There are very few issues these days that can compete with the war on terrorism – especially on the campaign platform. Stem cell research is definitely one of them. Should stem cell research be allowed to continue? Should stem cell research be allowed to reach its full potential? The answer to both is a resounding YES! Stem cell research that uses embryonic cells from blastocysts should receive public funding for as long as the cells are being used for therapeutic purposes and not for cloning of human beings. But, let us first answer the question, “what are stem cells and what is stem cell research?”
Human Stem Cells 101
Human stem cells are first seen in the earliest stages of human development. They are the building blocks for the human body and all its systems. Stem cells have the potential to become any cell in the body. As they reproduce, stem cells will either become specialized cells, forming tissue and organs, or continue being stem cells (and thus continuing to reproduce). If there is a “stuff of life”, biologically speaking, stem cells are it.
There are three types of stem cells: totipotent, pluripotent and multipotent. The totipotent stem cells have the full potential to become any cell in the body including all the cells necessary to make a fetus. These are the cells that would be used in human cloning. Pluripotent stem cells have the ability to become any cell in the human body, but they lack the ability to make an entire fetus. They are like a group of construction workers without a foreman. They essentially have the ability to make anything, but they lack the full vision of what they are making. Lastly, Multipotent stem cells are more specialized in their function. Therefore, they can become anything within a specified group. Think of them as specialized workers within an industry. They can perform any job within that industry but not outside of it.
When a human egg is fertilized, it splits into two layers of cells: an outer layer and an inner layer. The outer layer becomes the placenta, while the inner layer becomes the embryo. It is the cells in the inner layer that are harvested as the embryonic stem cells. These cells are typically of the pluripotent variety – especially during the very early stages of development. Once the stem cells are harvested, the embryo is destroyed. The stem cells are then arranged into “lines” that are then made available to researchers. It is easiest to think of the “lines” as the lineage that stems from a single embryo.
It is important to note that the embryos typically used for harvesting come from unused embryos surplused from In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) procedures. In IVF, doctors will typically create up to ten embryos in the event that the first few don’t work out. Once a woman is successfully impregnated, the surplus embryos are usually destroyed. That is, unless the parent(s) decide to donate the embryos to science for the purpose of embryonic stem cell research. As the embryo becomes more complex, the cells begin to specialize more and more in order to maximize their efficiency.
Multipotent stem cells are found in the bone marrow of living humans. In the bone marrow, these stem cells are responsible for the production of red and white blood cells. These cells can actually be transplanted from one person to another – provided there is a match in blood type and other factors – to aid in the curing of certain diseases and blood disorders. For example, leukemia and lymphoma.
The Goal of Stem Cell Research
The goal of stem cell research is to study the process of human development in hopes of gaining a better understanding of why we end up with certain deformities and illnesses such as cancer. Pluripotent stem cells could potentially be engineered to become cells or organs to replace defective or non-functioning ones in living people. In the future, there may not have to be long waits for transplant donors. In the short term, scientists are looking at using these stem cells to bridge transplanted tissue or organs, in order to decrease the possibility of the host body’s rejection of them.
The Socio-Political Points Of View
The points of view on stem cell research are most easily broken down into conservative and liberal points of view.
The conservative point of view stems from the belief in the sanctity of human life – regardless of how far along in development that life may be. The more extreme-right conservatives believe that by destroying the embryos, we are violating that embryos right to life. They view this as being akin to abortion. The less extreme conservatives, however, believe that we should be careful to not put the right to life before the right to live. As long as we are not “farming” embryos so that we can use them in stem cell research, the mid-line conservatives hold that “we are simply taking a potential life and turning into the saving of ‘living’ lives.”
Currently, from a legislative point of view, no public funding will go to stem cell research with new embryonic stem cells. Under the Clinton administration, stem cell research had much more support, and as a result, government funded the harvesting of approximately 60 lines of embryonic stem cells. The current administration put new restrictions on that research once it took office. President Bush believes that the life/death choice has already been made for those 60 “lines” and that they should not go to waste. He is very much against, however, the use of government funding to create any new ones. Interestingly enough, this legislation does not prevent private industry to fund any type of stem cell research.
Recently, the First Lady spoke out against the notion that embryonic stem cell research will offer a cure for illnesses such as Parkinson’s or cancer in the short term. To her credit, she makes a good point. It has been the practice of politicians to tout this issue as something that is on the brink of breakthrough. Scientists, on the other hand, speak not of the promise of what the research will offer in the long term. Instead, they concentrate on the potential that the research has to offer.
The Liberal Point of View
Scientists make a differentiation between the cloning of cells for therapeutic purposes from the cloning of cells for reproductive purposes (i.e. human cloning). In fact, for the most part, they are against human cloning. Their primary concern lies in the source of the funding for future stem cell research. If the majority of the research is privately funded, then the information becomes proprietary to the people funding it. This will more than likely delay any major findings since researchers will not be sharing any of their data with each other until a significant breakthrough is made. If the research were publicly funded, they would be mandated to publicize the results. In doing so, the knowledge base for stem cell research would be much broader, and thus potentially shortening the path to the answers they are all after.
While I agree that there is a need for infrastructure to ensure that stem cell research remains ethical, I believe that to not go ahead with stem cell research, is very naïve on our part. Even if we have not seen any great leaps forward in the research that has been done to date, the fact still remains that stem cells hold the potential for life, and the research that is done with them holds the potential for cures. Having had two parents go through different types of cancer, it would be nice to see a cure. Even though the ways to manage cancer have definitely improved, there is not yet a cure because we do not yet fully understand why it occurs. If stem cell research can allow us to look into the “inner-space” of physiological development, then I don't see why we shouldn't venture forth and explore this like we approach the exploration of our psyches, our oceans, or even outer space. It is time that we started to concern ourselves more with what makes us what we are, instead of worrying so much about who we are in relation to everything else we come in contact with. We should not be putting the right to live before the right to life. The stuff of life stems from here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND
"Now, I’ve heard them say, well, tests, we’re testing too much. If you don’t like to take a test, too bad. Because we need to know, we need to know whether you’re learning."
