Predicting the future.

We live in an age of reason--sort of.  We don't follow prophets, but we do worry about profits.  We know that the fortune cookie is just for fun.  We read our horoscope, but only consider whether it might be meaningful after the day has ended.  We only spend money on palm reading at fairs and faires and affairs.

We believe in science--mostly. We know about research, making predictions, understanding that relationships are not the same as cause and effect;  realizing that just because somethings works sometimes, doesn't make it dependable, or safe, or cost-effective.  We understand the difference between chance-probability and just plain luck.

But in the news, in the guise of scientific predictions and statistical analysis, we make plans for a future world as if it is set in stone.

Frequently those predictions are off, slower to arrive, faster to arrive, never to arrive.  And when that happens, we treat them the same way as the horoscope that wasn't true. We laugh and go on.  But frequently, the great engine of the world has already spent years working on the predicted event.  Things like space travel for money, controlling the weather, and more commonly, immigration patterns, voting patterns, economic changes.  The stuff that consumes the dreams and nightmares of the power people. The act of predicting a thing changes everything. 

Once a prediction is made, we begin to plan for it, or we start to make the change occur.  Its sort of like a self-fulfilling prophecy only on a grande scale.  We rarely ask what could we do to make this never happen and we don't ask ourselves if maybe the future change might just be a good thing.  We just dig in and start building a dam for the oncoming flood.

Looking at two events, one, a prediction made in the late 1970's---"by 2000, everyone up to our latitude would have to speak spanish to be employable".  The end of any prediction like this is unspoken, but becomes the focus, "if we don't do something now"  We have now spent 35 years trying to "do something now" and it is still a huge political issue and poor people that were born here are still in fear of losing their jobs to those spanish-speaking immigrants. 

Most of us still don't speak spanish.

But what did that prediction cause us to focus on?  Did anyone say "why are people coming up here from Central and South America when they know they are going to face a language barrier?  Did anyone try to help those countries with the problems that were making their own citizens run? 

NO!

We focused on two goals, teaching our own public school children in spanish immersion programs (novel and not a negative bone in its body,  but we never had the number of teachers needed to do this for many places) and targeting "illegals", "undocumenteds" and anyone that has a trace of a spanish accent or that has an hispanic last name.  (I even heard one woman, brunette with the first name Maria, be asked how she learned such good English, she was speechless, but I had been raised near her and knew her roots were Irish, German, English, and Wales.  She qualified for the DAR, old poor families love to brag about that.) 

We don't really seem to know our own history in this country.  Florida, Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, , in fact, everything west of the Mississippi was at one time claimed by Spain.  We should be expecting Hispanic surnames in our own citizens that have roots here as old as the oldest settlers to the U.S.A.   

All the original prediction proved, was that when faced with a change, we are mostly bad neighbors, and snobs about our roots and language.

The second event was not a prediction, but a lack of a prediction.  The Ebola scare that is filling the news and the political speeches for purposes of getting a vote was never predicted except perhaps by a few B-movies.  We did nothing to prepare.  The Western African Gorilla population wass nearing extinction from this virus just ten years ago.  If we had treated this information as important, we might now have a cure or a vaccine already.  But they are gorillas so who cares.

The first recognition of Ebola was in 1976.  In Africa,(
 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/04/ebola-zaire-peter-piot-outbreak
 )  the virus was discovered in a Belgian Nun working in Zaire, translate as first civilized person known to die of this so let's find out what it is, and the virus was identified. It has continued to rear its head, with thoughts that it is contracted from the remains of infected animals.  The eating of primates by humans is not unheard of, although to most of us it is as disturbing as putting chicken remains in chicken feed and cattle remains in cattle feed, there are those that were raised on primate meat, not a preference but an availability issue.  It also lives in bats in the area. 

It is a class 4 infective agent, think anthrax, think SARS, think high mortality and no way to prevent it if there is an actual exposure.  It is not airborne, although Bubonic plague has two ways to be spread, and the airborne is worse, so the fear with any virus is that mutation will eventually go there.  Diseases in horror stories frequently mimic the worst-looking symptoms and take full advantage of the way that humans panic. 

But we didn't predict this, and we assumed that because all the people that went to nursing school and medical school new what was needed to contain a class 4 infective agent.  And they have heard about it, but
1) most places don't have the expensive equipment available to use in case something that has never happened before shows up at their door, 2) don't necessarily remember anything about a thing they heard about in school but never thought they would need to use, 3) and never prepared for because hearing about a thing is not the same as doing it. 

So what does that mean to us?  It means that we have an election in a few weeks and for those politicians that want something better than immigration to beat their dead horse with, they can complain about Ebola, like it is a political issue, like it is new, like it is someone's fault--and obviously not theirs.

Watch those predictions, they are made frequently after scientific research is published, but the populist version is always aimed at creating panic and anxiety in the masses.  Learn to read the actual research.  Or make sure to not get just one version of what it means.  Be wary of predictions passed on by religious leaders, politicians, and rich folks with agendas.  We are all capable of making intelligent predictions based on information and don't need someone else to tell us what to believe.

Think for yourself.

Petty distractions herding us along.

