Observations Along the Road

Theatre Writeups, Musings on the News, Rants and Roadkill Along the Information Superhighway

Category Archive: 'rant'

Open on Thanksgiving

Written By: cahwyguy - Wed Nov 27, 2013 @ 7:16 am PST

userpic=chanukah-christmasThis morning while getting ready for work, I was thinking about all the kerfluffle over stores being open on Thanksgiving. You know what? I have no problem with it. The stores being open are not the problem. They are the symptom.

First, let’s get the stores out of the way. Truthfully, most of us have no problem with businesses being open on Thanksgiving. We like to be able to go to the market if we forgot something. We like to be able to tank up our cars, or even order something in if we’re too tired to cook. Employees that have to work on Thanksgiving are typically well-paid (which is a bonus to them), and their employers often give them other perks to make up for their being away from their families.

Further, those who are so “offended” about stores being open on Thanksgiving are not doing it because Thanksgiving is a national holiday. They don’t demand that stores be closed on Veterans Day, Presidents Day, Memorial Day, Labor Day, or the 4th of July. Why Thanksgiving?

The answer is because this has nothing to do with Thanksgiving, and everything to do with Christmas. Their issue is not with the stores being open; their issue is with the fact that if the stores are open they will go out and go shopping. It is that quest for the bargain. It is yet another example of America’s worshipping of symbols — and in this case, the symbol is not the Christmas tree, but the wrapped present.

Now, I’m no Christian. I haven’t studied the New Testament. I’m not intimately familiar with Jesus’ teachings. But I’m pretty sure that he wouldn’t his followers to chasing the bargain, going out solely to give more and more of their money to businesses large and small. He would much rather see that money go and do good for those who cannot afford to do so. But, alas, doing good for the poor and needy doesn’t seem to be the “American Way”. Tom Lehrer said it best: “Angels we have heard on high / Tell us to go out and buy!”

So, when you see Christmas marketing creeping earlier and earlier, and merchants getting more and more aggressive, don’t blame the merchants. They are just trying to make a living in a tough economy. Blame the society that has turned the winter holidays — neither of which had anything to do with gift giving and shopping Shopping SHOPPING — into the major commerce point of the year. If you’re Christian, celebrate the birth of Christ by emulating what he taught. If you’re Jewish, celebrate Chanukkah and fight the urge to assimilate and be like the Greeks. But please, don’t celebrate the overindulgence culture so prevalent this time of year.

The stores may be open. That’s their choice, and we don’t need to blame them for it. They are gambling that people will shop. However, their being open doesn’t mean you have to shop. Actually, to be precise, it doesn’t mean you need to start shopping for Christmas. Shop for Thanksgiving, fine. Shop as you normally would, fine. But for material presents? Feh!

Maybe — just maybe — your money can be better spent this holiday season. Give to a charity. Give to a non-profit. Do good.

Oh, and have a happy Thanksgiving, and Chag Sameach! Chanukah starts tonight!


--- *** ---

Tacky, Tacky, Tacky

Written By: cahwyguy - Tue Nov 26, 2013 @ 11:34 am PST

userpic=turkey,turkeys[A lunchtime musing…] As you know, we got to a lot of live theatre. For some of these shows, we bring along my mother-in-law. Last Saturday’s show was one such show. While eating dinner before the show, she shared with us a note that she received from the independent Senior Living facility she’s at. This note gave a variety of sandwich options — Roast Beef, Salami, and Tuna (IIRC) — and sides. My M-I-L said that these were box dinners for the residents staying in for Thanksgiving, as the dining staff was getting the night off to be with their families.

My first reaction was to be very thankful my M-I-L is joining us for Thanksgiving.

My second reaction — and my reason for writing this post — was how tacky this action by the facility was. I can understand wanting to let staff be with their families on the holiday. I can also understand the expectation that many residents will be with their families that day, and thus not utilizing the dining hall. But there are going to be a number of residents whose families are far away, or who do not have relatives that can host them, or who simply do not have relatives that care. For them, offering sandwiches is a slap in the face. At least the facility could have gone to Togos (there’s one in Granada Hills) and offered the #5 (Turkey and Cranberry) as a choice. But they could also have worked with a local restaurant to provide to-go turkey dinners to be delivered — Abes Deli, which is a block away, has a Roast Turkey dinner on the menu.

Why am I writing this? Primarily, to encourage people to think about the seniors near them that may be in such facilities. Check and make sure they are getting proper Thanksgiving dinners (if they want). Perhaps offer to invite such a senior to your dinner.