These are the words of President George W. Bush while speaking in Boston, Massachusetts, shortly after signing the "No Child Left Behind" Act (NCLB) in 2001. The NCLB is a proponent of standardized testing for K-12 children in the United States. It also introduces the concept of accountability for schools – with some pretty severe repercussions for schools that fail to deliver acceptable test results. Naturally, the schools feel that in order to remain compliant, they are better off to prepare students for the tests rather than teach them a curriculum that will cover what is on the tests. A standard, by definition, is a lowest common denominator. So, instead of teaching children in a diverse and nurturing manner, we are fine-tuning them to comply with the bare minimum. This commitment to mediocrity is not what you would expect from the world’s foremost super-power. Buckle up ladies and gentlemen; it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Let us begin, like all good tales, at the beginning – or at least as far back as is relevant to the point. In April of 1983, a report called "A Nation At Risk; The Imperative for Educational Reform", put out by the U.S. Education Department, raised some very serious flags in regards to the quality of education being given to children in the United States. The report was quick to point out how children in the school system were lacking in some of the basic skills. The report went on to state that these kids are already behind the children in other nations. In 1989, President George Bush Sr. drafted a law that was later signed by President Clinton; it was called Goals 2000. It moved towards educational standards in 13 subject areas. Not without irony, congress rejected the notion of having the law’s implementation overseen by the federal government. They had little interest in administrating this initiative.
In January 2002, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act came into law. The Act had seemingly noble objectives; by 2014, all the school children in the U.S. were to attain 100% proficiency in mathematics and reading. The problem with the act is that the objectives come with some pretty serious repercussions for non-compliance. These repercussions range from some pretty stiff finger-waving as a warning to "improve or else", to getting rid of all the staff and turning the governance of the school over to the state, or a private administrator, in order to make improvements.
The baseline set of metrics for the act came from data culled in the 2001-2002 school year. Initially schools had two years within which to start showing marked improvement in the performance of the student body in the standardized tests. The label of "Adequate Yearly Progress" (AYP) is applied to schools making the grade. Schools that do not make AYP are given the label of "In Need Of Improvement" (INOI). After the grace period, an INOI school is first mandated to provide tutoring to the students not making the grade in hopes of improving their test scores. Failing that, the school is to allow students not making the grade to transfer to a school that labeled as AYP. As if that weren’t enough, the INOI schools must also take money from their own budgets to provide transportation to the AYP School for the students that have been allowed to transfer. If a school continues to not make the grade, the final level of sanction is restructuring. Under restructuring, the school may have: most, if not all, of its staff replaced; the school shut down temporarily to open as a charter school; and/or have the school’s management turned over to the state. Given these strong repercussions, the schools are responding in what seems to be the most logical way; they are tailoring the curriculum to cover what is on the standardized tests.
The introduction of the No Child Left Behind Act leaves us with three major questions: "What will this do to our school system?" "What will this do to our children?" and lastly, "What will this do to our future?" If a large number of schools are choosing to focus their curriculum on the standardized tests rather than a more balanced education, we really are turning the nation’s schools into test prep centers; largely due to schools not wanting to avoid the repercussions of being an INOI school. If we are to project the problem out five years, the educational landscape starts to look quite scary. Gradually, we will be faced with a patchwork of schools, and school systems – some being run by the municipalities, some being run by the state and some being run by private firms. All this new administration of resources will mean a need for new infrastructure – or at least a lot of addition to the old one. With all these schools being administered by different organizations, we also run the risk of further stratifying the educational system.
In addition, the AYP schools will suddenly be faced with increasing percentages of their student body being made up of children that were failing in the INOI schools. Thusly, schools that were once labeled as AYP are suddenly in danger of becoming INOI as more of their resources – and attention – go towards making sure that the failing students improve their test scores to a proficiency level that is acceptable to the legislators. Otherwise, they too run the risk of becoming "In Need Of Improvement."
Our children will also suffer. Sudden changes to a child’s school schedule can be jarring to say the least. Children – especially the younger ones – thrive on schedules that are more structured. If they are forced to suddenly change schools, or if their school is suddenly re-staffed, it will have an effect on them; an effect that may affect their test scores regardless of proficiency. A large number of schools have also begun changing the pedagogical styles being utilized in the classrooms more towards rote, as opposed to comprehension. Instead of teaching in a manner that is more conducive to the conceptual and logical understanding of a subject, students learn in a manner that is primarily based on memorization. Typically, when a person memorizes something, they are memorizing an instance of a concept. I.e. they are memorizing a particular version of a concept given certain variables. The problem arises when you change the variables involved. A "memorizing" person may not be able to abstract the necessary information to reformulate what they have memorized in a useful manner. Although that may sound trivial now, consider that in the future, today’s kids will be the people designing the cars we travel in, the buildings we work in, and the planes we so readily entrust with our lives as we cruise at 30,000 feet. Not so trivial now, is it?
If we consider that a teacher has the ability to give a more accurate assessment of a student’s abilities than any test, a test is then simply a snapshot of understanding and ability. What a test will not tell you is what may have been happening in that student’s life at the time of the test. They may be worried about their home situation; they may have not eaten anything that day – not out of not wanting to but perhaps out of not being able. A single snapshot in time does not give the same breadth of understanding that a moving picture does. A teacher would have a better understanding of the moving picture and therefore a better understanding of a student’s abilities. A child’s worries may have little context to us, but don’t forget that amongst all this learning, they are also trying to define how they fit into the world. By standardizing their learning and assessment, are we not also trying to standardize their place in the world? Some states are not allowing kids to graduate from high school unless they pass a standardized test. But, if we have failed in teaching them, how can we expect them to pass? While I agree that we should not give a high school diploma to anyone that shows up, I do believe that we if we will pass or fail a student based on their output, we should be more aware of the inputs we are preparing them with.
