. Over the months-long course of the probate process, I had become numb, zombified. It is this numbness I must now shake.

The process began in the first weeks of the year and moved forward, albeit at a glacial pace, until mid-year. Then the other people involved, for reasons that I imagine seemed valid enough to them, became non-communicating non-contributors. I waited literally months for them to stir to life, but it never took place. My own patience, which in my estimate had been prodigious until now, was exhausted. Finally I rattled a few cages, the sleepers awakened, and the entire stultifying process was concluded in two weeks.

Another person might have walked through this without batting an eye. I couldn't. I was still in shock from my mother's death when the probate process began, and I stayed that way. Now it's time for me to rattle my own cage, and awaken from my own sleep. Now. It feels good to say the word.

This should be interesting.

Are We There Yet? Part II

2009-10-03T16:03:00.013-04:00

Are We There Yet, Part I

In Part I of this essay I explained where the jobs have gone, and why they're not coming back. In Part II, I hope to explain what to do about it.

Telecommuting is a subject I have attempted to discuss with business professionals, both employers and employees, on a number of occasions. In almost every case, the people I have spoken with immediately refuted the basic premise, and adamantly rejected the concept. The notable exception to this has been independent professionals, who in most cases already work this way. I am good at explaining things, but not at selling things. That's because I have nothing to sell. If you feel that widespread telecommuting is impractical, unnecessary and unlikely, you may wish to skip the rest of this essay.

Resistance to telecommuting is strong. “Managers want to see people at their desks, or they don't really feel like they are working,” say hiring managers. However, pressure to profit, and to cut operating costs, is unrelenting. Face-time becomes less a necessity, and so more of a luxury, every day. Every job that can be virtualized, will be virtualized. Those who will not adapt, be they workers, hiring managers, or senior executives, will be subsumed by those who will. This change is ensured by the unstoppable quest for ever greater profits.

The main unknown at this time is just where the virtual worker will reside. Right now, knowledge worker jobs are flowing to Asia, but this need not be the rule. There is no technological reason these jobs can't just as easily go to Pennsylvania, or Texas, or Wyoming. The idea that Adobe can send an entire division to India, but someone in St. Louis cannot work for an employer in Boston, is absurd. In time, Americans will learn to use the same tech tools the Corporation already uses. Eventually, 'we never did that before' will wear thin.

To make this happen, some mindset changes are needed. Managers will need to manage, and workers will need to work, by objective rather than by procedure. Workers will no longer be able to get by by showing up at a given time and 'looking busy.' Managers will have to know enough about a job to specify reasonable completion dates. Both will need to understand that it's about getting the job done well and on time, not about maintaining appearances.

As I said above, independent professionals have already figured this out. The average employer or employee, will need their hand held though. For some this represents substantial short-term opportunity. It will be necessary to market tools like Webex and eLluminate to the individual, rather than just the Corporation. Training will be needed. Placement agencies and job seekers alike will need to broaden their approach.

The so-called recession is officially a year old. We have already coined the moronic expression 'jobless recovery.' Job losses continue. Those whose unemployment benefits end fall off the radar. But we continue to wait. Wait for the headlines to change, wait for our legislators to fix everything, wait for a miracle to occur. How long will we wait?

I don't know. I'm no fortune teller. I am only an engineer. I only know what works.

Here's one who figured it out:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/biztech/07/05/Asia.wyoming.insource.teach/index.html

Here are the kind of tips we need:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/jobs/26career.html

I Don't Want No Frankencorn

2009-09-20T10:21:00.000-04:00

Today I went to the farm to buy the corn I've been waiting three weeks for. It was there. I bought it and took it home.

I ate the first ear raw. I boiled the rest and ate them. It was good. There's no way on Earth it could have been any fresher. It was better than what is in the store. It wasn't what I was looking for though. It was 'synergistic' corn.

