One of the aggravating things about university life is the tendency of those who have been educated beyond their native intelligence redefining simple things with catchy intellectual labels and making them more complex than they need to be. This has filtered down to other areas–the least of which is marketing. Take “The Cloud” for instance. This is fancy talk for data of one sort or another on someone else’s computers–and not your own. For years, we managed to describe this as ‘off site servers’ and ‘distributed computing’. Anything that is contained on the Internet is “in the cloud” to us.

It seems now that vendors of everything are looking at ‘cloud based solutions’ for everything from delivering computer programs on an as needed basis, to storing all of your images, data, and entertainment media. An article in the NYT helped drive this home:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/ar…ines&emc=tha26

What a catchy little name–dematerialize–and how appropriate to what can happen to your access or data. And a very catchy intellectual take on the matter. I always equated ‘dematerialize’ to making something disappear or cease to exist. And the bottom line here is that is what they are talking about here also. Some of these services are “free” up to a point. Then they charge based upon use and storage amount. Folks like Adobe (with their AIR program delivery system) and Microsoft want to dish all of their programs to you from the cloud. While they tout convenience–this is the ultimate in control–and increasing their revenue streams. Now, consider this;

ALL OF THIS REQUIRES A STABLE CONNECTION TO THE INTERNET. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DON’T HAVE ONE–OR BETTER YET–WHEN YOU REACH YOUR BANDWIDTH LIMITS?

I find it interesting that this simple fact of internet use is omitted from discussions about ‘going to the cloud.’  Quite a few blog, article, and other internet discussions recently touch on how much bandwidth average users consume–and the lower limitations imposed by home service providers and cellular data plans. Consider for just a moment what happens to your bandwidth when suddenly your browser, office productivity suite, and other programs must stream down to you in order to use them. When every time you wish to look at your photos, listen to songs you have bought, or watch your home videos or movies you have purchased. Devices are moving toward forcing you to pay “rent” for all of your information and productivity–and essentially holding you hostage for when, where, cost, and how much access you have to it. And no real liability when they make mistakes or cannot provide you access.

Think real hard on this technology fans–it’s not a trendy, overly intellectual conversation. It’s a matter of fact coming to a device near you…

.

This was not the case a week or so ago when the Three Stooges of BP, TransOceanic, and Halliburton were on the congressional hotseat.  Finger pointing was the order of the day there,  with Moe McKay, Larry Newman, and Curly Probert blaming each other.  The only excuse not heard was that it was “God’s Will”, and they got dangerously close to whipping that one out.  We always get some good Nyuk Nyuk’s out of Halliburton’s stooge–this time was no exception.

Watching the plumes of oil and drilling mud, courtesy of BP’s “catastrophe camera” stream–I stop to think that I need to fill up my Jeep today.  What the hell if it only gets 16 MPG around town.  We are not moving away from petroleum before my demise, so “Keep the Jeep” will be the order of the day.  Let the greenie weenies drive their little putzmobiles around.  I might have to haul something big and heavy.

Sarcasm or position?  Or a little of both as a scene from “The Graduate” comes to mind:

Mr. McGuire: I just want to say one word to you – just one word.
Ben: Yes sir.
Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?
Ben: Yes I am.
Mr. McGuire: ‘Plastics.’
Ben: Exactly how do you mean?
Mr. McGuire: There’s a great future in plastics. Think about it. Will you think about it?
Ben: Yes I will.

I sit here awash in plastic.  I wear it, most everything in my view contains it–and doctors have put some of it inside of me.  Industrial chemicals, pharmaceuticals, roadways, fertilizers, lubricants, heating gasses and fuels, pesticides, waxes, food additives–the list is chock full of the hydrocarbon stuff that make modern life possible–and is not replaceable with other things.  Yet the real deal in getting all of these goodies out of the crude oil is that 81% of every gallon of crude makes up various fuels–not only gasoline–but the stuff that keeps trucks, planes, trains, and ships moving.  And I’m afraid that this writer will never be able to hug a tree hard enough to believe that electric putzmobile technology or solar silliness is going to replace any of that need in the next fifty or more years…

Yup, that’s a lot of fuel products to get to the raw materials that keep the modern world spinning smoothly on its petroleum axis.  Cutting down on fuel use will not commensurately reduce the need for the remaining 15% of petrochemical products–a fact that is conveniently ignored in the empty rhetoric of reducing our dependence on oil.  Even if auto use of gasoline were to be reduced by one half today, our worthy friends in China, India, and Brazil will gladly use up the cheap glut that would result.  Those accused of being overly educated call this a zero sum game.  There is a twisted analogy here of painting oneself into a corner, and discovering that it will take forever for the paint to dry–if it ever does.  Perhaps the painter should not have used a petroleum based product.