This leaves us looking towards the future. It is important to consider the future of education, as well as the future of our society. Education is, after all, building the world of tomorrow. One of the first things that comes to mind is what will happen once the kids of NCLB reach the post-secondary institutions. Will these children be prepared to suddenly follow a course of study that suddenly forces them to exponentially expand their scope of knowledge and understanding? Will the colleges and universities be prepared to deal with a student body that must switch to learning by concepts from learning by memorization? More students may choose to drop out because they’re just not "getting it", and society will suddenly be further stratified; much like the primary and secondary school systems will be through NCLB. Yes, indeed, it may very well be a bumpy ride.
The NCLB act is sending a clear message, "the primary goal of a school is to boost and maintain test scores. Do it, or else." As parents, grandparents and citizens we should be sending the legislature a message of our own: "The primary goal of education is to prepare the children of the future with the knowledge and means to run the world in an efficient, democratic and peaceful manner. Do it, or else." But none of this will happen unless we all choose to get involved. I don’t mean just signing your name on some form letter to your representative. I mean get involved with every facet of your child’s education at a personal, administrative, and legislative level. Get involved personally by taking more of an interest in what they learn and extending their learning activities beyond what school gives them. If you do not have the time to do this, then get smarter about the environment that you provide for them. I guarantee that a Leapster Interactive Learning System™ will be a better investment than a Nintendo GameBoy™. Immerse them in a passive learning environment so that learning is all around them. If you want to see the results of an immersive learning environment, read Cheaper By The Dozen" by Kenneth Galbreth Jr. and Ernestine Gilbreth Carey – I assure you, it has much more depth than the recently released movie version. In the same way that you worry about what goes into your child’s mouth through nutrition, you should worry about what goes into their minds through education.
You can also make efforts to get involved in the administration and legislation of your children’s education. Get informed about the issues, talk to the teachers, and see how you can help them be champions for our children’s education. And then, sign your name on those form letters that go to the legislators. We must stop thinking of education as a short-run investment. After all, at some point, our very lives may depend on it. The alternative? We may face the world years from now, as it looks upon the state of our society and says, "Feel dumb. It’s Ok."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are the words of President George W. Bush while speaking in Boston, Massachusetts, shortly after signing the "No Child Left Behind" Act (NCLB) in 2001. The NCLB is a proponent of standardized testing for K-12 children in the United States. It also introduces the concept of accountability for schools – with some pretty severe repercussions for schools that fail to deliver acceptable test results. Naturally, the schools feel that in order to remain compliant, they are better off to prepare students for the tests rather than teach them a curriculum that will cover what is on the tests. A standard, by definition, is a lowest common denominator. So, instead of teaching children in a diverse and nurturing manner, we are fine-tuning them to comply with the bare minimum. This commitment to mediocrity is not what you would expect from the world’s foremost super-power. Buckle up ladies and gentlemen; it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Let us begin, like all good tales, at the beginning – or at least as far back as is relevant to the point. In April of 1983, a report called "A Nation At Risk; The Imperative for Educational Reform", put out by the U.S. Education Department, raised some very serious flags in regards to the quality of education being given to children in the United States. The report was quick to point out how children in the school system were lacking in some of the basic skills. The report went on to state that these kids are already behind the children in other nations. In 1989, President George Bush Sr. drafted a law that was later signed by President Clinton; it was called Goals 2000. It moved towards educational standards in 13 subject areas. Not without irony, congress rejected the notion of having the law’s implementation overseen by the federal government. They had little interest in administrating this initiative.
In January 2002, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act came into law. The Act had seemingly noble objectives; by 2014, all the school children in the U.S. were to attain 100% proficiency in mathematics and reading. The problem with the act is that the objectives come with some pretty serious repercussions for non-compliance. These repercussions range from some pretty stiff finger-waving as a warning to "improve or else", to getting rid of all the staff and turning the governance of the school over to the state, or a private administrator, in order to make improvements.
The baseline set of metrics for the act came from data culled in the 2001-2002 school year. Initially schools had two years within which to start showing marked improvement in the performance of the student body in the standardized tests. The label of "Adequate Yearly Progress" (AYP) is applied to schools making the grade. Schools that do not make AYP are given the label of "In Need Of Improvement" (INOI). After the grace period, an INOI school is first mandated to provide tutoring to the students not making the grade in hopes of improving their test scores. Failing that, the school is to allow students not making the grade to transfer to a school that labeled as AYP. As if that weren’t enough, the INOI schools must also take money from their own budgets to provide transportation to the AYP School for the students that have been allowed to transfer. If a school continues to not make the grade, the final level of sanction is restructuring. Under restructuring, the school may have: most, if not all, of its staff replaced; the school shut down temporarily to open as a charter school; and/or have the school’s management turned over to the state. Given these strong repercussions, the schools are responding in what seems to be the most logical way; they are tailoring the curriculum to cover what is on the standardized tests.
The introduction of the No Child Left Behind Act leaves us with three major questions: "What will this do to our school system?" "What will this do to our children?" and lastly, "What will this do to our future?" If a large number of schools are choosing to focus their curriculum on the standardized tests rather than a more balanced education, we really are turning the nation’s schools into test prep centers; largely due to schools not wanting to avoid the repercussions of being an INOI school. If we are to project the problem out five years, the educational landscape starts to look quite scary. Gradually, we will be faced with a patchwork of schools, and school systems – some being run by the municipalities, some being run by the state and some being run by private firms. All this new administration of resources will mean a need for new infrastructure – or at least a lot of addition to the old one. With all these schools being administered by different organizations, we also run the risk of further stratifying the educational system.
In addition, the AYP schools will suddenly be faced with increasing percentages of their student body being made up of children that were failing in the INOI schools. Thusly, schools that were once labeled as AYP are suddenly in danger of becoming INOI as more of their resources – and attention – go towards making sure that the failing students improve their test scores to a proficiency level that is acceptable to the legislators. Otherwise, they too run the risk of becoming "In Need Of Improvement."