"Sweet as sugar," my father used to say when I was a kid. Even as a kid, I knew bullshit when I heard it. If I want sugar, I'll get the goddam sugar bowl. It is corn that I want, not sugar. I put salted butter on this stuff, and then added salt, and I still couldn't cut the sweetness.

One online writer wrote, “People have gotten so used to sugary-sweet corn they think that's how it's SUPPOSED to taste. It's been an awful long time since I've had corn worth the butter, salt and pepper, stuff that actually required a bit of chewing. The corn of my childhood was not too many generations away from plain field corn - in fact, some of it was field corn, and had to be picked green to eat like that.”

So, I started reading. The problem is, hybridization. It never ends. Every year they fool with the seeds. To make them 'better.' So they can make more money. Cross-pollination has done its work, too. That's why it doesn't taste like it used to.

Reading, I found I wasn't the only one who noticed something had changed. One online forum respondent said, “I think for the most part, unless you seek out heirloom varieties of sweet corn, that all you find in the markets any more are hybrids that have been bred for long shelf life and shipability.“

Another writer, reviewing a source of heirloom seeds, said, “Oh--and check out the heirloom corn that they have gone to the trouble to test for GMOs because, as the catalog says, "It is getting to the point where most heirloom corn varieties test positive for GMOs; even growers in remote areas are having problems with Monsanto's GMO frankencorn."

As far as I can tell, no one in the state offers heirloom corn for sale, although it may be growing in some private gardens. My last hope is field corn. I know I can find that. I may have to boil it longer.

I never imagined even our produce had gone to hell. I had heard of frankencorn. I had read it had decimated native Mexican corn. I didn't realize it had gotten into my kitchen, though. Our food has been stolen, and destroyed, and replaced with something allowing bigger profits for the Corporation. Is there a thing left on the planet that hasn't been hosed up by somebody looking to profit?

References:
http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/417088
http://www.gardenrant.com/my_weblog/2009/01/falling-in-love.html
http://www.e-cookbooks.net/articles/squeen.htm

The Public Option

2009-09-12T17:24:00.009-04:00

These days, that word 'public' is associated with Health Care Reform, and it's controversial. Particularly, it is associated with the concept that the government itself, as an alternative to the big corporation, should offer health care insurance.

To me, the idea of insurance seems simple.

First, there is a large crowd of people. Let's say it is 1000 people. Most of the time, most of the people will be healthy. Sometimes though, some of those people will be sick.

So. You determine the average medical costs of this group for a given time period. Let's say it is a year. Then, you divide that number by 1000. The resultant number represents the basic cost to each individual in the crowd, for one year, if all were to have health insurance.

Well, there may be a little more to it. All this money needs to be kept track of. We need administrators. And we need someone to tell the administrators what to do. We need managers. And of course, we need someone to tell the managers what to do. We need executives.

So far, the jobs of all of these people, all these administrators, and managers, and executives, could be performed by a couple of desktop computers. But let's pretend that's not true. Let's pretend we can't just buy a couple of Dells, hire an Admin, and be done with it. Let's pretend we need to hire 100 people, buy a building to put them in, maintain the building, etc. Fine. We will add that cost to our basic cost. It still seems fair.

It is a very simple, honest and straightforward concept so far. This is an oversimplified description, though. Two other factors complicate it a bit. For one, my description assumes that everyone in the crowd has plenty of money to pay. But what if they don't have enough money, or any money at all? Does the crowd have any responsibility, moral or otherwise, to these people? Does it come down to Give Us Money or Die? Stand and Deliver?

The other factor is the right to profit from every single activity that some believe is guaranteed by our political system, combined with the extreme and undue influence the big corporation has over our legislators. These issues are beyond the scope of this essay. Please accept that they exist. Suspend disbelief, if you must.

Now. A small but raucous group of taxpayers is vehemently opposed to Health Care Reform of any kind. Their reasons, they say, are purely ideological. They are intellectuals. They say Public Health Care would be socialistic, even communistic. They are patriots too, and so, hard-line capitalists. I wonder if they have really thought this through.