Thinking ahead: What are they going to do about Christmas — even more of a family holiday. For us, we’ve already invited my M-I-L to join us for our traditional celebration: a movie and Chinese food.

--- *** ---

What’s Missing in This Article?

Written By: cahwyguy - Wed Nov 20, 2013 @ 11:44 am PST

userpic=verizonWhile eating my lunch and reading the news, news.google.com highlighted an interesting article (alas, from Fox News): “FCC announces plans to upgrade century-old phone system“. In short, currently 1/3 of people use cell phones, 1/3 use digital services from cable providers, and 1/3 use what is called POTS – Plain Old Telephone Service. This is the century-old copper wire switching network. Of course, eventually, both the cell phones and digital services end up on that copper as well.

What happened is that yesterday the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced plans to expedite the largest change to the nation’s phone system in decades — a move away from the circuit-switched system that sends those analog signals over copper cables to a digital, IP-based network that largely relies on fiber optics. Once tests prove that the new system works in localized trials, the system will be rolled out nationwide, and the copper wires that have been the basis of POSE for over a century will be turned off.

Be scared, be very very scared.

According to the article, the FCC is expected to begin in January “a diverse set of experiments” in order to figure out how to transition to the new IP-based system, a transition certain to take years. FoxNews was told that the initial experiments will likely include regional tests of an IP-based system to ascertain reliability, scalability and so on. The commission’s technological advisory committee set a goal of 2018, which is likely too ambitious, he said. But expect localized trials as soon as 2015. The upgrade may mean introducing the age of video calling to landlines. An IP landline network, unlike current copper wires can handle much larger amounts of data that could be used to make video calls.

What’s missing in the above? Security.

One of the facts I remember from studying for the CISSP is that Federal wiretap laws apply only to telephone (read: POTS) communication. It does not apply to VOIP (which is one reason I don’t do digital phone systems). Once our copper lines move to all digital…

Further, there is no mention of using encryption — or giving the provision for encryption. Ideally, if we’re going digital, it would great to be able to be able to use public-key encryption for the payloads of the messages (not routing), where the user controlled the key (for one thing, this would allow you to sign over the phone). Will it be there?

What about analog devices? Is this the death of the modem? What about all the technologies that depend on analog signals over copper (many medical devices do; fax machines may)? Does this mean (using an IP-based service) that a side-benefit is instant internet connectivity? What does that do to the ISPs?

One big advantage of copper is that it provided its own power infrastructure. If your electricity went down, often your phones would continue to work. That’s not true for VOIP, where you require additional power adapters. Further, the phone system was very simple — which also made it robust. Yes, the Internet was designed for robust switching, but I’m not sure it will have the resiliency we’ll need for nationwide telephone service in emergencies. One wonders, in fact, if they’ve actually figured out all the requirements properly.

Much as I can see the benefits to moving away from copper, I’ve got the increasing feeling that these benefits are not necessarily for the end users. They will lower costs for the telcos, and may make things easier for, umm, other parties, but the end consumer?

Your thoughts are welcome.

--- *** ---

Keeping Your Insurance

Written By: cahwyguy - Thu Nov 14, 2013 @ 5:13 am PST

userpic=progenitorivoxA quick morning post before I get off to get ready for work… I’m seeing a number of people advocating that people should be able to keep their insurance, just as the President promised. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is working with Mary Landreau to get a bill passed to modify the ACA to let people keep their grandfathered policies as long as the companies choose to offer them. This worries me, and here’s why.

First, the finances of the ACA are a delicate balancing act. In order to be able to cover pre-existing conditions, preventative care, maternity needs, etc., the insurance companies need sufficient bodies in each pool. If people stay in their lower-cost policies that don’t cover those areas, the pools may not balance … and there may be financial problems in the long run.

Second, this provides no guarantee people can keep their policies. Insurance companies can still decide they don’t want to offer those low cost polices, and there’s nothing Congress can do about it. Congress cannot dictate what plans a company must offer, only the minimum coverage for new plans.

Thirdly, it does nothing for people who want those low-cost plans. Insurance companies will still not be allowed to enroll new people in the plans that don’t meet the minimums. Thus, slowly over time, the number of people in the grandfathered plans will diminish making them economically not-viable, resulting in the cancellation of those plans.

Just something to think about. Now off to the showers.