There is nothing I hate more than when someone refers to regular people as "sheeple".
It's derogatory.  It implies that the speaker is more aware than the masses.  It is like saying we all deserve to be where we are because we are:

• too trusting of the system
• eager to believe that someone in power cares about the well-being of everyone
• denying that anyone would ever manipulate things;  the news, the economy, politics, for a personal gain that was not good for the majority of individuals
• stupid

So I hate the word.  And am reminded of that great movie in which the craggyfaced older reminds the younger that "a person is smart, people are .....(read as---sheeple).

We are weeks from an election.  And we are deep in a time of a polarized nation, a time many of us thought was done.  We thought we had moved on from racial tension, from misogyny, from class warfare, from fixed elections, voter manipulation, propaganda usage, and all that stuff from history class that happened a long time ago.

We have a new activism going now.  And I can't argue with it.  But are the activists sheeple?  Or is that term reserved for those people so immersed in their own little worlds, with going to work and coming home, paying their bills, feeding their kids, going to church and complaining with friends, relatives, and neighbors about what is wrong with the world.  You know, most of us, most of the time. 

Anyone ever notice, that while activists want change, the people going about their routine want everything to stay the same?  Some of them are even dreaming of an earlier, rosier time--the 1950's is the most idealized, although I have seen it done with the 1800's, the 1920's, the depression (those particular individuals were farmers, and their families lost nothing in the depression, but they loved watching the Waltons) the 1940's--what is not to love about a nation that pulls together for a common enemy and then wins.

The people that loved the 60's were kids during the 60's, they loved the music, they loved the TV, they loved dads at work and moms at home when you got out of school, and they were white kids, middle-class, running on the momentum of the 50's and with parents that tried to keep them from hearing about race wars and communes and drugs and all those things that were going on at commie campuses and San Francisco and Watts.  The kids knew about TV shows like 'Lost in Space" and "Lassie" and "Flipper".  The kids knew about Barbies and transistor radios and bell bottom pants.

The 1960's may have more in common with this decade than any other time.  We have a Vietnam-like war action going on eternally, and it is doing things to the minds of our young men and women that frankly made for some truly dramatic books and movies and some horrifying homelessness and addictions.   We have a very liberal president that scares the crap out of those happy, 60's-like parents (and no, those original 60's parents weren't into that liberal stuff either, but assassination does make people think hard about talking bad about you,. We have activism---and racism, and feminism and sexism and bigotry and repression and propaganda and just plain crookedness in high places. And Activism. 

But remember, the 1960's were scarey.  Kids heard tidbits on the news, heard backyard gossip not meant for their ears, continued to have drills to keep from being nuked ("get under your desk"  really?) while no one really explained anything about that.  We knew the world was full of danger; there were people like Manson, there were commie spies everywhere trying to take over our wonderful country and they would take all the children to schools that trained them to turn in their parents and neighbors, there was satanic music,  and of course, we were all waiting on the Rapture and Apocalypse.

So are we mostly herd animals?  Do we not think for ourselves?  Are we so reactionary that if someone yells "fire" we all run off the cliff en masse?

Maybe.  I don't know.  I just know that we currently have an election coming up and that in our state, the most climate change denying, oil supporting old codger is now running on his daughter's decision to adopt an African Child, and the time he spent talking to soldiers "like a regular guy".  Do I think the first Ad about this bit of news, where the child is now about grown and its the first I've heard of her, is related to the Ebola scare and the anti-immigration work done in my fine state (or at least an attempt to lessen the negative appearance of those?  Do I think his daughter's decision has anything to do with anything at all? Of course not.  And the stories about visiting with soldiers, that reeks of a belief that we are idiots, drooling fools that fall for any bit of kindness from on high.  I would think that the people that sent our young people to other countries to risk their lives would talk to them with great respect and honor.  Only a politician that thought he was someone very special and better-than would endorse such an advertisement.

Yet three different coworkers have suddenly started supporting him--again.  Because?  I have no idea.  I really don't understand politics at all.  Maybe it really is just a form of sheep herding.

I'm still going to vote. I really do want to believe that we can have a government that is a democracy--and yes, I know its just a republic.  We are all deniers I guess.

I really would like to see us be a herd of a democratic, equal opportunity  species.

humanity's greatest gift

Listening to a songwriter and her song, in which she told the story of a life ended by drug abuse, and yet didn't tell it--- at least not like a news story or a melodram--- it dawned on me that while we are surrounded by panicky news stories and horrible economic predictions, a failing infrastructure and ongoing global mistreatment of those without power, we are daily surrounded by the translation of life, both beautiful and poignant, surreal and comedic, by artists.

Those artists, working in their medium of choice, and there is a lot of choice out there, show us what to look for, how to see beyond the hype of the style-makers and opinion creators.  They help us find the beauty in the saddest situations, and the awesomeness of the most simple.

I do not consider religion our greatest gift, although that feeling, that indescribable exaltation and wordless understanding that mystics and artists seem to give us glimpses of, is what most religions started with.  The dogma, rules, and endless studying of holy writings obviously did not come from that feeling.  (that is a whole, different obsession by a whole different personality type).

I do consider that artists, real artists, are much more common than the news and museums and classrooms would have us believe.  I think maybe we are all artists at heart and have only to let go and reconnect with that part of ourselves.  I have seen essays by 7th grade students that were art, I have seen million dollar sculptures sold to citiies that had nothing to say, although the name of the pieces frequently have amazing imagery.  I have tasted desserts that were art, and smelled perfume that was art.  I have seen quilts that amazed me to the point of speechlessness, ceramic pots glazed into a wonder of the galaxy, and photo's taken by simple people with simple cameras that made my heart melt--not from sappy sentimentality but from their identification of a scene of such intense contrasts, dramatic lighting, and simplicity that it made me want to go there, to be there and see through the  eyes of the photographer.