The Public School System is justified by the belief that we all benefit from an educated populace, whether we have ten children, or no children at all. Even those who hate children benefit, we are told. The tax burden is the same for all. I don't have a problem with this system. However, truth be told, it is a bit socialistic. A purely capitalistic system would only provide schooling for those who could pay. The more children you have, the more you pay. Every quarter too, the profit margin would have to increase. We might as well include the Public Library System, too.

And then there are our Public Services. Try to picture a strictly capitalist police and fire department. Being mugged or raped? House on fire? Which credit card will you be using today, sir?

Imagine, if you will, pure capitalism applied to the issue of national defense. It seems too ludicrous to contemplate. And yet, there are places in the world where people must rely on private security forces for their defense.

My point is that, any good idea can be taken to a ridiculous extreme, even capitalism. Further, we don't have pure capitalism now. Certain socialistic institutions are already part of our lives, and I don't think we would want to change this. If you don't realize that, you need to take another look. There is nothing whatsoever either patriotic or intellectual about allowing those of our friends and neighbors without enough money to be pauperized by health care costs, or worse, to die.

Whither the Post Office?

2009-08-29T19:17:00.008-04:00

REF: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/29/business/29postal.html

The Post Office is a venerable institution, once indispensable. It was conceived and put forward by Ben Franklin, as you probably know. For many years their motto, "If it was good enough for Ben Franklin, it's good enough for us," served them well. Unfortunately, like so many US institutions, they brought irrelevance upon themselves. When they should have been paying attention, they were looking out the window wondering, "Is it Friday yet?"

It isn't that they totally ignored technology. Over the years, whenever an opportunity came along to automate, they took it. Most of these opportunities were presented by Pitney Bowes. I worked on the development of the first of these machines, the Facer/Canceller, jokingly called by the designers the "High Speed Shredder." Many jobs were permanently replaced by automation. Through attrition, many post office employees were replaced by temps, as well. As usual, employee wages and benefits were seen as "the cause of all our problems."

I know some of this story because I helped develop the machines. I know other parts of the story because my mother was retired from the Post Office.

They showed what they were made of when UPS and Fedex came on the scene: straw. Instead of competing with them, they willingly handed over the lucrative package delivery market. At this time, the Internet wasn't even a player. They said, "So what! We are still the only ones allowed to sell stamps!"

Now, they publicly admit that their primary function is to deliver junk mail to your house. And the shit doesn't even have stamps on it, much less a time/date stamp. They blame their $7B deficit on everyone and everything but themselves. Where did the pride go?

I think you will still be able to buy a stamp, and drop a paper letter in the mailbox, for quite a while. I expect it will become really expensive, though, and the mailbox may be far away..

Just Say Yes

2009-08-06T12:56:00.005-04:00

The dentist's office called me this morning to make an appointment to have my teeth cleaned. I told them I might need two appointments back-to-back, as I hadn't been there in quite a while. Without giving it any thought at all the woman said, "Oh, we don't work that way. We will determine if you need a second appointment." Do you know why she said that? Insurance companies. They are so used to insurance companies telling them what to do, they have stopped thinking for themselves. Mind you, she didn't think twice about doubling my time and transportation costs.

What do you think would happen if I said, "I want to book every appointment for the whole day, back-to-back. I want to pay cash in advance, right now." I have a hunch they would take the money.

A couple of months ago, my favorite breakfast muffins disappeared from the supermarket. When I asked about them they said, “Oh, we don't get them anymore, because nobody buys them.” Now, I'm not nobody, and I wasn't happy with this answer. I spoke with the department manager. I explained that I knew they ordered their products in quantity, and I knew I might have to buy a dozen packages at once, and I knew I might have to wait a week for them. But I figured that since I had the money, and they had the product, we ought to be able to work something out.

She understood, and agreed. It would have been a whole lot easier if when I first asked they had said, “Yes, we can get them for you. You'll have to buy a dozen packages, and it will take a week to get them. Do you still want them?”