Our children will also suffer. Sudden changes to a child’s school schedule can be jarring to say the least. Children – especially the younger ones – thrive on schedules that are more structured. If they are forced to suddenly change schools, or if their school is suddenly re-staffed, it will have an effect on them; an effect that may affect their test scores regardless of proficiency. A large number of schools have also begun changing the pedagogical styles being utilized in the classrooms more towards rote, as opposed to comprehension. Instead of teaching in a manner that is more conducive to the conceptual and logical understanding of a subject, students learn in a manner that is primarily based on memorization. Typically, when a person memorizes something, they are memorizing an instance of a concept. I.e. they are memorizing a particular version of a concept given certain variables. The problem arises when you change the variables involved. A "memorizing" person may not be able to abstract the necessary information to reformulate what they have memorized in a useful manner. Although that may sound trivial now, consider that in the future, today’s kids will be the people designing the cars we travel in, the buildings we work in, and the planes we so readily entrust with our lives as we cruise at 30,000 feet. Not so trivial now, is it?
If we consider that a teacher has the ability to give a more accurate assessment of a student’s abilities than any test, a test is then simply a snapshot of understanding and ability. What a test will not tell you is what may have been happening in that student’s life at the time of the test. They may be worried about their home situation; they may have not eaten anything that day – not out of not wanting to but perhaps out of not being able. A single snapshot in time does not give the same breadth of understanding that a moving picture does. A teacher would have a better understanding of the moving picture and therefore a better understanding of a student’s abilities. A child’s worries may have little context to us, but don’t forget that amongst all this learning, they are also trying to define how they fit into the world. By standardizing their learning and assessment, are we not also trying to standardize their place in the world? Some states are not allowing kids to graduate from high school unless they pass a standardized test. But, if we have failed in teaching them, how can we expect them to pass? While I agree that we should not give a high school diploma to anyone that shows up, I do believe that we if we will pass or fail a student based on their output, we should be more aware of the inputs we are preparing them with.
This leaves us looking towards the future. It is important to consider the future of education, as well as the future of our society. Education is, after all, building the world of tomorrow. One of the first things that comes to mind is what will happen once the kids of NCLB reach the post-secondary institutions. Will these children be prepared to suddenly follow a course of study that suddenly forces them to exponentially expand their scope of knowledge and understanding? Will the colleges and universities be prepared to deal with a student body that must switch to learning by concepts from learning by memorization? More students may choose to drop out because they’re just not "getting it", and society will suddenly be further stratified; much like the primary and secondary school systems will be through NCLB. Yes, indeed, it may very well be a bumpy ride.
The NCLB act is sending a clear message, "the primary goal of a school is to boost and maintain test scores. Do it, or else." As parents, grandparents and citizens we should be sending the legislature a message of our own: "The primary goal of education is to prepare the children of the future with the knowledge and means to run the world in an efficient, democratic and peaceful manner. Do it, or else." But none of this will happen unless we all choose to get involved. I don’t mean just signing your name on some form letter to your representative. I mean get involved with every facet of your child’s education at a personal, administrative, and legislative level. Get involved personally by taking more of an interest in what they learn and extending their learning activities beyond what school gives them. If you do not have the time to do this, then get smarter about the environment that you provide for them. I guarantee that a Leapster Interactive Learning System™ will be a better investment than a Nintendo GameBoy™. Immerse them in a passive learning environment so that learning is all around them. If you want to see the results of an immersive learning environment, read Cheaper By The Dozen" by Kenneth Galbreth Jr. and Ernestine Gilbreth Carey – I assure you, it has much more depth than the recently released movie version. In the same way that you worry about what goes into your child’s mouth through nutrition, you should worry about what goes into their minds through education.
You can also make efforts to get involved in the administration and legislation of your children’s education. Get informed about the issues, talk to the teachers, and see how you can help them be champions for our children’s education. And then, sign your name on those form letters that go to the legislators. We must stop thinking of education as a short-run investment. After all, at some point, our very lives may depend on it. The alternative? We may face the world years from now, as it looks upon the state of our society and says, "Feel dumb. It’s Ok."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INFORMATION IS GOOD. EDUCATION IS BETTER.
In the United States we live in a culture where “more is better”. This is apparent in the size of our vehicles, the size of our typical food portions, and statistically in the size of our waists. When asked the question, “Should restaurants and fast food chains be required to provide their clients with nutritional information of the products they make?”, I feel compelled to reply with, “Well, sure, why not. But what good will having that information do?”. In order to really answer the question we need to back up a little. What good is information that you don’t really know what to do with? A chemical formula for Trinitrotoluene in the hands of someone who knows what to with it could be hazardous. The same formula in the hands of an average person is quite harmless; they may never know they hold the recipe for dynamite. If knowledge is power, then information is that power’s potential.
In 1993 the US Food and Drug Administration brought the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) into effect. According to the NLEA “Food labeling is required for most prepared foods, such as breads, cereals, canned and frozen foods, snacks, desserts, drinks, etc.” This makes the United States one of the countries with the most amount of nutritional information available to them on the shelves. So, why is it that approximately two thirds of adults, and roughly nine million American children are considered to be overweight or obese? It is simply not enough to only provide the data. We need to learn how to interpret it. In the old days we used to only worry about fat and calories. Nowadays, fat is broken down into saturated, unsaturated and trans fat. Calories are broken down into sugars and carbohydrates, and suddenly fiber is the new kid on the block. But at the end of the day, what does it all mean? In the same way that we learn that it’s always “i before e except when followed by c” we should also be taught “protein before sugar except when followed by fiber”. I am 34 years old, and I am still dumbfounded by the nutritional labels on simple things like breakfast cereal. A box of Trix has fewer carbohydrates than a box of Grape-Nuts but also has two less grams of fiber than Grape-Nuts. If I know I weigh 230 lbs how can I place two grams into context? I can clip a fingernail and lose two grams; but how important is two grams of fingernail in the context of my entire body? I have access to the data, but I don’t know what to do with it. The solution comes back to education. Make nutrition the fourth “R” (along with reading, writing and arithmetic).
On Wednesday March 10, 2004 the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly in favor of the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act (a.k.a. Cheeseburger Bill). The bill postulates that people should be responsible for their own choices under the principle of volenti non fit injuria (the voluntary assumption of risk). The underlying assumption here is that we should be able to exercise enough self-restraint to make our nutritional choices with a certain amount of wisdom and moderation. After all, even too much water can be harmful to the average person.