Strains of Bruce Hornsby playing “The Way it Is” surround my thoughts as they turn to all of the people in the Gulf that are affected by this mess.   Fishing boats sitting idle.  Tourism flat and repugnant as a possum on a hot country road.  So it is in the Gulf states that depend on fishing and oil for their economy–and those states like Florida that fishing and tourism define their character.  But this is just one more assault on a tenuous balance that has existed for decades–as development, overfishing, and urban runoff have steadily maimed that industry.  How this catastrophe will redefine things–finally tipping the scale in ways no one can yet imagine.  Sing on Bruce, it’s a sweeter requiem than the ravings of Booby Jindahl.

[Cut to Obama blabbering on the beach, and a dog and pony show casting crew assembled by BP pretending to work on a Louisiana shore in the background.]

This is indeed a wakeup call–that all of our endeavors carry risks of a magnitude that staggers the imagination–and presses the environment.  Best case scenarios and polite lies have been exposed as the rubbish that they are.  Let’s hope that somewhere out of this a new set of policies and regulations comes forth that adds a level of protection against such catastrophes in the future–while recognizing that our world is built upon the fruit of the drilling rig.  We can only marvel that this has not happened before.

As the news rolls in that the “top kill” efforts have failed, several things become abundantly clear.  The first is that oil producers lack the technology to deal with damage at the wellhead or blowout preventer level when drilling at these sorts of depth.  They lied about that.  Solution–America needs to step back from such operations until such time as the technology exists.  Returning to the fantasy that companies created to present an illusion that they could deal with such disasters–penalties should be imposed for such misrepresentation–and an entirely new level of scrutiny given to those proposing any sort of underwater drilling operations.

Being that this is the largest man made petroleum disaster in history–the sane course is not repeat the episode to see if one larger can be created.  It has been proven beyond a doubt that problems result in grasping at straws–to the detriment of everyone.

Let’s hope that BP is not too big to fail before it–and the assets of those connected with the Deepwater Horizon peter out.  Our Fearless Leader wishes to be responsible–so be it.  A strange vision of Mr. McKay at BP erasing this message from his voicemail twice daily comes to mind:

“Hello, this phone call is for Lamar McKay.  If you are not Lamar McKay, please hang up now.  If you continue to listen to this message, I have an important business matter for you that requires your immediate attention.  Please call Mr. Obama of the White House Collection Agency by 4PM today to avoid further complications with your account…”

But alas, Barry has better things to do than dun the bozos at BP to pay up.  Rest assured that there will be some new or expanded agency that will oversee all of this.  He is correct that he is responsible–as the captain of a great social and economic ship that owes its very being to a few specific pairings of hydrogen and carbon atoms–in a world that is based upon this myriad of potential combination’s.  The devil we live with.  Of course we could stop using these products and return to the way of life that existed several hundred years ago.  Whales, like the fish that have been decimated over the relatively recent past are in short supply–so something else would have to be found to fill our lamps with.  It’s just the way it is, and make no mistake–we are all responsible…

© 2010

Western society so irresponsible—at just about any level one cares to look. Let’s consider just one small corner of our reality, how we take care of ourselves. For the most part (all the rubbish about staying fit through proper exercise and diet aside), we do whatever we want, and then act pretty clueless when our decisions cause some sort of a health upset. A simple example is upset stomach/acid reflux relief. Commercials show us products that let us make hogs of ourselves eating greasy, spicy, and chemical laden foods that have caused the viewer severe upset in the past. The solution is not to avoid those foods—but to take a damned pill that will mask the symptoms of doing something our bodies would rather we not.

There are literally thousands of products on the over the counter market to take care of any ache, pain, or complaint we may have. The message is quite clear—have a problem, take a pill. Instant fix, no effort or responsibility required. When we come to prescription drugs, then all bets are off. We expect them to fix any ailment or condition, regardless of how much that issue was our own doing and responsibility. Some of this might be the fault of a soft and stupid society wanting everything sugar coated and without any conviction—but there are mega-corporations out there that have spread the gospel of “pills are good for you” many decades now—regardless of whether they are or not.

It is natural to point the finger at the consumer. After all, we are the ones who ultimately make choices. But the real world matter is that we have little choice or input as to what goes into our food supply, supplements, or pharmaceuticals. These decisions are made by large multi-national corporations whose purpose is profit—and they spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year peddling junk food and questionable drugs to offset the choices that we are invited to make in the “free market”. One would think that a modicum of concern would be had for the end consumer—that bad products would not be even a consideration—but we need look no further than the tobacco or fast food industries to realize that this is not the case.