During the time I worked as a design engineer to the commercial electronics industry, I was the can-do guy. The most challenging assignments were given to me. After ten other engineers said “That's impossible,” I said, “Yes, we can do that, although you may not like the price.” Most of the time, they accepted the price. After all, they wanted what they wanted.

There are a hundred reasons why we can't do the job, including “We don't work that way, We don't do that, We never did that before, That's too complex, That's impossible,” and many others. The next time someone wants to give you money, be affirmative. Your customer or client will like the results, and you may like them as well.

Try it. Just say yes.

Are We There Yet?

2009-08-05T16:28:00.006-04:00

In his 1970 book 'Future Shock,' visionary author Alvin Toffler made two points. Both have proven to be valid.

The first was that technological change engenders societal change. The second was that the rate of technological change is exponential, rather than linear. Having read the book nearly 40 years ago, these two points seem self-evident to me. I have the advantage of perspective.

The evidence of the validity of these points can be seen throughout human history. Fire, wheels, gunpowder, moveable type, all were pivotal developments. All brought about substantial societal change. It has been said that had it not been for the printing press, for example, neither the American nor the French revolutions would have taken place. You get the picture.

An understanding of the dismal economic condition we find our Western world in today requires an appreciation of the factors described by Toffler. But there's more. We need to understand the role and nature of the Company.

The relationship between the Company and the government has always been symbiotic. And that made sense. The Company built a factory in the town. The Company hired workers in the town. The workers paid taxes. The Company sold products, made profits, and paid taxes. Everybody made out.

It has always been understood, too, that what's good for the Company is good for the town. When the Company profited, new jobs were created, promotions went around, and raises were awarded. Again, everybody made out. Understandably, the government made laws to favor the conduct of business.

The theories of John Maynard Keynes, a prominent economist of the 30s, tell us that the flow of money is circular, and that recessions occur when someone in the chain stops passing it along. Based on his theories the US Federal Reserve System undertook to reverse the Great Depression by increasing the supply of money. It worked fairly well, although people who lived through that time said afterward, “It took a war to get us out of it.” By the 50s and 60s, most capitalist governments had adopted Keynesian policy. President Obama is using these same policies today to get our economy back on its feet.

So far, it doesn't seem to be working. The banking industry has recovered, as has the insurance industry, and lavish bonuses are again the order of the day. The stock market is showing signs of life, and even the real estate market has a pulse. Yet there are six applicants for every job, professionals can't find work at half their normal wage, and even kids are finding that the burger-flipping jobs have been taken by adults.

If you are working now you may be thinking, “What's this guy talking about? Things aren't that bad!” Remember that even during the thirties, your odds of staying employed were still three to one. This was not sufficient to avoid an economic disaster. Some say, “A recession is when my neighbor is out of work. A depression is when I am out of work.”

Some people are beginning to think something is wrong. The political cartoonists Danziger and Oliphant see it. Many respondents to the New York Times 'Post a Comment' feature see it. Friends I speak with see it. I see it, and although I'm no economist, I think I know what's wrong. I even have ideas about what to do about it. I just don't know who to tell. I write this essay in the hopes of telling you.

Here's what's wrong. The technological revolution has invalidated the basic premises of our economic policies and our tax laws. The Company still needs a building, and workers, but they don't need them in our town anymore. They don't need them in our country anymore. When the jobs come back, they won't come back here. They may come back in India, but not in Indiana. The circular flow of money visualized by Keynes has been broken. The money leaves the Western world, and goes to Asia, and it doesn't come back. All the deficit spending in the world will not make up for this. Roll over, Keynes, and give Roosevelt the news.

As I mentioned, I have an idea what can be done about this. I'm going to save that for another essay. I think there's already enough to swallow in this one.

Are We There Yet, Part II

The Horses Are Dead

2009-07-12T10:37:00.033-04:00

Sunday mornings I file my unemployment claim. The state has it set up so that I can only file on a certain day, and at certain times in that day. Yes, I file online, but they run it like an office, as if the computer needs time off. Typical Connecticut.