The critics of the cheeseburger bill are up in arms because they feel that this bill absolves the “corporate fat cats” from adhering to any sort of social responsibility. But in the end, what is that saying about our ability to choose? Herein lies the dilemma. We can have the choice and eat ourselves into heart attacks, or we can give up some of the choice and end up healthier. Lord Acton stated, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Absolute choice, it seems, has a tendency to do the same. But, if we can become better informed about the choices that we make, then we can take that power back and “uncorrupt” it. If we fundamentally understood the concept of nutrition and its components we would surely think twice about super-sizing our next fix. Why is it that we can expect high school students to understand how to work a graphing calculator, and yet, not to understand some basic biochemistry when it comes down to how food is broken down in our bodies? The Sonoma County Family Nutrition Task Force in California is beginning work on programs that will attack the problem from three main viewpoints: give the kids healthier choices in vending machines and cafeterias at schools, advise physicians on ways to better “spread the word” about nutrition, and lastly, show the parents how to make nutritional lifestyle changes to instill better eating habits. The task force aims to use preventive measures to decrease the contributing factors to heart disease, diabetes and other diet related illnesses. Don’t put off ‘til tomorrow what you can do today. Education allows us to make better and more informed choices.
While requiring restaurants and fast food chains to provide their clients with nutritional information of the products they make may be a good idea, teaching people what to do with all the nutritional data we throw at them would be much better. We can also benefit from decreasing the amount of excess available to the general public (even if it has to be through legislation). McDonald’s, to their credit, have said that they will be phasing out the super-size value meals by the end of 2004. We will have less choice, but that will be a good thing. We have proven to ourselves that we could not exercise enough self-restraint to make good choices regarding food consumption. As the saying goes, “You can’t talk yourself out of a problem you’ve behaved yourself into”. Then again, with enough nutritional education (and the ability to finally make contextual sense of the data) we may find that those choices we no longer have were never viable anyway. Groups like the Sonoma County Family Nutrition Task Force have right idea. Information is good. Education is better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1993 the US Food and Drug Administration brought the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) into effect. According to the NLEA “Food labeling is required for most prepared foods, such as breads, cereals, canned and frozen foods, snacks, desserts, drinks, etc.” This makes the United States one of the countries with the most amount of nutritional information available to them on the shelves. So, why is it that approximately two thirds of adults, and roughly nine million American children are considered to be overweight or obese? It is simply not enough to only provide the data. We need to learn how to interpret it. In the old days we used to only worry about fat and calories. Nowadays, fat is broken down into saturated, unsaturated and trans fat. Calories are broken down into sugars and carbohydrates, and suddenly fiber is the new kid on the block. But at the end of the day, what does it all mean? In the same way that we learn that it’s always “i before e except when followed by c” we should also be taught “protein before sugar except when followed by fiber”. I am 34 years old, and I am still dumbfounded by the nutritional labels on simple things like breakfast cereal. A box of Trix has fewer carbohydrates than a box of Grape-Nuts but also has two less grams of fiber than Grape-Nuts. If I know I weigh 230 lbs how can I place two grams into context? I can clip a fingernail and lose two grams; but how important is two grams of fingernail in the context of my entire body? I have access to the data, but I don’t know what to do with it. The solution comes back to education. Make nutrition the fourth “R” (along with reading, writing and arithmetic).
On Wednesday March 10, 2004 the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly in favor of the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act (a.k.a. Cheeseburger Bill). The bill postulates that people should be responsible for their own choices under the principle of volenti non fit injuria (the voluntary assumption of risk). The underlying assumption here is that we should be able to exercise enough self-restraint to make our nutritional choices with a certain amount of wisdom and moderation. After all, even too much water can be harmful to the average person.
The critics of the cheeseburger bill are up in arms because they feel that this bill absolves the “corporate fat cats” from adhering to any sort of social responsibility. But in the end, what is that saying about our ability to choose? Herein lies the dilemma. We can have the choice and eat ourselves into heart attacks, or we can give up some of the choice and end up healthier. Lord Acton stated, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Absolute choice, it seems, has a tendency to do the same. But, if we can become better informed about the choices that we make, then we can take that power back and “uncorrupt” it. If we fundamentally understood the concept of nutrition and its components we would surely think twice about super-sizing our next fix. Why is it that we can expect high school students to understand how to work a graphing calculator, and yet, not to understand some basic biochemistry when it comes down to how food is broken down in our bodies? The Sonoma County Family Nutrition Task Force in California is beginning work on programs that will attack the problem from three main viewpoints: give the kids healthier choices in vending machines and cafeterias at schools, advise physicians on ways to better “spread the word” about nutrition, and lastly, show the parents how to make nutritional lifestyle changes to instill better eating habits. The task force aims to use preventive measures to decrease the contributing factors to heart disease, diabetes and other diet related illnesses. Don’t put off ‘til tomorrow what you can do today. Education allows us to make better and more informed choices.
While requiring restaurants and fast food chains to provide their clients with nutritional information of the products they make may be a good idea, teaching people what to do with all the nutritional data we throw at them would be much better. We can also benefit from decreasing the amount of excess available to the general public (even if it has to be through legislation). McDonald’s, to their credit, have said that they will be phasing out the super-size value meals by the end of 2004. We will have less choice, but that will be a good thing. We have proven to ourselves that we could not exercise enough self-restraint to make good choices regarding food consumption. As the saying goes, “You can’t talk yourself out of a problem you’ve behaved yourself into”. Then again, with enough nutritional education (and the ability to finally make contextual sense of the data) we may find that those choices we no longer have were never viable anyway. Groups like the Sonoma County Family Nutrition Task Force have right idea. Information is good. Education is better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHEESEBURGER BILL
Re: Cheeseburger Bill...
You know what the funny thing is? The economic foundation of supply and demand is quickly forgotten by people as the critics say "the food industry now does not have to worry about public health". If people stopped demanding it, then it would not be profitable to produce such crap (but sometimes nummy) food. The fact is that it's there because we all still ask for it.