I have heard chants that lifted me to other realms with no identifiable words.  I have heard poems that left me understanding the feelings of people that I shared almost no life experiences with, and in that understanding I had no choice but to love them. I have seen dances that changed my mood and paintings that filled my soul with questions about my own place in the universe.

There are connoisseurs of almost everything that could be considered art.  But we can all learn to appreciate art.  The first step is to slow down.  The next is to stop worrying about what someone else, what society, what our religion, what our friends would think about that art, and experience it for ourselves.

And while all art is beautiful, much that is art is not pretty or sweet or nice.  William Blake's "flea" is far from pretty, but his poem "tyger,tyger" is one of the most powerful glimpses into that same mind that can be experienced.  That same mind.

People are complicated.  Few people are all prettiness, sweetness, and  nicety.  They are complicated.  Like a good Cabernet, like an amazing orchestra-piece. like a wonderful pie, like a Van Gogh painting. Sometimes complicated like graffiti or like the sound of rain with a violin and piano.  So slowing down, savoring the nuances of a sight, a sound, a taste, a smell, can be the difference between recognizing something life-changing and just having another ordinary day.

I guess that means art requires two people, at least two people to be art, at least one to create it and at least one to perceive it.  The creating only changes the person doing the creating, and it does change that person.  The act of making something beautiful and meaningful and new leaves a mark on the soul of the person  that is creating.  The perceiving, though, can leave a mark on an endless number of people.  And each person will perceive through their own eyes, ears, nose, taste, and even touch.  Our senses may allow us to interact with the world, but our minds, our pasts, our beliefs, allow us to interpret those perceptions.

I have seen people that hate all classical music, that can't stand the smell of  hay but love the smell of car exhaust, that will eat chocolate only unsweetened, others are more ecclectic, enjoying music from all times and places, exploring music like it is a great mystery, trying chocolate covered insects and raw puffer fish like it is an experiment in living.  There are stories for each of those choices.  There are connections within each of us to various artforms that have become friends to us, rituals, omens, connections to our roots and symbols of our hopes and dreams. 

Therefore, art, the greatest gift from humanity--to humanity.  Keep making what you imagine, real.  Keep creating.  Share your art.

spreading it around--germs not wealth

We are currently hearing a lot about Ebola, which is a scary disease that had previously featured in thriller movies and semi-realistic horror books. It has been spreading in West Africa, a part of the continent with high poverty, political unrest, and low education levels.  The problems with containing the virus is caused by those things, fear(read distrust of authority figures)among people about vaccines and medicine, lack of access to healthcare and treatment, crowding, and denial that the disease is real (as opposed to government propaganda).
 
We recently had our first case (other than those that came here for treatment after exposure and immediately went to secured health care facilities) of Ebola show up in Dallas.  A man from Liberia got on a plane, went to Dallas, went to the ER, told them he thought he had been exposed to Ebola while in Liberia, was reassured that was ridiculous and sent home with a prescription for antibiotics.  Several days later he was admitted for (drumroll please) Ebola and is being treated in the ICU.  How many people did he contaminate in the time between going to the ER and returning later?  If he was like me, everyone is safe except for 3 cats that like to steal food while it is being eaten.  Unfortunately, he did not live alone in isolation, and there are already people being tracked for signs of illness.

I get why the places in West Africa are having a hard time with this.  Poverty  and war and corruption and superstition are easy to connect to poor public health control of the spread of a virus.  But are we going to die in the USA of our own arrogance?  For all our fancy equipment and highly trained infection control personnel, it all boils down to whether or not the possibility of the disease is recognized.

"when you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras" is to med school what "doing the same thing over and over expecting different results is the definition of crazy" is to Narcotics Anonymous.  

Ebola in Texas is definitely a Zebra, and they treated a horse. 

But the world is big, the numbers are big, international travel is common,   We have all now heard of Dr.'s without Borders, but does anyone really think there are any disease causing agents that recognize borders?
While horses are the most common, if there are a couple of million people in a city, there will be any number of zebras found.  If there are only 1 in a million cases of something, you should not be deny that one will appear, you should be expecting a least a couple.  The chances of getting most illnesses is much better than winning our lottery, but we have lottery winners.  So why aren't we expecting the diseases with lower numbers?  Why wasn't the ER in Texas prepared?    Why aren't we doing more to screen people traveling out of the countries with this Ebola outbreak before they get on a plane?  Or off a plane?

Flu vaccines start this month.  Doctors will be screening patient's in the ER for the Flu if they say they have been exposed or have any flu-like symptoms.  Most of them won't have it.  But Influenza is a horse we all expect.  Get you flu shot if that is what you do,wash your hands, avoid touching vomit, sputum, saliva, blood, feces, open wounds, tears, exposed organs; don't hug strangers with red eyes or body-fluid covered clothing, and if someone says they think they were exposed to ebola, don't kiss them.

Use some sense, cover your cough, wash your hands, clean up after yourself or your kids, and consider some nice homebody hobbies.