Many of us remember trouble with Tylenol in 1982, an incident that resulted in seven deaths. That was an act of malicious tampering, something that could not have been anticipated by the manufacturer. Now we are confronted with a new kind of product threat—impure, contaminated, and faulty potency pharmaceuticals. In January of this year, 52 Tylenol based products had to be recalled from the market. It seems that they were contaminated with a “fumigant” used to assure that bulk shipment of goods does not become moldy. The product still reeked of mold—making us ask the question of whether the contamination actually began at the Chinese factory that produced it. Now we have 43 additional products being pulled from the shelves due to issues with potency and impurities. It is easy to understand how one manufacturing line could cause an issue with a single product—but this points to problems with bulk supplies of ingredients used to make all of these consumer remedies. For the most part, all manufactured in China.

So far in the past decade, we have been confronted with contaminated additives, fake pharmaceuticals, and useless antibiotics. In an effort to clean up its drug production image, in 2007 China executed its State Food & Drug Administration head Zheng Xiaoyu. While good public relations, it does not seem to have done much to staunch the flow of shoddy drugs and contaminated foods from streaming into consumer nations like North and South America. So if the source of the rubbish is not really serious about issues, the onus must be taken up by the American manufacturers who package up these things and sell them. There looks to be a little problem with that—something about profit.

As an aside to better understand what is happening in our pharmaceutical markets these days, we need to step back nearly four decades and recall the Ford Pinto. As designed, there were serious flaws in the protection afforded passengers in the event of a rear end collision. The gas tank could explode, and the doors jam shut trapping riders in a fiery inferno. Ford knew of these problems from the beginning, but did a cost benefit analysis of what the liability would be paying out claims for death and injury, versus applying a production change and an $11 repair on millions of vehicles should a recall be made. Ford decided to take the risk. In the end, they paid out $6.5 million in damages—a drop in the bucket compared to the profit that was made producing and selling defective Pinto’s. A new business model was born and validated.

Just in the past year alone, big pharma has paid out fines and claims into the multiple billions—on products it knew were problematic or being promoted for off label uses. The list reads like a Who’s Who of pharma; Johnson & Johnson $81M, AstraZenica $520M, Pfizer $301M on top of a $2.3B fine several years ago, and so many more it becomes sickening. These anticipated costs are built into the general costs of doing business—without any regard whatsoever for the intent of the laws or the ultimate welfare of the consumer. After all, these costs are passed off the person who ends up buying the product. So we can begin to see how cheap Chinese rubbish helps to offset the cost of bad medicines. Who cares if they are safe?

Where is our FDA in all of this? Why busy cozying up to companies, lobbyists, and collecting hefty fines that subsidize their operations. Meanwhile nasty goodies flow from foreign sources, shoddily made and contaminated with who knows what—into our food and medicine supplies. Consumer awareness is not an answer—for all we seem to care about is the cost and taking magic pills to make our inconveniences go away quickly and without effort. So if government regulation of drugs, fines, and bad PR for the drug companies is not the answer, what is? All of this is giving me a headache, so I think that I will take a couple Chinese aspirin, and eat a few Fig Newtons—which curiously are now made in Mexico…

© 2010

Congress critters are now busy looking for his replacement on the committee. Their actions are somewhat funny, reminding me of “The Sidestep” song and dance Charles Durning performed as the Governor in “The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas.” Their prancing about can be understood—as Ways and Means is one of the most powerful committees in Congress. It is responsible for creating all of the taxation and revenue raising policy for the federal government, and oversees things like Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, and most federally funded welfare programs. No small potatoes.

Rangel is not the first chairman to run off the tracks—many will remember the horrid comedy of Wilbur Mills and stripper Fanne Fox. A hopeful parallel here is that Mills went off to a successful private career of working with alcoholics and practicing law. He too had been in office for 38 years and chairman for 18 years (compared to Rangel at 39 years and 3 years, respectively). Folks, that’s just too damned long for anyone to be in elected office.

Age is playing a profound role in finding a replacement for Rangel. The first suggestion was to put Rep. Pete Stark in Rangel’s place. Stark is 78. Unfortunately, he should be better known as “No Show” Stark, for he has missed over 250 votes in the past year and is suffering from some illness of old age. Of the leading Democrats on Ways and Means, only one is under 70 years old. Eyes have turned to Rep. Richard Neal of Massachusetts, who in only 61. This is thought to perhaps create a “generational change” in the leadership of the committee. The only bright spot that this writer can see with this possible appointment is that Neal will probably not need to wear Depends for at least another 10 years. This is important, because whomever assumes the chair will sit there until such time as an ethical skid mark appears in their underwear, they die, or are unseated in an election. Again, this is too damned long.

Thomas Jefferson had the quaint idea that a citizen should only serve a term or two doing what they could to further public interests, and then go home and be a resource there. For a great part, this admonition has been disregarded, and political office translated into a lifetime career—as long as the gravy is poured liberally back home and the ability to power broker remains strong. Instead of true democratic representation in a federal republic, Congress and various state houses have become oligarchies, and with the tremendous corporate money influence, are busily becoming plutocracies. Which brings us to election finance reform and term limits.