--- *** ---

Monday Rant: It’s All About Me | It Takes a Community

Written By: cahwyguy - Mon Nov 04, 2013 @ 11:37 am PST

userpic=soapboxWhile reading my RSS feeds while eating my salad, one of the OCTA Headlines caught my eye. This article (actually, an opinion letter) was going on against the proposed toll lanes for I-405 in Orange County, and said:

The proposed I-405 toll lanes will only improve the drive times for those who pay to use them. The rest of us will see little improvement in traffic congestion or travel time for our massive investment. Tolls may make OCTA rich at taxpayer expense.
This was yet another example of something I’m seeing more and more, and as I chewed my salad, I fumed and thought: The “Me” generation has come back to bite us in the butt.
  • People are upset at toll lanes because they will “only improve the drive times for those who pay to use them” (translation: they won’t benefit me because I won’t pay). But these same folks refuse to let taxes increase to pay for more infrastructure.
  • People are upset at health insurance minimums and plan changes that will make them pay more because they will benefit someone else, not them (without understanding how insurance works, and that they can’t predict their medical needs in the future).
  • People are upset when some other state gets more, or some other community gets more, and it doesn’t go to them.

We used to view our Nation as a community, helping each other build a better life. Living in California, I had no problem helping the southern states because a stronger nation benefited, and I knew they would be there when I needed them. Sharing the risks reduced the exposure for all. This is the idea behind FEMA: I’ll pay for the hurricanes in the South, they pay for the Earthquakes out here.

We used to view our State as a community: the hinterlands would help the cities, and the cities would provide support to the hinterlands. We were all in this together.

Today, where has that attitude gone? People are only out for what they can get. Religious institutions are viewed as a balance sheet: do I get out in services more than I pay in. Same thing with government: we’re mad at taxes if we don’t get that much value in return. We forget that the view is a National view: over the average all benefit, but some will win, and some will lose, and the winners and losers will change over time. We also work, through our financial contributions, to make our National society strong: healthier, smarter, successful. Again: this is on the average.

But people don’t see that. They don’t see the average. It’s all me, me, me.


--- *** ---

Shutdown Day 4: I’m Fed Up

Written By: cahwyguy - Wed Oct 09, 2013 @ 6:48 pm PST

National Lampoon Doguserpic=pastramiAs the shutdown continues, I’m getting fed up. So I think I’ll talk about food:

Oh, and speaking of the shutdown… remember yesterday when I talked about how compromises work? The Dems have agreed to lower the budget figure to $986 billion, the Republicans’ baseline spending level, and begin a conference to delve into exactly where government spending would be cut. This gives the Repubs something they want — a lower budget figure. However, they want the ACA off the table. In other words… the GOP gets something, the Dems get nothing. The GOP response? Nope. We want both the cuts and the ACA killed. This is why the magazine cover will remain until this is resolved.

--- *** ---

Shutdown Observations: Furlough Day 3

Written By: cahwyguy - Tue Oct 08, 2013 @ 6:24 pm PST

National Lampoon Doguserpic=soapboxI just saw an article in the LA Times with the tagline: “House Speaker John Boehner flatly rules out a potential short-term deal to reopen the government, saying it would amount to ‘unconditional surrender.'”

Excuse me?

Since when is this a war?  Since when does the process of running the government mean that one side must win completely, and the other side must lose completely? Mr. Boehner, if that’s what you think that government is, please go back to 4th grade civics class.

The job of Congress is to pass legislation that a majority (or perhaps a super-majority, depending on the bill) must approve. In both houses. Your job, in the House, is to come up with legislation you can convince the Senate to support. Ignore the President in all of this.  Come up with something that can get through the Senate. Newt Gingrich, your hero, said just as much: It has to pass the Senate. The Senate is not going away.

Most important, please remember that compromise means you give up something, and the other side gives up something. You can also look at it as both sides getting something they want, but not everything they want. However, I’m not seeing any evidence that the GOP understands this. They seem to want only what they want, and if they can’t get it, they want more. Already the proposed deal has moved from delaying or defunding Obamacare to delaying or defunding Obamacare AND major budget cuts. That is not compromise. I haven’t seen the House propose a single thing that could be viewed as a plus for the other side. No, saying you’ll cut Obamacare less is not a plus, because you are still cutting it. That’s like saying I’m only going to cut off one hand instead of both.

