onah

Hey. I bought a scooter. it's a Kymco, People 150. :) One of these days (yeah, right) I'm going to post a picture or video of me and/or the scooter. I swear.

The fastest I've pushed it to (downhill w/ a tail-wind) is about 65mph. 50-55 is a more typical top-speed. Because it can only go so fast, I knew I had to give up road trips when I got it. I thought I could, and so far it's been more or less fine. But I find myself searching google-maps to find out-of-town roads/highways I can drive on. Problem is, google maps doesn't tell you the speed limits. To overcome this, I sometimes use the ... what do you call it... the street view? I look at all those photos of the streets... and zip back and forth along a stretch of highway until I find a speed-limit sign. haha. :)

I'm going to try out this google thing... I don't know if it will work. let's see: Found a Speed Limit Sign

nope. it didn't work the way I wanted. LJ won't publish the code. That link seems to work though. Anyway, I was pleased when I figured out this works. (well enough, I think.) You can, I think, infer from the map that I'm thinking about driving my little scooter up over a little mountain pass and go on down to Lake Tahoe. That's a nice place to visit now and then.

see ya.

geez. I already feel stupid about what I just posted. I think the possibility of having an audience doesn't work for me. Maybe I'll try it again next year.

I've been nudged. Hi.

how y'all doing?

I'm fine. I'm going back to school these days and doing a lot of math homework. It's easier this time around for some reason.

Still living in Sparks NV.

I was in a car accident about a month ago, and my little car, that's been taking good care of me for the last 14 years, is totaled. This is terrible, of course. It was the other driver's fault. As you might expect, her insurance company has offered me a settlement that's insufficient to replace my car. I'm going to fight it. Yesterday I rode the bus in Reno for the first time. It was kind of nice. I might keep on with this. I'm also thinking about buying a scooter.

Things are far from perfect but they're certainly good enough. In most ways, I think, I couldn't really ask for better.

I do a little bit of writing these days. (very little.) It consists mostly of stuff involving: figuring out my beliefs... it's almost academic or at least layman-philosophical... I guess it's just a diary. an example of the prosaic content: "if I feel now, ashamed or embarrassed of who I used to be, and I know I've always felt that way, that means I can be reasonably sure that in the future I will feel the same about my future's past; which is to say I will, then, cringe and feel embarrassed about who I am now. So, knowing this, can I do anything about it?" Only far more wordy and with copious ellipses. haha. I have no audience and that's perfectly wonderful.

So, y'all doing alright? Whenever I come back to this journal it's a blast from the past. I'm amazed to see so many people are still here and writing. I see you've all changed though, which is great. I'm not the only one getting a little older. I haven't checked to see who still has me friended, so I who might read this. Best wishes to you all. Nice to "see" you again.

Something has been bothering me for a while... about the argument for free-enterprise vs. government doing the work, for the government. that is; anything the government does requires at least some small amount of work (and usually money) to make it happen. Much of that work can be "outsourced" to private industry. A lot of people really like this idea for a variety of reasons (some talked about, others not). One of the reason most often referenced is "efficiency". "Government is inefficient" they say. I think this claim is very often over stated, but I'm not going to argue about this point. What's been bugging me... is something about *profit*, and it just got a little clearer in my head just now, and this is it: most of whatever efficiency is gained in private industry is converted into profit... privately owned wealth. So, do we have a more efficiently run state? I contend not. I think what we wind up with is less money going directly to the working people and more of that money going to owners of companies... big companies... which is to say: the idle rich. Once a business is given a task by the government, that business will work as hard as it can... not to do the best job possible as one would hope, but to make as much profit as possible. That means quality of service declines, ground level employees (the privately employed people doing the actual work, government work) are paid less and worked harder. The government doesn't spend any less or not much less money... and whatever money is left over winds up in the pockets of share holders. Whatever efficiency is gained winds up as profit and reduced services, which means most of us wind up with less that we might otherwise.

You could say that any privatized governmental function serves as a tax break to the filthy rich... because we, the rank and file tax payers, pay the filthy rich to do a poor job of the government's work.

my basic thing: When people rearrange the structure of how publicly work gets done, it tends to change where the money winds up. "Rearrange" is a key word in that sentence... because it's like a deck of cards, a zero sum game. There will be an end result with something left over. In the end, who has received the greatest benefit?