My original 26 weeks ran out last month. An 'emergency' 20 weeks, which I am now collecting, was available. It will run out around Thanksgiving. Technically there is more money available after that, but the reporting procedures become so extreme as to make it impossible for most people to get. This, of course, is the idea.

The state computer is so overloaded that I have only been able to use it at six in the morning. Any other time resulted in ten minute page loads followed by disconnects and error messages. Lately it has been overloaded even first thing in the morning. The number of people filing seems to be increasing.
..........................................................
In 1980, the 'official vehicle' of the US Ski Team was the the AMC Eagle. In 1981, it was the Subaru. Here, looking back, you could see the beginning of our national decrepitude. The Subaru makes me laugh. In the early 70s, when I lived on Gaylord street in Denver, there was a car lot just around the corner on Colfax. It had 50 Subarus. The car had two doors, and seating for two. The rear wheels were closer together than the front wheels, as I recall. Each car was white, there were no other colors. They cost $1500. They sat there for about six months. Nobody bought one. One day I walked by and the lot was empty. They were all gone. I was soon to find out where they went. On Saturday I saw them all on television. They were in a demolition derby.

In 1985, I watched Reagan sign off on the sale of the US semiconductor industry to Asia. He had to sign off on this because there was some thinking that this industry might be key to defense. There was still the memory of WWII, when shipping was risky, and we couldn't get rubber from India. By 1995, 35% of defense-related components were supplied by off-shore manufacturers. I watched the signoff on television with great interest, as I was working in the semiconductor industry at the time. Reagan signed with glee.

In 1990, the Perkin Elmer Corp. folded up its tent. They had been responsible for the development of the projection mask aligner, the machine that made possible the mass production of integrated circuits. They built the Hubbell space telescope. They had been the industry leader in labratory analytical instruments. Their tech accomplishments were substantial. The incredulous employees watched what they called the 'hostile giveaway.' It was at this time that I lost my job there. But the board were no fools. It was time to take the money and run.

The main building on Rt.7 in Norwalk still stood ten years ago, deserted. The parking lot was cracked, and plants grew up through the cracks. It looked like "Life After People," on the History Channel. It saddened me to see it. When this company went, the first half of my working life went with it. I never worked as a design engineer again. Like the board, I saw the future.

My heart was never in tech writing. I could take no pride in it. It is very un-challenging, and far too formulaic. Yes, I did hone my skill with the written word during this time, but although I acknowledge it, I cannot bring myself to feel gratitude for it. Two years worth of honing is not worth 20 years of bullshit. I have watched as the enterprise acquired the morals of a crack junkie, and the filching of the common man around the world was called 'creating wealth.' What we actually created was trickle-down poverty.

This morning's headline says, "President Urges Public Patience on Economy." I have patience. I am patiently waiting for our leaders, and our country, to realize that the horses are dead. We beat them too hard, for too long, and now they are dead. No economic mumbo-jumbo is going to bring them back to life. The thing is, we still have this wagon load of shit to get into town. Like alcoholism, unless there is recognition of the reality of the matter, and a willingness to make a change, the condition will persist. I hope I live long enough to see the resolution. I feel like I've already paid for the ticket.

"All for sale, all for sale..." Smooth Walker in Dr.Detroit, 1983

What About Bermuda?

2009-05-19T09:11:00.019-04:00

Some years ago I had the pleasure of visiting Bermuda. You may be acquainted with the island's reputation for cleanliness. It is well deserved. They take their environment very seriously. They have to. It is all they have to sell.

There was no litter at all on the sidewalks or streets. The fine for littering was $500. If you threw litter out of a moving car, the fine was $1000. If you were driving the car, the fine was $2000. The laws were strict, and they were enforced. I was there three days before I saw a crumpled soda can underneath a roadside bush. I flicked out my cigarettes and put the butts in my pocket, not out of fear of the law, but out of respect.