[Additional Exercise Thoughts: A compromise is shared pain — each side hurts equally, and the other side knows it. The GOP wants the other side to give up (delay or defund) the Affordable Care Act — something very dear to them. In exchange, is the GOP willing to give up on a position equally near and dear to them? Are they willing to agree to make changes in tax laws that increase revenues? Are they willing to pass the Dream Act or help with immigration issues? Are they willing to pass a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to an abortion? Are they willing to pass a law making discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation illegal? Any of these would be big concessions from them, potentially equal to asking the Dems to delay or defund the ACA? Are they willing to do this?  Looking from the other side, what the President is proposing — a clean bill at last years levels — is shared pain. The Dems don’t get increases in revenues or increases to support programs, and the sequester cuts remain. The GOP feels equal pain by not getting things they want. One last exercise related thought: If the GOP believes the “shared pain” is the Dems getting the country running again, this is saying that the GOP is putting party principles over the welfare of the nation — they believe that defunding or delaying the ACA is more important than anything else in this country. What does that say about them as a party?]

I’m not saying the Senate is doing much better at negotiation, but there’s not much that they can propose that the House would accept short of completely gutting Obamacare. That’s not going to happen, so they need to figure out something else to negotiate on.

I’ve got this feeling I’m going to have a lot of time to work on the highway pages. 1934, you’re next.

--- *** ---

Shutdown Log – Day 0

Written By: cahwyguy - Thu Oct 03, 2013 @ 5:16 pm PST

userpic=angry-dogI had hoped that my rants of Monday and Tuesday would get the shutdown out of my system. There were a few items I was still fuming about, but I was trying to let them go. That was before this morning, when we learned that our humble little FFRDC was also affected by the shutdown, and as of tomorrow, almost all of us are on furlough — burning vacation days if we have them, taking unpaid time off if we don’t. Further, unlike Federal workers, we’re not getting that time back (or for those taking unpaid time, getting retroactive pay). This is hitting folks in the pocketbook, all caused by congresscritters who are not taking the personal economic hit for what they do.

There are those who are blaming this situation on the Senate and President not being willing to negotiate. My question is: Negotiate what? All the Senate and President is asking for is (a) to fund the government at the same level as last year for a few months, and (b) to agree to pay for, as one co-worker put it, “the one-click purchases we’ve already made.” The House is unwilling to do that — a minority of congresscritters is holding the country hostage over a law that was approved by the people’s representatives, signed by the President, and judged legal by the Supreme Court. If they want to negotiate on this, do it after the country’s financial crisis has been taken over. They won’t do that, however, because the only way this group feels they can get what they want is to bully the rest of the nation. My opinion — that’s not how America works. We don’t give in to bullys.

But I’m not angry. No, not me.

Then there are the people who are upset that the prisons are open, that the military is still there, that taxes are still being collected… while the CDC and NIH are closed, and parks are closed. They don’t understand how the government is funded and why what is open is open. Here’s the explanation. The law is the Antideficiency Act, passed by Congress in 1870 (and amended several times), which prohibits the government from incurring any monetary obligation for which the Congress has not appropriated funds. The Government Accountability Office says employees who violate the Antideficiency Act may be subject to disciplinary action, suspension and even “fines, imprisonment, or both.” The only exemptions to the shutdown concern “emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property,” according to government documents.

What’s even more galling is that this shutdown appears to be part of a larger plan. It’s not Obamacare. It’s the debt ceiling. It’s a longer term plan to strengthen one party’s hand in the debt ceiling talks. It’s bullying. Here’s a nice statement from Mark Evanier’s blog:

Ezra Klein on what’s going on in Washington. This all sounds correct to me, especially this paragraph…

To the White House, the shutdown/debt ceiling fight is quite simple, and quite radical: Republicans are trying to create a new, deeply undemocratic pathway through which a minority party that lost the last election can enact an agenda that would never pass the normal legislative process. It’s nothing less than an effort to use the threat of a financial crisis to nullify the results of the last election. And the White House isn’t going to let it happen.

Nor should they.

I agree. When George Bush was President, I didn’t always like what was being done — but I didn’t demand the country be held hostage until I got my way. [I’ve seen a number of posts that use the Iraq War as an example of this.] I bided my time, understanding that this country can live with anything for a few years. The pendulum would eventually swing, the other party would come into power, and legislative mistakes could be corrected. The current congresscritters seem to forget that — eventually (and it always happens, just as the weather oscillates from hot to cold to hot again) their party will be in power and they can do what they want. Until then, they have to work with the party that is in power in the best interest of the Nation; not block anything and everything.

As I’ve said before: children. I’m beginning to think — more and more — that Tony Hendra, Christopher Cerf, and Peter Ebling were right. They were just off a few decades.


--- *** ---