The purpose of government... think about it... is to improve the lives of the governed. We come together to form agreements such as our constitution and laws in order to make our own lives better. Murder is illegal? Thank goodness! My life is better. I get to vote for anyone I choose to lead my country? Alright! My life is better. Pay taxes to build a few roads? OK... as long as we all pay a little bit for the new roads, I'm cool with that... because roads (often) improve my life. Government is for *us*. All of us. When it does anything, this should always be the driving principal. We, all together, pay lots of money to a public sector in order to improve our collective existence. Whenever some of *us* are benefiting more than others, we, the people, the owners of this nation and government, need to take a very close look at what's going on.


hm... I bought a book about a week ago that speaks to issues like this one. I haven't read it but I listened to the author speak a little. Did you know that big box store (like Wal-mart and Target) often don't pay sales tax to the government? They collect it, but they have deals with the government (local) which allows them to keep the sales tax money. The rationale behind this perk is that they (the big box stores) strengthen the local economy ... so the local government should subsidize their presence. Did you know that? And, what happens, of course, when a big box store moves in is all the local small stores providing the same services go out of business. This means (!!!) the small local business owners are subsidizing their own demise. Follow? The little guys are driven out of business. People go to work at big box stores and are paid less. And we, who used to own, run, and work at our local business now shop at the big box stores, pay "sales tax" because we are legally required to do so. This "sales tax", however is kept by this new store, as a subsidy. We pay "taxes" in order to help the filthy rich to destroy our locally owned and operated businesses.

This is not the kind of thing that is talked about much on TV. go figure.

btw, I'm not saying free enterprise has no place in government. But, we need to be a lot more discerning. Remember, the key is that thee only function government is to improve our collective lives. Let that be a guiding principal.

Is anybody else really irritated about Hillary crying during a speech? I couldn't believe it. What's even more unbelievable to me is that it somehow was received favorably. huh? I don't get it. When I heard the clip it sounded an awful lot like she was upset about not winning in Iowa... that she was saying "come on guys! why didn't you vote for me? I'm trying to save the country... and how am I going to do that if you don't vote for me?" oh, brother.

If she gets the nomination, do you think Republicans are going to feel sorry for her? Will she get the Republican sympathy vote? "oh, I was thinking 'anybody but Hillary', but that crying business just broke my heart." as if. no, they're going to just tell it like it is. We don't want a President who's going to cry when she doesn't get her way.

I am honestly confused. Why did anybody like that? it's on the edge of making my skin crawl.

the books I've been reading lately are making me feel like I have a pretty good layman's understanding of modern economics. I am fascinated.

• The Origin of Wealth: Evolution, Complexity, and the Radical Remaking of Economics, by Eric Beinhocker

  I loved this book. It has a good, understandable explanation of the modern understanding of evolution. It makes an excellent case that this new theory of economics is, at the very least, far more realistic and scientific than classical economics; exploding (in my mind) ideas/myths of "perfect information", "perfect rationality", "perfect competition" and so on. I also found really interesting what he had to say about the profound influence culture may have on economies.

• currently reading: The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, by Naomi Klein

  At present, I am maybe 1/3 of the way through the book. I am engaged, but also a tad skeptical about its thesis. What I am appreciating very is the basic over-arching history it's giving me of the neo-liberal (recently renamed: "neo-conservative"?) 20th century economics movement of Milton Friedman and the Chicago School of Economics... and some of the unfortunate side effects. This book, you might say, is quite political... or at least can easily be framed that way. I think the basic purpose of the book, the intent of the author (so far, in my mind), is to "re-associate" the ideology of the "Chicago Boys" with the terrible brutality, the terrorism, of the South American dictatorships that came to power, with US support, in the 60's through the 80's. Pinochet in Chile is an example. These regimes came to power with a laissez-faire economics play book in their back pockets. Free trade isn't something we tend to associate with anti-democratic power. Yes? Naomi Klein makes a very good case that in a great many instances, since the early 60's, unfettered capitalism has been instituted, literally, by force. ...that this pure laissez-faire model was, in some cases, not only undemocratically enforced but the primary motivation for military coups.

  In my understanding (from other sources) Pinochet, et al, were supported by the CIA in order to fight the cold war... so it makes sense that free-market ideology would follow. (thinking about it, that we support(ed) brutal dictators, always makes me sick.) This book theorizes, with terrific help from direct quotes by Milton Friedman himself, that the policies recommended by this economic model are usually so terribly unpopular, that they cannot be instituted without at least a suspension of democracy. I think that is probably true in many or most possible locales. In the US, on the other hand, I'm not so sure.