Robert Michels was a German sociologist who believed that all modern democracies eventually become oligarchies. In his “Iron Law of Oligarchy”, he made the observation that there are but minor differences between those who hold political office and power—and that these representatives keep a tight control on what is considered politically respectable and acceptable in terms of action and policy. These denizens depend upon private economic systems for support and direction, and are positioned by the “media elite”. Sound a little bit familiar? A variation of this is the corporate oligarchy, also called Corporatocracy. The elite in commerce and banking call the shots—with little regard for regulation, constitutional law, or the interest of the common citizen. Gee, this sounds like what helped get us into the economic and social mess that we now face.

As a result, we get a disproportionate number of “public servants” who have garnered too much power, become intoxicated by it, and stay in office so long that the halls of legislation begin to resemble St. Petersburg Florida in the 1960s. While growing older does not mean that one becomes unaware or inept in understanding the effects of a rapidly changing technological, social, and economic world—it does mean that belief systems forged in another time and place rule the thinking process. Whether we like it or not, the world has become a roller coaster ride of change and interaction—what writer Thomas Friedman termed “Hot, Flat, and Crowded.” As America begins to lag behind and accrue more economic and social problems, these “lifers” and the “new blood” bent on their own dynasties simply do not seem to get it.

It should be pretty obvious that these people are not going to impose term limitations on themselves, nor limit the bulldozer fed piles of money given for seeking and retaining office through campaign finance reform. The Supreme Court recently made one of the worst decisions regarding this matter by eliminating most controls over corporate investment in buying “the right stuff” to inhabit the elected stratosphere of the new corporatocracy. The common citizen rarely notices—as we seem much more concerned with how many loose ends will be explained when Lost concludes. Those that have lost their jobs, homes, savings, health care, and security in the “new American deal”  are paying a bit more attention.

For it will ultimately be the citizen that demands that term limits be put in place, that mandatory retirement from high level government posts—elected or appointed—be applied just like for any other federal employee. That age is 70. If it is considered that it is not safe for someone to fly a commercial airliner after age 60, why should it be appropriate for someone to determine the fate of a rapidly changing nation at age 80?

It would be a real shame to have the new chairman of Ways and Means be some wet behind the ears, immature green punk of 40 take the helm. Maybe someone that age might actually understand that no one—a government or individual citizen—can keep borrowing to pay for things without raising adequate revenue. The bill always comes due. Let’s start putting people in these positions that realize the consequences will come due before they pass on—and then send them home every 4 or 8 years and let another pick up the torch in a responsible chain of action. Nah, on second thought let’s just worry about those Lost episodes, and cheer when the old farts of government shout “you damned kids get off our grass…”

© 2010

There was no public internet, so this marvel let me get into several dial-up bulletin boards that operated out of people’s homes! Unfortunately, in those days as this–a lot of what was found was cheap porn.  As to graphics on the green monocolor screen, a draw was like this—I would issue the command to open the file, got up and go pour a cup of coffee. Step out on the back porch, and have a smoke. Return to the computer 8-10 minutes later, and watch as the draw—usually a vector graphic—complete its task.

Now later in the Windows age (beginning with Windows v3.0 on a 386 processor computer) I began to cut my teeth on helping others set up, and maintain small business networks. Novell was king of this heap at the time. It is interesting to observe that anti-virus, adware, and spam filtering was not necessary—nor was it a regular thing to have to update software or anything else except to load a new application on the computer. This was a good time—and everything that could possibly go on a computer was less than 15Mb. Amazing, isn’t it? I still have that old Compaq, and incredibly enough, it still runs and does everything that it is capable of doing…

In the interim, I became a system administrator, set up complex Windows Active Directory servers and oversaw a dozen servers and nearly a hundred workstations. Every week became a challenge setting up new barriers—antivirus, firewalls, adware protection, and the new bane of computing—UPDATING SOFTWARE TO PLUG BAD PROGRAMMING IN THE PREVIOUS VERSION. What was this? Holes that someone found that could be exploited to gain control of one’s computer, or just mess up someone’s day. An image grew in my mind of the dutiful corporate software programmer sitting at home at night writing nasty malware to ensure job security and have a great joke at the expense of the end consumer.  And then I became sick of it all, and moved on.

Just last week, I fired up a computer for my amateur radio system that had been shut down for nine months. One major upgrade, and 67 other upgrades later, the operating system was back in sync with today. The antivirus software had to be upgraded to a completely new version—and this did not have anything to do with the numerous updates to all of the software that resided on the computer. What a joke—and it still required further updates for security holes and program flaws. Amazing how we are required to spend big money to test flawed software for developers, and shell out more money for improved versions of software that was supposed to be good in the first place…

Our problem these days is companies who shovel the same old garbage out to us—dressing up old broken software—and asking us to pay for fixing it. Am I the only one who has an issue with this? Where once I found a challenge and fun in making applications work together, and work for many people at the same time, I now find myself working just to keep my own computers running properly and free of hacker garbage. How has this happened?