Has anyone seen the Phillip Morris Ads on TV pointing to the website that tells you how bad smoking is for you? The thing is, they figure (much like the fast food industry does, I'm sure) that these things are all such a part of our culture that it doesn't matter how bad they tell us the stuff is, we'll still be asking for it and making it profitable for them to sell to us.
I think the government is just saying "Hey people, you can't blame McDonalds for your fat ass because YOU are the one going in there and spending YOUR money on stuff that YOU KNOW is not good for you. Why is it we externalize so much of our responsibility? "It's God's will and the devil made me do it"... Um, OK I'll leave that one for another entry.
Surely they could begin to legislate "vices" out of existence, but then we'd all be up in arms about our freedom to choose being taken away from us.
So, the moral of the story? Hey, you have a choice, so CHOOSE WISELY.
You want democracy? then speak up and let your choices speak for themselves. Otherwise, sit your soon to be fat ass down on the couch and I recommend you start taking an aspirin a day. They'll thin your blood so that you can continue to live with your choices just a little longer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know what the funny thing is? The economic foundation of supply and demand is quickly forgotten by people as the critics say "the food industry now does not have to worry about public health". If people stopped demanding it, then it would not be profitable to produce such crap (but sometimes nummy) food. The fact is that it's there because we all still ask for it.
Has anyone seen the Phillip Morris Ads on TV pointing to the website that tells you how bad smoking is for you? The thing is, they figure (much like the fast food industry does, I'm sure) that these things are all such a part of our culture that it doesn't matter how bad they tell us the stuff is, we'll still be asking for it and making it profitable for them to sell to us.
I think the government is just saying "Hey people, you can't blame McDonalds for your fat ass because YOU are the one going in there and spending YOUR money on stuff that YOU KNOW is not good for you. Why is it we externalize so much of our responsibility? "It's God's will and the devil made me do it"... Um, OK I'll leave that one for another entry.
Surely they could begin to legislate "vices" out of existence, but then we'd all be up in arms about our freedom to choose being taken away from us.
So, the moral of the story? Hey, you have a choice, so CHOOSE WISELY.
You want democracy? then speak up and let your choices speak for themselves. Otherwise, sit your soon to be fat ass down on the couch and I recommend you start taking an aspirin a day. They'll thin your blood so that you can continue to live with your choices just a little longer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT-SIZING YOUR EDUCATION
In recent years we have all come to know the cliché “right-sizing”. Sometimes we feel its sting through the loss of employment, and other times we may use it in jest to refer to wardrobes and such. So, how do you “right-size” an education?
After 10 years as a graphic designer and management consultant specializing in web-based training (the former with my own company and the latter with PricewaterhouseCoopers) I decided to leave it all and go back to school for a degree in Architecture. My biggest challenge (aside from the opportunity cost of my income) was to get my mind wrapped around the school mindset once again.
I had attended college before, but at the time I was much more interested in the experience of being at school as opposed to the learning itself. This time it was different. I would be transforming myself from that 90-pound academic weakling to the likes of a Charles Atlas academic Adonis in a scant 5 years. The question was, what would be the most effective way of doing it?
While looking at my options I instinctively went to the University of Arizona. After all, if you want a higher education, you should go to a higher education facility right? Well, not so much. One is quick to ignore the university’s seemingly lesser little brother, the community college.
Since I had been out of the academic education loop for almost 11 years I began to think about how to best manage this change in my lifestyle. University classes are notorious for being large and impersonal. In addition, University is more expensive than community college. Given the fact that I had just “right-sized” my income, cost was definitely an issue. The transition from the workforce to academia was also something I would have to deal with. Suddenly community college did not look so bad.
Once I did more research, I realized that not only was community college cheaper, but classes were also smaller and they had a transfer program to the university into the Architecture program. Suddenly college seemed like the more obvious choice. Since I was in a transfer program, all the classes I would be taking at Pima Community College would transfer directly into my university degree at the university of Arizona. I was sold.
Pima Community College has allowed me to get a good quality education while allowing me to transition from a work mindset to a study one. Not only that, but it has allowed me to do that at approximately half the price for credits that I now don’t have to pay for at the university. I highly recommend community college as a transitioning step from workforce to a new career path. The smaller classes are more hands-on, which allows me to get more of the attention I need as I become a student.
In short, I have a newfound respect for community colleges. What I once thought of as high school with ATMs and a bigger parking lot, has now become an extremely viable way to re-enter a frame of mind that most of us may have had a tendency to enter only once in our lives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After 10 years as a graphic designer and management consultant specializing in web-based training (the former with my own company and the latter with PricewaterhouseCoopers) I decided to leave it all and go back to school for a degree in Architecture. My biggest challenge (aside from the opportunity cost of my income) was to get my mind wrapped around the school mindset once again.
I had attended college before, but at the time I was much more interested in the experience of being at school as opposed to the learning itself. This time it was different. I would be transforming myself from that 90-pound academic weakling to the likes of a Charles Atlas academic Adonis in a scant 5 years. The question was, what would be the most effective way of doing it?
While looking at my options I instinctively went to the University of Arizona. After all, if you want a higher education, you should go to a higher education facility right? Well, not so much. One is quick to ignore the university’s seemingly lesser little brother, the community college.
Since I had been out of the academic education loop for almost 11 years I began to think about how to best manage this change in my lifestyle. University classes are notorious for being large and impersonal. In addition, University is more expensive than community college. Given the fact that I had just “right-sized” my income, cost was definitely an issue. The transition from the workforce to academia was also something I would have to deal with. Suddenly community college did not look so bad.
Once I did more research, I realized that not only was community college cheaper, but classes were also smaller and they had a transfer program to the university into the Architecture program. Suddenly college seemed like the more obvious choice. Since I was in a transfer program, all the classes I would be taking at Pima Community College would transfer directly into my university degree at the university of Arizona. I was sold.