Perhaps all the creepy, end-of-the-world tv shows are just making us a little paranoid---or maybe they aren't.  

Key facts from WHO

• Ebola virus disease (EVD), formerly known as Ebola haemorrhagic fever, is a severe, often fatal illness in humans.
• The virus is transmitted to people from wild animals and spreads in the human population through human-to-human transmission.
• The average EVD case fatality rate is around 50%. Case fatality rates have varied from 25% to 90% in past outbreaks.
• The first EVD outbreaks occurred in remote villages in Central Africa, near tropical rainforests, but the most recent outbreak in west Africa has involved major urban as well as rural areas.
• Community engagement is key to successfully controlling outbreaks. Good outbreak control relies on applying a package of interventions, namely case management, surveillance and contact tracing, a good laboratory service, safe burials and social mobilisation.
• Early supportive care with rehydration, symptomatic treatment improves survival. There is as yet no licensed treatment proven to neutralise the virus but a range of blood, immunological and drug therapies are under development.
• There are currently no licensed Ebola vaccines but 2 potential candidates are undergoing evaluation.

---

Transmission It is thought that fruit bats of the Pteropodidae family are natural Ebola virus hosts. Ebola is introduced into the human population through close contact with the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of infected animals such as chimpanzees, gorillas, fruit bats, monkeys, forest antelope and porcupines found ill or dead or in the rainforest.
Ebola then spreads through human-to-human transmission via direct contact (through broken skin or mucous membranes) with the blood, secretions, organs or other bodily fluids of infected people, and with surfaces and materials (e.g. bedding, clothing) contaminated with these fluids.
Health-care workers have frequently been infected while treating patients with suspected or confirmed EVD. This has occurred through close contact with patients when infection control precautions are not strictly practiced.
Burial ceremonies in which mourners have direct contact with the body of the deceased person can also play a role in the transmission of Ebola.
People remain infectious as long as their blood and body fluids, including semen and breast milk, contain the virus. Men who have recovered from the disease can still transmit the virus through their semen for up to 7 weeks after recovery from illness.

Next Time.

Next time I'm going to be an artist.  something visual in 2D or 3D, but that is it.

It does require reincarnation, with which I have no problem, but I do have a problem with regrets.  And I regret that every time a decision came up, it put the possibility of focusing on what I wanted to do most--make beautiful or moving or amazing or bizarre things that when other people looked at them they had to think a little different, look a little harder, wonder, it took that choice out of the decision..

I have spent a lifetime trying to learn to paint, trying, just trying.  I currently get the opportunity about 8 hours every 3 weeks.  That is the most time I have ever had for it, and I have wanted it since I was ten.
But I always had the benefit of other people's regrets.  My parents who did not prepare for well-paid and in-demand jobs;  the family friend that was an art teacher--and hated it because he spent most of this time preparing for the social studies classes he had to teach so that he could also teach art---to a bunch of kids that thought art class was "an easy A" or "free time", my grandmother(who wanted to be a nurse, but trained as a teacher, then got married before ever getting to work) who recommended a solid education in nursing or education (I now have both) which are appropriate for good women, and a school system that not only didn't recommend that I take art, they didn't offer art unless you were in the 2nd grade class that the only art teacher in the system, taught.  (I was in the other teacher's 2nd grade).

I am trying to avoid regrets.  I've had a decent life.  And I my free time is spent on what I want, but I don't have much free time.  Perhaps because when a person reaches a certain age, all that you can interrupt is their hobbies.  Hobbies aren't important.  They are time fillers.  Something for lonely, old people to fill up their time.  But I really would like the time to practice, experiment, maybe take a class or two.  Instead, I work 40+ hours a week, and babysit, and help with other people's current projects around their houses.  Other people are family.  I do love my family.  But family is family whether or not they know you, know what you want, what you believe, how you think. In other words, family is not necessarily a friend and definitely only an intimate friend if their version of talking also involves listening.

Has anyone else noticed that listening is not important anymore.  People that love to talk about themselves, their lives, their complaints, their problems, how stressed they are, how busy they are---well those people can talk about those things for hours without interruption.  WITHOUT INTERRUPTION!  The fact that they can stop interruptions is a sign that it is not a conversation, they are using the listener. 

They need to quit being selfish and get a journal.....

Or a blog.

Well, off to a family birthday party.  Maybe I can paint a while when I get home.

Romance in the 21st century

ro·man·tic

 adjective \rō-ˈman-tik, rə-\

: of, relating to, or involving love between two people

: making someone think of love : suitable for romance

: thinking about love and doing and saying things to show that you love someone.

But what about love?  Surely there is more to a relationship than romance.  Most people realize rather quickly that life is a lot of things. Yet I hear, "he isn't romantic enough"  "she doesn't treat me like she used to"  "the zing is gone"

Good grief.  Turn off the porn and chick flicks and grow up.  People are not there to help you live your fantasies.  If you both want to share some fantasy time--ask for it, and be ready for the other person to say no.  These days people want to compete with their spouse, use their spouse for chores, rely on their spouse for money,  not have to be alone, always have a date for weddings and funerals, etc, etc, etc.

Who ever treats their spouse with the same respect they want to be treated with; who talks to them like they value their opinion; uses them as a sounding board because they know they will be honest; shares their hopes, fears, hateful thoughts about others or themselves without fear of their words being thrown back in their face.  Who treats their partner like family?