The truth of the matter is that a lot of money is made in adding bells and whistles to programs that hardly anyone uses—but unless the upgrade is made puts them out of touch with those who do make the upgrades. We are regularly attacked by those whom little effort is made to locate—and even smaller effort is dedicated to prosecuting. Just like everything else in American or world economies—there is too much money made in responding in a passive way to threats than eliminating them. It seems that the mistakes in programming have become a valuable commodity to those who are standing by to “help” us plug them.

I just received a call today from a friend, who could not access their Firefox web browser without crashing. 52 updates later, this problem resolved itself. Meanwhile, this person had “automatic updates” activated for their computer. The real tragedy here is that we continue to pay our money out to various software vendors, antivirus companies, and other “supportive” applications and do not really complain. Switch to Apple? Sure, improve the market share that they hold (beyond about 5% at an incredible and unwarranted cost for the hardware) and see how quickly the target includes those machines. There seems no escape.

Where once I enjoyed exploring and developing computer systems, I have now come to hate them. Better software, such as WordPerfect for writers, has been forced to a ground zero because Microsoft has taken over the corporate and word processing world. This article was produced in Word—not because I wanted to, but because I had to. And only six updates in the last two months enabled me to do so.

When will we get tired of this game, and demand some accountability and value from our software providers? Oh, excuse that thought—Windows 7 in coming—hurry to be the first to upgrade, and find out how many devices you can no longer use, and things that are not permitted for you to do anymore before they offer you the next 1001 updates to keep it running. I hate computers—and think that I got a lot more done, and in a more intelligent manner with my old IBM Selectric typewriter…

© 2009

The Supreme Court forced busing to “desegregate” and equalize education—the success of that is still up for debate. Various civil rights acts, in combination with affirmative action attempted to equalize the workplace. Yet, in 2009, we have a much more insidious form of racism than ever before—because it is unspoken. Anyone who truly believes that the color or ethnic lines have been broken is either ignorant or lying to themselves—it is still there, and takes forms not thought of a generation before.

Now we seem to have a black in the White House. Nothing the man does is acceptable to the right wing establishment—and we have to ask ourselves why. Joe Wilson, a U.S. Representative from South Carolina, represents just the tip of the iceberg that seeks to undermine the president—diluting the authority of the presidency—and denigrating the holder of that office. The only thing that was missing from his vocal attack was the word “boy” after “you lie”.  This is just another rotten page in the book of lies that already contain such choice labels as Kenyan, foreigner, Muslim, socialist, Nazi, communist, America Hater, so on and so forth.  Where do they come up with all of this rubbish?

It’s tragic that we are still fighting the same battle of putting blacks on the bus as putting one in the White House. One would assume as America has grown older, it has grown wiser and resistant to fear of the “other”.  The far right of the Republican Party is by far the most vocal—and has not had a single good thing to say about anything the man has done. Nor have they offered a single, workable alternative to any change or reform being offered. One has to wonder—and their own words explain themselves. They want him to fail at any possible cost. There is a nigger on the bus, and by God—we are going to teach him a lesson.

What is happening is far beyond any partisan posturing. Although a sufficient number of Americans voted a black into office—there is beyond initial conscience a certain sense of “buyers remorse”. No where is the resentment more apparent than in Republican attacks.   Being modernly politically correct, these various loumouthed representatives of an America we need to move beyond–but dare not say what they are really thinking–are using other tools to marginalize and denigrate the president and his office.  It’s high time that the Limbaughs, Hannitys, Malkins, and others of their ilk are put into their place.  Well political fans, Barry is not going to the back of the bus, and it is time to work for the progress of the county—not narrow minded bigotry and party agendas.

Nuff said….

© 2009

For the past several days, I have been engaged in a forum conversation about just this thing. It has been an opportunity to read just how screwed up average Americans have become—and how much they are buying into the hateful, deceit filled propaganda being shoveled out by the more vocal members of the Republican Party. Along with the expected paranoid delusional and conspiracy fanatics, village idiots, and those who are simply unable to resolve the fact that a negro couple now sleeps in the big bed at the White House—are those who are buying into every bit of rabble rousing fallacy being churned out by the Republican machine and their illustrious spokespeople. What they are writing is frightening, and the general attitude is one that threatens the premise that America has been built upon.

Over the past 50 years, we have seen a transition away from the once collegial Congress that shaped national ends, toward an extremely polarized and adversarial collection of powerhouses of polemic. Beginning with Barry Goldwater in the early 1960s, the Republican party has become increasingly bellicose, distanced from the interests of the ordinary citizen, and enamored in playing a game of fear and distrust in furthering its agendas—usually those of the elite rich and large corporations. This crew has progressively more seen government as akin to a sandlot football game—in that a particular team must win at any cost. This is in direct disregard for the fact that the majority of the history of Congress has led to a series of middle of the road comprises that have generally done well to serve the needs of the American people.