Today I read the headline, "Cost of Cigarette Litter May Fall on San Francisco's Smokers." The article said, "The proposal, to be introduced next month to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, would add 33 cents to the cost of a pack of cigarettes, to offset the estimated $10.7 million the city spends annually removing discarded butts from gutters, drainpipes and sidewalks." I visualized San Francisco as one huge ashtray, bristling with stinky butts, overdue to be emptied.

I must not be the only one who visualized this. One reader's comment said, "Go to your local 24-hour grocery store in the wee hours when they're sweeping the parking lot: mostly cigarette butts. People even dump their car ashtrays on the lot. This sweeper is paid (given statistics) mostly by nonsmoking customers. Smokers will also stand next to a building's outdoor ashtray and dump a butt on the sidewalk." Egad! Now that's filthy! This author referred to Lincoln, Nebraska. Evidently Lincoln, too, has an extreme litter problem.

Another reader, one who actually lives in San Francisco, wrote, "…authorities should consider a $1000 littering fine…" This would address not only cigarette butts, but burger wrappers, fry boxes, paper napkins and cups as well. To me, this made sense.

If the city government wants to penalize cigarette smokers, it should do so without the pretext that it will deter littering. Impose a $10 per pack tax and be done with it. If the goal, on the other hand, is to discourage littering, it should enact Bermuda-style littering laws, and enforce them. It works.

Say what you mean, and mean what you say.

Who Cares Who's On Board?

2009-05-16T19:47:00.007-04:00

Can you remember the CB radio craze of the 80s? Every car sported a CB antenna. Every dashboard had a little black box with colored lights. This went on for a year or two. Then suddenly, within a few months, maybe within a few weeks, they all disappeared. I guessed everyone got tired of saying “10-4 good buddy.”

This was followed by the little orange diamond-shaped signs that hung in the car window. The first message was serious. It said, “Baby On Board.” I remember asking myself why I needed to know this. Was I being asked to drive even more carefully? Was the driver bragging that she had succeeded in procreating? I never knew. But when I saw the sign, I always looked for a baby. Most of the time there wasn’t one. Then came the attempts at humor, many of which were funny for 30 seconds. There was “Mother-in-law On Board” and “Ex-wife In Trunk.” The last one I remember seeing before these too disappeared was, “Who Cares Who’s On Board.” Who cares, indeed.

Next came the bumper stickers. Bumpers were plastered with them. Everyone felt they had something to say that everyone else needed to hear. I didn’t care though. I didn’t care if the driver loved New York, or was Polish, or hated war, or had visited Nantucket. I don’t know what happened to all the bumper stickers. Maybe the drivers picked them off. Maybe they just fell off. Maybe the cars all went to the junkyard. I don’t know.

Today you can hardly find a ball cap or a t-shirt that isn’t advertising something. Most of them say the equivalent of “Here’s what I like!” These too will find their way to the land fill.

Now, we have the Internet. And the Blog. Any one of us can go on at length about our likes and dislikes, and share our personal views with thousands. It has been said that the Internet is the most powerful technology for social change since the printing press. The printing press allowed the common man to learn to read. The Internet, though, allows the common man to publish. Twitter is today’s bumper sticker. Unfortunately, this stuff won’t decay and crumble. It is virtually immortal.

It is easy to see how the ability to read empowered the common man. It is said that, had the printing press not been invented, the American Revolution would never have taken place. It is more difficult to see the lasting esthetic value of “Baby On Board” or “Kiss Me I’m Polish.”

It is interesting to speculate about what would have happened if every individual in Elizabethan England had the power to publish. How many plays would we have to read before getting to Shakespeare? Would we ever find Shakespeare at all? For that matter, were there better playwrights than Shakespeare, who simply couldn’t get published?

Will ‘search engine optimization’ take the place of literary scholars? Will populist appeal replace artistic merit? Will the Oscar Meyer Bologna jingle become the new Carmina Burana? Generations to follow will know the answer to this, but we can’t. It’s too soon. I have decided not to add my voice to the din. Except this once.