If you want to be romantic---lay down the phone, listen to them when they tell you a story, and tell a story back and see if they listen.  And if either of you decide to debate, dissect, judge or minimize any part of the other's story.  You have a problem.  If you can't show your partner the love and respect of hearing them, just hearing them, then there is no hope for a future of happiness (plus your kids are in for a bad time and other people probably are glad when you leave early)  A romantic relationship must be safe.  And both people, if they are competitive, must be on the same team.

So the next time you want to gripe about the lack of romance, ask yourself these three questions?

1. Am I really talking about sex?
2. Do I trust my partner enough to be relaxed and open with them and visa versa?
3. Do I listen like a friend?

 And of course, last but not least,  do you like each other or have you treated each other so badly for not being the person you wanted them to be that you currently hate each other.  

 

I don't know if that can be fixed, but fantasy is only in your head.  If you want a fantasy partner, you don't really want another person in your life.  You just need your imagination.

 

Grow up!

Why all the panic about Social Security running out?

Think about it.
Social security is paid for by everyone that receives a paycheck, every month.(or two weeks, or twice a month or weekly--whatever)  It is not part of your federal taxes or state taxes.  It's not even part of your medicare payment as that is now an additional and separate amount.  I also pay for an employer determined health insurance amount, a dental insurance amount, and the amount to put into my 401k.
(No one has ever called my 401k an entitlement.  But I am putting less in that than I am into Social Security)

Since I was knee high to a grasshopper, and yes, I was short even as a child, there have been news announcements about the Social Security running out before I will ever get there.  It was supposed to run out before my parents got there, but they got lucky, and received their monthly.check and it supplemented them until their deaths.   Both took their social security at 63.  My father received his for 19 years and my mother for 12 years.  Social Security started August 14, 1935, so they both paid in their entire working lives. Both called it their Welfare check.  The humiliation of a government check has long been present.

So why did FDR start the Social Security Administration?  Other than he was some kind of communist and bleeding heart liberal etc, etc?  Before Social Security, the PROPORTION OF ELDERLY WHO were poor was nearly one in two, and it is now less than one in eight.  More than 60 percent of those lifted from poverty were women.

Before social security, each community had their own way of dealing with the destitute.  From providing for them in individual family's homes, indentured servitutude was used.  The family provided food and shelter in exchange for chores.  Frequently this involved children and widows.  The poorhouse or almshouse was another method, and a good many horror stories started with this type of house.  These houses were transitioned to nursing homes and hospitals after social security.  The fear of both nursing home and hospital among those that experienced the great depression was very closely related to the horror and shame of the poorhouse.

But why the constant threat of it running out?  It is tied to the constant threat of more people than ever that are elderly.  The median age in the U.S.A is  37.6 years.  That means half the population is under 37.6 and half is over 37.6.  Projections always imply that this median will go upward as the population ages, but reality is that the population is always being increased.  In 1960 the median age was 29, in 1970 it was 28, by 2010 it was 37.2.    We talk about the baby boomers as the root of all population evil, but the median age in 1950 was about 30 and in 1940 it was about 29.  But in 1920 it was about 23 (men about 25 and women about 21).  We had just finished a world war, we had no antibiotics, we had just gone through a nightmarish influenza season, women died in childbirth, there was no insulin, we didn't get the whole germ theory thing then, so people died and not of old age.  
So it sounds like more people than ever are living long enough to work and pay into social security.  (what?  you have never heard anyone say it like that?)  

So what is the pay-off for constantly threatening that social security is going to run out?  Is the pay-off fear?  Is it a way to try and stop a social program so you can then tax that money--moving it from social security to the general coffers where the politicians can spend it on their favorite pet donator?  Is it to keep people too rattled to ever feel secure enough to think about what else is going on around them?

Am I paranoid?  Sure I am.  I don't trust the current people in power as far as I can throw them.  History should explain why, look at all the long-term corruption that has come to light at various times in our countries history.  We have stories about it daily in our own time.  How much never sees the light of day?  Do I think that the global warming deniers getting massive contributions from the oil industry have only my best interest at heart?  Do I think that the richest congress this country has had for eons is highly empathetic to the plight of the poor.  (Mary Antoinette's famous though probably inaccurate quote comes to mind--"let them eat cake")  

Our power structure encourages people to work until they fall over dead, acts as if retirement is a sign of a lazy user.  All the while they are vacationing for weeks and months each year as part of their due, most of us have been putting off getting to travel, relax with our favorite past times, fish, paint, or do anything we would choose to do---until we can retire.   Since no one ever said "when I grow up, I want to set in a cubicle 40-60 hours a week while a crappy daycare raises my kids and the public schools expose them to poorly paid teachers and undiscipline peers whose parents don't want them disciplined at threat of violence to the poorly paid teachers.  I want to put off seeing the national parks and put off seeing great art and put off relaxing on the beach because I just love this boring, underpaid, repetitive, unappreciated but necessary job I have and that  is why I'm on the planet."  No one has ever said that.  

Is Social Security going to run out?  Only if we keep messing with it until it does.  Its basically an annuity system.  A person that lives long enough could get more than they put in, but every person that dies without collecting has already donated to the annuity.  Most annuities pay the insurance company to keep selling them.  And there are a lot of people profiting off of social security besides the people putting in to the coffer.  