But, forget all that—this is the age of disingenuous dogma! It would not be so bad if this latest Obama bogeyman story were something in isolation—conjured up by the same folks who have had their rectums inspected while being abducted by aliens—but is something that is coming with the aid and assistance of the Republican party. Now, in this day of “win or else”, it is expected that there be some sore losers as the result of the 2008 elections. But since that time, and if we really want to be honest for some time before that—the Party of No has engaged in an unceasing campaign of lies, half-truths, scare tactics, and character assassination in order to deflect notice of the status of the country. You know, those two unwinnable very expensive conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, the near collapse of the American economy, an unemployment rate not seen since the Great Depression, the dismantling of the Constitution and personal privacy, trashing of habeas corpus and a right to trial, under the rubric of homeland security —all things that happened during or as a result of their 8 year watch and “stewardship” of citizen interests.

The garbage that is issuing through right wing talking heads such as Limbaugh, Hannity & Malkin, Beck, and others of their hate filled ilk is unthinkable as fact to an intelligent person, but unfortunately too large a segment of America has lost the ability to think for themselves and must now rely on such a group of malcontents as are represented by the punditocracy of Fox News to interpret the world for them. Death panels are going to kill you and old people. Socialism is going to absorb all business—the government will rule all. Obama is a communist—or socialist—or Nazi—or a Muslim—or take your choice. Everything the President of staff do is now under indictment as something that will bring down America. Labels and hate fly—and citizens try to bring guns to Presidential events. There have been four successful assassinations, and six unsuccessful ones—all because firearms found their way into the proximity of the President. I do not want to see number 11, and the NRA and Republican right wingers should be ashamed of itself advocating for this sort of behavior under some Second Amendment pretense.

All of the lies, innuendo, and propaganda campaigns have come without a single alternative solution being offered by the Republicans. There are those in the party, from Mitch McConnell down who only seek to see any initiative begun by the Democrats or Obama fail—so that they can claim “I told you so” and supposedly use that as leverage to win future elections. Let’s hope that America has not become that dense, but serious questions are emerging whether that is true or not. Average Americans defend and spread this hate and dysfunction through the internet and their participation on it—sort of their own private National Enquirer type newsfeed service. Talking heads including “Simple Sarah” Palin incite mob mentalities through their disingenuous propaganda. The ignorant and misinformed are taking to the streets and meeting houses, and stymie any chance of improving the condition of things through cooperative means.

So, while the retirees stand protesting health care for all on the street corner while enjoying their socially subsidized retirement and health care; and the parents fear socialist indoctrination of their children attending socially subsidized education; and the ordinary “citizen patriots” wrap themselves in the flag and Jesus in their pocket to disrupt the political process with lies visited on them by special interests and losers—life goes on. I am listening much closer to the words coming from my neighbors, and watching how people are behaving badly toward each other. Change just a few words in the invective, and history has seen this play run its course before. And it is hardly a pretty performance. We try very hard to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of children—it’s unfortunate that we cannot keep the political process out of the hands of idiots. The result is always the same—the innocent suffer.

[Editorial Note: For several days, I attempted to contact the administration of Knox County schools to learn of their position on Obama's educational message. The call on Thursday was not returned, and everyone in administration had abandoned their offices on Friday to take a four day Labor Day weekend. After such a short summer vacation, everyone must be exhausted and need a few days off. Must be good work if you can find it…]

© 2009

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”

So when this morning an opinion piece in the Washington Post caught my eye, I had to see what the story was.  In essence, students are arriving at the start of the school year, already academically tired.  From what, one might ask—as summer vacation is a time of rest and recreation.  But alas, the shortsighted “professionals” that have ruined the teaching sector have added a new dimension to a student’s life—summer homework.

It should not be a surprise—students have been falling behind on every measure of education with the exception of taking a standardized achievement test—and the competence in that is given by an entire year of a subject squandered in teaching the test.  Now there are those who worry that children will become amnesiac dullards if they are not put to the task throughout the summer.  Consider this one more effort to regiment and control the lives of the ordinary citizen-consumer. The article itself is here:

This trend and my tendency to think about the past in my old age—got me to pondering the status of education and the experience of students between my generation and the current crop of unfortunates that are subjected to this travesty we call the American educational system.

We tend to center on what the educational system was in that short window between the end of WWII and the introduction of constructionism into educational practice in the 1970s.  It is important to remember that our educational system was reshaped during that period by the GI Bill, a Baby Boom, the rise of suburbia, new economies, and the Cold War.  However fleeting, this is held as the gold standard, a time when students actually appeared to be learning something useful.