Pima Community College has allowed me to get a good quality education while allowing me to transition from a work mindset to a study one. Not only that, but it has allowed me to do that at approximately half the price for credits that I now don’t have to pay for at the university. I highly recommend community college as a transitioning step from workforce to a new career path. The smaller classes are more hands-on, which allows me to get more of the attention I need as I become a student.
In short, I have a newfound respect for community colleges. What I once thought of as high school with ATMs and a bigger parking lot, has now become an extremely viable way to re-enter a frame of mind that most of us may have had a tendency to enter only once in our lives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
iPhone
So, after much anticipation, Apple finally unveiled the latest offering from the Wonka factory of technology. Apple's own Willy Wonka, surrounded by khaki and mock-neck laden IT oompa-loompas unveiled the latest flavour with all the flare, and exultation that we have become accustomed to at least once a year from Apple.
The website touts that Apple has reinvented the phone. I must say that I agree. The only thing is that the phone does not live in a vacuum. It still needs connectivity. So, really, they have not added a phone, so much as crammed a PSP into the form factor of an iPod (more or less) and added a phone with touch screen capabilities. What Apple should have also done is to reinvent the cell phone business model.
In discussion, a friend brought up a good point... when in wi-fi areas, why not use VoIP? That would be a coup for sure. But then Cingular would get its knickers in a twist because they would not be making money. So, again, good job Apple on reinventing the phone, but why not commit to the whole thing and reinvent the industry as well. Apple has no qualms in saying that it did that with iTunes and the music industry. Alas, maybe time will tell.
In the meantime, I see things getting bigger before they get smaller. Surely everyone will now be coming in droves with their latest incarnation of a newly fully integrated personal media center. But, as technology becomes smaller once again, it will not be too long before we find ourselves shouting, "Honey, have you seen my phone!"
This revolution will take place in the palm of my hand... eventually.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The website touts that Apple has reinvented the phone. I must say that I agree. The only thing is that the phone does not live in a vacuum. It still needs connectivity. So, really, they have not added a phone, so much as crammed a PSP into the form factor of an iPod (more or less) and added a phone with touch screen capabilities. What Apple should have also done is to reinvent the cell phone business model.
In discussion, a friend brought up a good point... when in wi-fi areas, why not use VoIP? That would be a coup for sure. But then Cingular would get its knickers in a twist because they would not be making money. So, again, good job Apple on reinventing the phone, but why not commit to the whole thing and reinvent the industry as well. Apple has no qualms in saying that it did that with iTunes and the music industry. Alas, maybe time will tell.
In the meantime, I see things getting bigger before they get smaller. Surely everyone will now be coming in droves with their latest incarnation of a newly fully integrated personal media center. But, as technology becomes smaller once again, it will not be too long before we find ourselves shouting, "Honey, have you seen my phone!"
This revolution will take place in the palm of my hand... eventually.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of Kingdoms
As I finished watching the movie Kingdom of Heaven, in the last title cards of the movie, it was said that approximately 1000 years ago an uneasy truth was struck between Richard the Lionheart and Saladin... and that today, a certain peace still eludes Jerusalem. So, it has been in all this time that we have waged war against each other for the right to place our claim on not only Jerusalem, but other lands, cities, and property around the world. Yet, we come and go, we live, we die, and the land that exists still remains.
So, I pose this question: If none of us is ever around long enough to remain "King" of that which we fight to possess, then when will we realize that on earth we will, none of us, ever be the kings of anything but ourselves as individuals? When we will we realize that as the kings of ourselves, we must go about our affairs in such a way so as to respect the other kings amongst us? When will we realize that the battles we wage for ownership are only won temporarily, and that in the end, the state of that which we claim to own is eroded by our treatment and appreciation of it, not as a thing that will outlive all of us, but as a thing that should die when we do?
We may have the power to be kings (some of ourselves, and some over others), but I believe that we often lack the wisdom to rule in such a way so as to respect that which allows us to live. Going forward, we are all kings - men and women alike - and we should all treat each other with the respect that is deserving, from one King, to another.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, I pose this question: If none of us is ever around long enough to remain "King" of that which we fight to possess, then when will we realize that on earth we will, none of us, ever be the kings of anything but ourselves as individuals? When we will we realize that as the kings of ourselves, we must go about our affairs in such a way so as to respect the other kings amongst us? When will we realize that the battles we wage for ownership are only won temporarily, and that in the end, the state of that which we claim to own is eroded by our treatment and appreciation of it, not as a thing that will outlive all of us, but as a thing that should die when we do?
We may have the power to be kings (some of ourselves, and some over others), but I believe that we often lack the wisdom to rule in such a way so as to respect that which allows us to live. Going forward, we are all kings - men and women alike - and we should all treat each other with the respect that is deserving, from one King, to another.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Talk Hard
As I watched the ending credits of the movie Pump Up The Volume (with Christian Slater and Samantha Mathis) I began to ponder as to what exactly happened to the X generation and the subsequent "Y" generation, or as the movie refers to it – whether intentionally or not – as the ""Why bother generation".
Was it just me that grew up so disillusioned with the whole system, and the inequalities that it was wrought with? Weren't we all going to grow up and change all that for the better so that our kids wouldn't have to put up with all the crap? And yet, here we sit, with mortgages, low monthly payments, our morning $3.25 coffee fix, and gas at the same price.
Oh don't get me wrong, I'm also paying my three bucks for coffee (though not every morning), but as I look around me I see a lot of the same disillusionment that we had growing up. In so many ways so much had already been done by the time we came around. So what's next?
Well... What if...
What if we actually drank tea one morning instead of coffee, and too the time to go to a park somewhere to just sit and ponder our lives for just 30 minutes as a starter. What if we looked at all the things that comprise our lives, and began to actually pay attention to what was just noise, and what was actual tangible stuff? The irony there is that the truly tangible stuff in life is not tangible at all. Love, friendships, that feeling that on a Sunday afternoon you have someone to call up and just to talk to. That's the stuff that matters, and yet, all the truly intangible stuff that matters in life is what we become obsessed with.