Yet the panic continues.  Why do we panic---I personally am going to be really hacked off if I die without getting to retire.  I don't think I'm alone in that.  I think the panick is from that sick feeling that "I wasted my whole life trying to get to do just what I want, and now its too late."  I have a lot of empathy for those poor individuals that died in slavery never knowing freedom, that died in prison for false or ridiculously silly charges hoping every day for a reprieve, that died at work...... 

I'm taking retirement the minute I can. 

strange connections

Sometimes, when I'm working and it is boring (and how many times can you do the same job with no differences without it being boring) and the halls are noisy, I put on my headphones and turn the classical music on my Ipod to shuffle.  The assumption is that it is to relax me, but boring does not really call for relaxing.  I drink my coffee and the music causes my brain to travel--not far, the job is in no danger, but the computer is slow, so while the little circle slowly spins, I think and with the classics, I remember.

For some reason, when the big drum, or the cymbals, or certain runs on the piano start, I can see the TV of my childhood, and feel my parents sitting to my left, eating popcorn or ice cream while i'm snuggled under a quilt. Late night television; those old black and white movies that were the bread and butter of after-the-news entertainment, almost always used the classics for their soundtracks.  Early Disney cartoons did, also.  But watching the old shows doesn't put me back in my childhood, it just reminds me of how glad I am that we now have color on more than cartoons and how cheezy some of those old movies were.

At any rate, doing my repetitive and boring work with my long gone parents sitting in the dark behind me is very comforting.

My point is, anything can be the connection.  I used to want a blue popsicle every time I smelled DDT.  No one ever purposefully gave me DDT, but they sprayed it on the dump about the same time the ice cream man came when I was four.  I loved blue popsicles back when I was four, and from then till it was outlawed (probably later, those DDT stashes were loved by farmers and all my family were farm folks).

Smells, music, tastes--not like chicken, but like paw-paws or persimmons or really soft blackberries,  and occasionally some strangely perfumed cleaner or body wash that makes me think of the medicine I was given when I was sick.  Kid medicine has changed in the last 50 years, these days its bubble gum or cotton candy.
Sometimes a shadow from a tree will remind me of a conversation sitting on a rock wall with an uncle gone almost 40 years.  Sometimes the memory will almost make me dizzy, as if my feet are fully on the earth, as if I might be hurtling through time.  Sometimes these strange mental connections make me miss someone so much i could cry.  Other times its like I have them back for a moment, a tiny blessing brought by the wind.

I don't understand the human brain or the memory connections that create such things.  I understand the human soul even less, but such memories make me think we have a soul.  Something that hooks us to a universe that is beyond time and space, something behind the physical.  Could it be my own loose screw?  Sure.  But it might be my favorite.

intimidation

To intimidate someone is to make timid or fearful :  frighten; especially :  to compel or deter by or as if by threats <tried to intimidate a witness>  
Policing by intimidation is a common enough technique.
Workplace intimidation is intentionally and maliciously causing an employee or coworker to feel inadequate or afraid. This includes verbal threats, unjust criticisms, sabotage of a person's work or supplies, sexual harassment, and physical violence. Actions like these erode the confidence of employees and affects their ability to do their jobs. In many places, it is punishable by fines and imprisonment, and businesses may also be held liable if they do not respond appropriately. Those who feel they are being subjected to workplace intimidation can get help from managers and law enforcement.
One form of intimidation is bullying.

Physical:  Physical bullying involves harmful actions against another person’s body.  Examples include:  biting, kicking, pushing, pinching, hitting, tripping, pulling hair, any form of violence or intimidation. Physical bullying also involves the interference with another person’s property.  Examples include: damaging or stealing.

Verbal:  Verbal bullying involves speaking to a person or about a person in an unkind or hurtful way.  Examples include:  sarcasm, teasing, put-downs, name calling, phone calls, spreading rumors or hurtful gossip.

Emotional:  Emotional bullying involves behaviors that upset, exclude, or embarrass a person.  Examples include:  nasty notes, saying mean things using technology (e.g. cyber bullying using emails, instant messaging), chat rooms, tormenting threatening, humiliation or social embarrassment.

Sexual:  Sexual bullying singles out a person because of gender and demonstrates unwarranted or unwelcome sexual behavior.  Examples include: sexual comments, abusive comments, unwanted physical contact.

Racial:  Racial bullying involves rejection or isolation of a person because of ethnicity.  Examples include: gestures, racial slurs or taunts, name calling, making fun of customs/skin color/accent/food choices.

The best immediate response to intimidating behaviors is 

1.Walk Away: If possible, remove yourself from the situation immediately.

2. Say “Stop:” If it feels safe, tell the aggressor to stop in a firm but calm 

way. If you feel confident to do so, use humor or a clever response to 

weaken the effect of the mean behavior.

3. Keep Cool: Try to control your emotions in the moment. Showing fear or 

anger may egg on the aggressor.

4. Don’t Fight: Try not to fight or bully back in response—this may just 

continue the cycle of bad behavior.

But if the intimidator is in a position of power, then walking away or saying stop will be seen as insubordination.  If the person being intimidated is young or this is round 57 of the same old thing, staying cool and not fighting is very unlikely.