I remember during this time—beginning in 1961—teachers did not teach and students did not learn for the purpose of passing a statewide achievement test.  We learned to acquire a solid set of skills that would serve us in the workplace, and in society.  There was a correct answer and an accompanying narrative to what we were learning–and coming to our own frame of understanding and belief about something was not a factor.  We had to learn the basics, and then we could use those tools to become critical thinkers.

Interestingly, there was no ADD, ADHD, or other behaviorally disordered kids in my classes all the way through high school in the early 70s.  Students learned quickly not to disrupt the class (as there were tangible punishments), and extremely slow learners and “special” students were removed to their own classrooms with teachers who specialized in this sort of education.  Troublemakers and the mentally deficient did not slow down the learning of the entire class.

Our schools were not in the business of social work, counseling for behavioral disorders, educating for birth control and safe sex,  nor a multicultural linguistic battlefield.  Grades were important, and were earned—there was no curving of the grades nor substitution of pass/fail grading—and damaged self esteem for failure to apply oneself was not an issue.  You worked at learning, or you failed–and could be held back a grade or two.  This was a reality that no one wished to experience—but some did.

We learned that everyone was not created equally.  There were those who came from families that were powerful and privileged.  There were those whose background was poor and disenfranchised.  There were the bright stars, the pretty people, the stupid, the crippled, and the lazy.  Teachers could spend time with each, because schools were local and not megacenters of a thousand students or more, and classes did not have so many students that it was impossible to interact with each one.

Why do we need all this ancillary homework?  A sheet or two of math drills a week, and a chapter or two of reading, and maybe one book per semester somehow managed to impart a functional knowledge that did not require much review–maybe a week–at the beginning of the following semester.  We also had free time during the school day for “recess”–and were actually able to engage in unstructured activity.  Imagine that, as today every activity is structured, coordinated, and executed in neat fifteen minute blocks–in school or out.

I was particularly intrigued by one of the comments a reader made at the end of this collection of editorials.  It gives some insight to the demands that are being made of students in regular classes, to speak nothing of artistic pursuits such as band or sports activities.  The author wrote:

When I was fourteen years old, I was working almost 60 hours a week. This is because, on top of the 40 hours of work we did at school, our teachers each assigned us one hour of homework per night. Four classes, times five days, equals another 20 hours of work.

Forty years ago we were a nation with the skills to travel to the moon, and a manufacturing powerhouse.  Today we are a people that cannot get across town without a GPS unit, perform simple math functions without a calculator, have little knowledge of history or geography, and have difficulty writing an email that is not fraught with grammatical and mechanical errors.  Of politics and government, we are likely the most ignorant nation in the Western world.

Summer homework?  It reminds me of the analogy we learned in the fourth grade of the little Dutch boy with his finger in the dike.  A patchwork solution to prop up a faulty system.  Somewhere along the line of professionalization, warehousing of students and standardized testing something was lost–the art of teaching, critical thinking and the ability to properly learn.  In this the educational system has failed us.  Go figure, if you can…

© 2009

If one thinks that this is just one more tale from Iraq, Afghanistan, or another part of the Middle East, then they are wrong.  This is a story that unfolds around us every day in this country when law enforcement authorities confront an illegal drug lab and its operators.  Here in Appalachia, methamphetamine production can be found in every county, produced and supported by users from all economic and social walks of life.  And there are other kinds of drugs manufactured as well; Ecstacy, PCP, crack cocaine, designer amphetamines, hallucinogens, the list goes on.  And then there is Tennessee’s number one cash crop, marijuana.

There are two realities here.  The first and most important is that throughout the entire discernable history of all cultures of humanity, man has sought and found ways to change his perception of reality through plants, chemicals, and alcohol.  No society has ever been free of this, and many encourage the behavior as it is built around significant cultural and spiritual rituals.

In the modern Western “civilized” world, it is estimated that approximately 25% of the population uses some sort of illegal or legal prescription drug (in a manner not intended) on a regular basis to feel different about themselves and the world they interact with.  Perhaps another 10% are very occasional recreational users.

It is the 5% of this population that becomes addicted and socially destructive that we see, and focus our primary attention on.  Again, people always have and always will use substances of one sort or another, and some of them, their families, and their communities will suffer as a result.  But the fact is that this use will never be eliminated by any means.  The goal is to reduce the destructive social effects of this behavior, and attempt to eliminate the violence that accompanies it.  The interesting paradox is however, that as enforcement becomes more intense and penalties more severe, the value of the substance increases and so does the violence surrounding these alternative economies.

This is the second reality.  Drug trade is an alternative economy whether one wishes to admit to it or not.  Cocaine alone is a multibillion dollar industry in this country.  In areas that have a marginalized and disenfranchised population where opportunity is slim, there is always a rampant drug economy.  Not just in our country, but others as well.  It’s really hard to reason with someone whose legal hope is a go-nowhere, minimum wage job versus the opportunity to work a few hours a day from home, hang out with friends, and make in excess of $1000 a week.  Just Say No doesn’t work in this case, and neither does arresting dealers.  Many times someone else has moved into the market before the busted party even arrives at jail.