  Here's a thoughtful review: Shocked, awed and uncertain, which I find myself agreeing with. Here's a stupid review: Bleakonomics, which provides an excellent of example of how one might read between the lines and miss the actual message. (of course, maybe I'm just reading something else between the lines. really though... I think this guy didn't understand the book.)

anyway, economics... yeah. very, very interesting stuff. hehe.

I'm also fascinated that... I've heard anyway... that Marxist thought may be one of the most influential in the coming century. (Marxism, btw, is not Communism. I thought I'd say that in case ... uhm, you happen to "hate Marxism". I am not a Communist or a Marxist, or a Capitalist... but whatever, please keep your hate to yourself.)

I believe I'm going to be in Seattle over the holidays. Not sure when, exactly... but the rough idea is 14th through the 2nd. Anyone want to have a cup o' coffee while I'm in town?

My gallbladder was removed about two weeks ago. Are you surprised? I sure was, and still am. that was a real left-fielder.

I'd been doing a "cleanse" diet for about a week and 3-4 days. Two days before, I'd started feeling tired and a bit under the weather for the first time since starting the diet. I thought this was strange because everything I'd read and heard made me think I might feel bad at first but good for most of the time. Instead, I felt fine (great) until day number 9, or so. On day 11 I had some abdominal pain, that kept getting worse. I decided to go to bed and sleep it off, but I found I couldn't lie down. Then, I couldn't stop moving. It sucked.

I paced... laid down... on my stomach, on my back on my side, I knelt, I leaned over chairs... I did whatever I could to try to relax because I was so tired, but could not. I thought I must have food poisoning, though I wasn't really nauseous at all. After an hour of hell in my apartment, I drove myself to the emergency room. I thought I was probably being a wimp... because I thought uhm... the pain wasn't really that bad... but I could NOT ignore it... I could not stand still... and it became pure agony.

I arrived in the ER at something like 1:30am. After they finally gave me pain meds by something like 2:30-3am... I could finally sleep which was *absolute heaven*. They removed my gallbladder, via laparoscopic surgery, at 4:30pm that same day, and I left the hospital by 7:30 that evening. whoa.

I'm not saying that cleanse diet necessarily had anything to do with the sudden gallstones and inflammation. It's in interesting coincidence though. I'd never done a detox anything before... and I'm guessing my body was pretty toxic. (probably still is, but less so.)

hm. btw, my skin is looking very good now, and I've lost something like 5lbs in the last 3 weeks. heh. Did I mention I became a vegetarian about 4-5 months ago? Back then I weighed something like 195lbs, which is the heaviest I've ever been. About a month ago I was joking to myself that "I never thought I would be happy to weigh 185." (because "normal" for me is more like 160, and good is closer to 150.) Now I'm 180 or less... and I'm just confused by this. since I started the vege thing... I haven't been craving food so much. (it's weird.) I never expected to lose weight, and certainly not this much, or this fast. And, I'm happy and satisfied. *knocks wood*... Of course, all things are temporary... especially my happiness. ;) I have to say though... that since I stopped trying to be a rock star and instead am just trying to be a normal/good/moral/simple person... things are going pretty well. I'm never going to be rich, or famous, or admired, or anything else that I've wanted. instead, I'm going to be normal, awkward, confused, uncelebrated, unglamorous, goofy, afraid ... honest, simple, accepting (of as much as possible), quiet, and be around people who are very, very much like myself. I'm also always conscious and aware... i.e. no more "soma vacations". ;) I'm stuck in my body, and in my life, and always will be. And, I'm really learning to like it. who knew I would one day sort of understand patience? haha. who knew I could be happy without being powerful, respected, and rich? haha. who knew...

it's funny that I only write here when I'm happy. I wonder... I must look like an irritatingly happy idiot to you people. I think that might be the only image I'm comfortable with projecting. hehe. No, the truth is, I'm just like you. :) (unless you people are all irritatingly happy... in which case... no, I'm not anything like a "rock star.")

haha. I loved reading this. Some great bits:

"My brain exploded with the implications and the beauty of the thing," he tells New Scientist. "I thought: 'Holy crap, that's it!'"

and...

So far, all the interactions predicted by the complex geometrical relationships inside E8 match with observations in the real world. "How cool is that?" he says.

he comes up with a promising unified theory and he says: "Holy crap, that's it!" haha. :) I think that's so funny, and cool. way to go surfer dude!

a meme I want to watch: put on some roller skates and put yourself in front of a camera, and introduce yourself. that's it. the rest is up to you. (btw, is it still "cool" to use the word: meme? I've been out of it, as you know.)