So the question is, why do bullies and intimidators go into positions that allow them to repeatedly do what they like best.  I know from personal experience that while I'm basically peaceful, if you get in my space, touch me, or crowd me or try to box me into a corner, i'm going to start pushing back.  Its automatic.  I am no longer capable of hunkering down and surviving.  I'm going to let you know that I won't be intimidated and will not be pushed around.  For millions of people that have been victimized/ostracized/bullied/demonized/and treated like they aren't human, that response is also automatic.  

If i'm waving a gun at you or trying to kill someone, shoot me. But if i'm walking down the street and you get in my space, i'm going to try to get you out of my space--its automatic.  And while some people will tell you that you should expect that from people in power, reality is, people in power don't do that to anyone unless they are trying to elicit that automatic response.  

We need to make sure that the people we put into positions of power and control like police and probation officers and social workers and teachers and anyone that interacts with less powerful people and has the ability to use intimidation be educated fully about the subject.  I know that large, urban police departments require 4 year degrees, but a lot of small departments require only a cleet license--which is all about gun law, and not at all about not being a bully.

We need to make sure that people do not get placed in those positions with known prejudices---a hard thing to do, as many of the people doing the hiring have the same prejudices; that people with a history of using intimidation to get cooperation not be given that kind of power over people.

And last, we need to not have such deep loyalties to our fellow coworkers because they are pals or watched our back or "know what it's like out there" that we protect them when they are viciously wrong.  

Repeatedly the citizens of this country have witnessed the way a group of people that has been hired to protect and serve, becomes a criminal enterprise, covering up the bad and criminal behavior of its members because they are family.  Time to stop the "us against them" attitudes that create so many problems in our communities (and the world--its what starts every war).  

We are all in this together.  None of us want to be robbed by anyone, or hit or shot or otherwise victimized.  All of us want to be treated with respect despite our differences.  We have all worked with the person that is dearly loved by everyone up the ladder, but despised for their rudeness, arrogance, and self-aggrandizement by everyone equal or under them.  

The hierarchy is a sham, we are all on the same plane. So, without pushing or crowding, lets all just do this together.

A Barren Mind, a Barren Soul.

The opposite of love is not hate, but indifference.  The opposite of happiness is not sadness but boredom.  And the opposite of rich is not poor but barren.  

The first two are obvious;  most of us have had someone we love that hurts us so badly we hate them.  That is just the other side of the same coin--the yin of it's yang.  We have all had moments of happiness, sometimes amazing happiness, and times of utter sadness.  But the hardest to withstand day after day is boredom.  Boredom makes people quit jobs that pay well for their lives, and leave marriages that they sincerely wanted to work or worse, make them turn off their brains.  Boredom feels like it kills brain cells and dulls everything.  
But the last, rich and poor vs barren--what is that supposed to mean?   Barren is the opposite of fertile and therefore the opposite of productive or creative.  While not all people choose to have children, the couple that wants them but can't feels they are missing the full richness of life--despite the evidence that kids are actually a lot of work with no guarantees of any pay-off at all.  
While people with massive amounts of cash and properties--both real (and not so real), are always called rich by everyone;  people that created things, made things, used their imaginations, volunteered to help others, or teach others, producing things both ordinary and sublime, frequently describe the richness of their lives but rarely are described that way by any except close friends and family.

We need to make the  definition mean everything it used to.

having abundant possessions and especially material wealth

2

a :  having high value or quality

b :  well supplied or endowed <a city rich in traditions>

3

:  magnificently impressive :  sumptuous

4

a :  vivid and deep in color <a rich red>

b :  full and mellow in tone and quality <a rich voice>

c :  having a strong fragrance <rich perfumes>

5

:  highly productive or remunerative <a rich mine>

6

a :  having abundant plant nutrients <rich soil>

b :  highly seasoned, fatty, oily, or sweet <rich foods>

c :  high in the combustible component <a rich fuel mixture>

d :  high in some component <cholesterol-rich foods>

7

a :  entertaining; also :  laughable

b :  meaningful, significant <rich allusions>

c :  lush <rich meadows>

8

:  pure or nearly pure <rich lime>

While we know about rich soil, the opposite being called poor but meaning barren--incapable of producing anything, we rarely considered the richness of people in any terms but materialism--until they are old and facing death.  

We want our children to become rich, it was the american dream--getting rich.  The millionaire was the standard, although the unspoken inflation that has made a car that used to cost 3000$ new now cost 30,000$ and a house go from 25,000$ for a basic starter to at least 80,000$ for a basic starter that needs work and comes with a iffy neighborhood.  A millionaire is not middle-class, but only barely not.  You need at least 10,000,000$ to be "well-to-do"  secure in your standing/position in life.  If your job has a retirement advisor, they will make sure you know that you can't retire with a measly 500,000$ saved.  (What?  that is 10 years of my salary!  What?)