The cures for this issue are rather complex, but simple at the same time.  The first line of attack is opportunity.  If there are not enough satisfying and progressive employment opportunities, there are always bound to be problems with users and dealers in a wholesale business of despair and squandered potential.  This fact is particularly apparent in the large black communities of Knoxville, Nashville, and Memphis.  Strong economies greatly decrease drug related economies.  The second cure is tolerance.  The key is to not be tolerant.

Drug dealers and manufacturers are not dark, mysterious strangers that appear at midnight and disappear at first light in a puff of smoke, but our kinfolk, friends, neighbors, and coworkers.  We must not depend on law enforcement to solve the problem, but let those know that are involved in the problem that we simply will not tolerate their actions.  It’s amazing what a group of 30 or more concerned citizens showing up at a dealer’s house can accomplish.  Drug Free Communities sponsors such programs.  We need them here.

The war on drugs can never be won.  The skirmish line can be made manageable, but it is only through open opportunity and actionable public opinion that change happens.  It takes more than going to committee meetings and lecturing school children.  It takes a community working from the bottom up to make change happen.  We must have sensible drug laws, and decriminalize the possession of marijuana and cocaine—or carry on as if there are no lessons to be learned from the Prohibition, our track record, and the path that enlightened countries of the world are taking.  The alternative is to continue to live in a world that little Iraq’s can be in our backyard any day.  Is this the reality we want, or do we want to change our reality another way?

© 2009

In many successful microenterprise programs it all begins with business training and investment in ordinary people in a place called a “business incubator.”   While this may conjure up some wild images, a business incubator is simply a place where microentrepreneurs go to grow their business.  Incubators provide space to work, and supply services such as technical support, telephone, office equipment such as computers and copiers, and most important, an environment that is conducive to success.

While microenterprise is a common outlet for progressive or displaced workers, development really shines for those who are disadvantaged—and located in minority communities that are seeking to renew themselves.  Self employment is one way to earn extra income to supplement low wages typical for those lacking a college degree.  Women with families choose self employment for the flexibility they need to balance home and work responsibilities.  Individuals with disabilities find economic independence through business ownership.  And most importantly, for many low income people, microenterprise offers the chance to use talents, realize suppressed dreams and find fulfillment that is rarely possible with their options in the current labor market.

A question that is often asked is whether microenterprise development makes any real difference.  How stable and profitable can microenterprises be?  Most of these questions are rooted in the stereotypes about the skills, determination, and ingenuity of low and moderate income people—and in the new economy, the ability of long term displaced workers to function outside a traditional workplace.  A number of major studies over the years answer these questions quite clearly.  By and large, the data has shown that microenterprise does indeed increase incomes, contribute to community growth, decrease overall poverty and the number of working poor, and move people forward.  The most surprising finding is that these businesses enjoy high survival rates—rates higher than the national averages for traditional small businesses.

Another question that comes up is whether the investment in microenterprise is cost efficient.  Again, data gathered by the U.S. Department of Commerce shows that cost measures for operational costs are around $0.42 cents per dollar for micro-lending programs, compared to $0.61 for conventional business financing programs.  This is a bargain that stimulates local economies and empowers ordinary people to contribute to their communities through taxes, creation of employment for others, and services that contribute to general quality of life.

This sort of program could be particularly useful to Knoxville, Knox County, and the more rural counties surrounding us.  We have a population of people who qualify and could benefit from all aspects.  The kind of business and services they could provide are necessary to help keep spending within the region, and build the sort of business community that serves the needs of residents and visitors alike.  Each business is one that creates cash flow and increases outside spending here.

We also have a number of ideal spaces to create business incubator and microenterprise business locations.  Many of the older communities, such as those along Magnolia and in Burlington have numerous empty storefronts.  A number of ideal spaces to create an incubator exist in the many “surplus” decommissioned schools—that are at risk of demolition by neglect.  Other large former industrial properties are available as well.

Funding streams exist as well—and do not simply rely on local banks and economic development offices creating local sources of monies.  At the federal level, there is HUD Community Development Block Grants, Department of Commerce CDFI and Small Business Administration loans, and USDA Rural Development funds.  This is just a tiny sampling of the resources available.  To make it happen takes a lead agency—either government of non-profit—to apply and administer the programs.

In the course of industry and small business meeting the needs of community and tourism, there could be no better combination.  We ended the growth age of chasing smokestacks for industrial development and employment 20 years ago—and discovered that industrial parks were not the answer.  And there can be no nobler goal than to empower our citizens, restoring the self sufficiency and self determination that was taken away so long ago.  Will such a program ever be created here?  The better question is when, and who will take up the challenge.

© 2009