Our society has been all about the money for a while.  And while some wise folks have figured out that it is not what it is all about, and lived their lives with a different goal, there have always been a large number of our population that can never even acquire enough for the basics, food, water, shelter, weather-appropriate clothes, medicine when sick and therefore they never get the opportunity to find out what true riches are.  Barely surviving is life-sucking.  If you have ever almost drowned, then you know that you were not enjoying the beautiful view while treading water and trying to keep your nose above the waves.  All energy went one place.  Drowning people are desperate, they will try to use their fellow drowning victims as flotation devices. They will bargain with god, and curse their own mothers and anyone else they can blame for the position they are in. And they will take other's down with them.  Its not evil, or meanness or even cowardice, but just pure panicky fear.  Most creatures when placed in a position where they think there might be a way to survive and get on with their life will do the same (a few won't, but they are rare heroes).
The people generally described as rich, tend to act like they believe that in some way they are worth more, their life if more valuable, their ideas more important, their contributions to society more meaningful. They are frequently jerks or worse.
Rich people gave us cars and computers and tv and professional sports---of course they didn't really give them to us, they sold them to us and got rich doing so.  The people working for them are unknown unless they happened to be a name that was being sold.  Some professional athletes and actors and directors and CEO's also get rich when we buy those things, but the guy that put your car together didn't get rich, and the man that ran the camera or put on the monster makeup or sold the hotdogs or swept the stadium or showed you how to program your smart phone, that person didn't get rich.
Who decides who profits and who gets by.  Artists have always known that the difference between a 50$ painting and a 5,000,000$ painting is a patron.  A patron with some money can help you find an audience of higher paying customers and a patron that blows millions on a whim can make you rich also.  For some reason, if rich man #1 wants a painting by Joe Blow, then rich man #2 and #3 also want one, only bigger or more expensive.
At any rate, the man or woman with millions and billions is not necessarily the one to die rich.  At the end of it all, the richest is the one with the best memories, the most loved-ones, the wisest wisdoms and that ended up getting the chance to create all those things that lived in their head.  Use the rich and creative and productive mind and soul you were born with--die rich.

symbols, keywords and other cues to our environment

There is a great bumper sticker out there,  (coexist) and it has a lot of variations, but every time I see it, I like the person whose car it is on.  I don't know them, and it might have been slapped on there five minutes ago while they were in a store---by the person that was different than them and that they had just cussed out.  I'm responding to the bumper sticker and not the person.  It represents something that is positive to me.
Symbols represent.  They give us clues.  They help us know if something is good or bad, safe or dangerous, desireable or worthy of avoidance.  And which is which is frequently taught to us by our beliefs.  Most of us get those from the people that raised us and while we rebel about speeding and seatbelts, getting high and safe sex, we rarely rebel against the beliefs we were taught as children.
When we do rebel against those beliefs, it is usually more reaction-formation than an actual examination of the beliefs.  We have all met at least one person raised in a home with strict fundamentalist religious beliefs (any religion--they all have families like that) that becomes the biggest atheist or satanist fundamentalist that could exist--reactionary to the point that their whole life is taken up with going against the teachings of their family.  They are consumed with being the opposite and do not even admit that anything except the opposite exists as a possibility.  They can not see that they are as blind to the other possible beliefs as their family that raised them was.  They would only recognize two symbols, the one of their childhood--which they now hate, the one of their current belief, and the rest would be meaningless.
We give symbols their meanings.  But a symbol doesn't have to be a drawing or visual representation of a religion.  It can be anything.  It can be detected by any sense.  And it can be meaningful to an entire culture or only to a single individual.
Currently, we are having riots in a neighborhood outside of St. Louis, and the symbols involved in that are both highly recognized, and unspeakable.  The face of the young black male and the blue uniform.  While the first should not be a symbol, it has been for a very long time.  And it means very different things to different people. We know through discussions of profiling that the young black male is supposed to be violent, criminal, and the list could go on and on from here.  Show someone a picture of a young black male and ask them to tell you what he is doing in the picture, the stories will be different depending upon the culture and background of the person you ask.  The picture itself has no meaning except the meaning placed on it by the person telling the story.  The same is true of a picture of a person in a police uniform, and while the sex and race of the person in the uniform may make a difference depending upon the beliefs of the person telling the story, the story of the young black male in the blue uniform will not be the same as the story told for the first picture.  The uniform is its own symbol.
We are rioting now, and it is spreading because being a symbol causes a person to lose their individuality.  They are judged as the symbol and all the connotations the symbol has to the person doing the judging.  And we are all judging.  It's what we do.  We recognize patterns and sort things into groups.  It is why we can accomplish so many things, and why we do so much evil.  Obviously, the ability to recognize a nail and use it, even if it is a little different than the first nail we saw makes us able to make things, and just as obviously, our inability to judge each other without prejudging them based on appearance,culture, worklife and health and habit creates social injustice, poverty, fear and even war.
Our natural tendencies, to judge, to react, to panic, to gossip, to put things in little boxes according to our beliefs, to be loyal to what we see as "like us" and to be against what we see as "not us", makes us dangerous.  Only our own awareness of how we as people can be, how wrong, how unjust, how murderous, that awareness can help us to examine our own thoughts, our own beliefs.  We must look closely.  And it is hard to do, because of our loyalty, because we don't want to think that the people like us could be wrong, could be predators or users or any of those things we say we don't like.    But clear vision is needed, self-honesty is needed, commitment to being a good person is needed if we are going to stop hurting each other as if the other is only a symbol.
We need symbols, stop signs, international bathroom signs, red-tipped white canes, yellow cabs, even uniforms to identify people functioning in roles of service.  But people need to stop being symbols.  I know how hard it is to find even one person that is just like me---I've never really found that, so how can whole groups, cultures, countries, and continents of people be the same.
Don't react to the symbol, get to know the person.