What if we decided to realize the fact that you can be a realist and a true pragmatist about life and living in its true sense? Do you really need to check e-mail between 7 and 9 when your kids are awake and wanting to engage? I can vividly remember my son's first word – it was "help" but that's another story – I can remember the smell of his hair, and his laugh, and yet, I cannot for the life of me remember how many e-mails I sent out last week or exactly what was said in them. So, what if truly tangible?
What if we remembered all the things that we swore we would do when we were in our teens and still pissed off enough at the world to want to get involved?
What if we realized that we are beyond the "too young to take over, but too old to ignore" years, and are now in a position to actually get some things done?
What if we re-framed our notion of what is truly tangible and what is not?
What if we started doing those things right now?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Was it just me that grew up so disillusioned with the whole system, and the inequalities that it was wrought with? Weren't we all going to grow up and change all that for the better so that our kids wouldn't have to put up with all the crap? And yet, here we sit, with mortgages, low monthly payments, our morning $3.25 coffee fix, and gas at the same price.
Oh don't get me wrong, I'm also paying my three bucks for coffee (though not every morning), but as I look around me I see a lot of the same disillusionment that we had growing up. In so many ways so much had already been done by the time we came around. So what's next?
Well... What if...
What if we actually drank tea one morning instead of coffee, and too the time to go to a park somewhere to just sit and ponder our lives for just 30 minutes as a starter. What if we looked at all the things that comprise our lives, and began to actually pay attention to what was just noise, and what was actual tangible stuff? The irony there is that the truly tangible stuff in life is not tangible at all. Love, friendships, that feeling that on a Sunday afternoon you have someone to call up and just to talk to. That's the stuff that matters, and yet, all the truly intangible stuff that matters in life is what we become obsessed with.
What if we decided to realize the fact that you can be a realist and a true pragmatist about life and living in its true sense? Do you really need to check e-mail between 7 and 9 when your kids are awake and wanting to engage? I can vividly remember my son's first word – it was "help" but that's another story – I can remember the smell of his hair, and his laugh, and yet, I cannot for the life of me remember how many e-mails I sent out last week or exactly what was said in them. So, what if truly tangible?
What if we remembered all the things that we swore we would do when we were in our teens and still pissed off enough at the world to want to get involved?
What if we realized that we are beyond the "too young to take over, but too old to ignore" years, and are now in a position to actually get some things done?
What if we re-framed our notion of what is truly tangible and what is not?
What if we started doing those things right now?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of Brothers and Sisters
As of late, I have been doing a fair bit of reading on the Archaeological issue of following the ancestral lines back through time to find the birthplace of humanity. I find it interesting that so far, genetic studies have shown us that the cradle of humanity began in Africa. Even if one is to look at the origins of man with a more theological eye, we would find that the origins of humanity are not geographically so far off.
As we have gone through the ages, we have fought many battles with each other over resources, and points of view. Interestingly enough, at a micro-level, siblings fight in much the same way over resources, and points of view. The main difference is that with siblings, there is typically a parent present that is able to mediate conflicts. What we lack in the world stage, as we argue and fight over resources and points of view, is a parent. While there may be administrative bodies that come together to try to resolve conflicts, they are usually seen more as peers than as parents. SO the questions that for the time being remains unanswered is: If in the end, we are all related, then who will be the one(s) to step up and be seen as parents in the world stage to help us resolve our issues as we fight like siblings?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we have gone through the ages, we have fought many battles with each other over resources, and points of view. Interestingly enough, at a micro-level, siblings fight in much the same way over resources, and points of view. The main difference is that with siblings, there is typically a parent present that is able to mediate conflicts. What we lack in the world stage, as we argue and fight over resources and points of view, is a parent. While there may be administrative bodies that come together to try to resolve conflicts, they are usually seen more as peers than as parents. SO the questions that for the time being remains unanswered is: If in the end, we are all related, then who will be the one(s) to step up and be seen as parents in the world stage to help us resolve our issues as we fight like siblings?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What if...
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not religious by any stretch of the imagination, but given who we are today, if there was a second coming of Christ, and we saw him do the things the bible said he did, would we take him for who he is? Or would it be like some Outer Limits re-run, and we'd end up hooking him up to every biometric machine we can get our hands on... just to be sure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE MACHINE
So, here's something I think I just figured out. I realize many people have probably already figured this one out, but at the time it became clear to me, I must admit that I felt my brain expand by 2%.
Having recently moved to the US from Canada, I was amazed at how people here are practically falling all over each other to give you credit. Bad credit, Poor credit, No credit, No problem. So I got to thinking, doesn't this in the end create an economy that would crash since all its profits would be in the form of credit? And then the beauty of it hit me.
The US is predominantly christian (which may or may not have anything to do with my point). Given that dishonesty and lack of honor is frowned upon (at least in theory) I began to think of how this sets up the motivation. What motivation? Bear with me for a few lines.
So, you have all this credit being given to people that probably shouldn't be having it. Bring in the Socio-moral contract that loosely states that you should essentially pay back what you borrow, and then wrap that in the capitalist concept of always wanting bigger, better, faster and more of whatever the economy has to offer. Suddenly you end up with a perpetual motion economic machine that essentially propagates from it's own cycle of extending credit so that people can buy stuff that is produced. Of course, as time goes on, inflation takes care of the price of things being more expensive.
OH WAIT. STOP! An important aside...
The argument of nominal dollars enters into play here. While some things may be cheaper today than they were 50 years ago because of nominal dollars, the fact is that I was not alive 50 years ago and therefore any debt that I have is in Real Dollars in the context of my lifetime, not some nominal dollar from 50 years ago. i.e. My debt is real-time, The nominal dollar... not so much.
Ok, so where was I ? Ah yes, so, we have people getting credit which they max out pretty quickly (anyone who had a credit card between the ages of 18-24 will know what I'm talking about) and then they have this feeling of obligation to pay back what they borrowed, so they have to either keep their job – or in worst case scenarios, find one – so they can pay back what they owe. If you keep your job and your payments up to date, the creditors reward you by saying "Well done, here's more credit". And then we get a raise and we reward ourselves by treating ourselves to more stuff because, well, we've earned it. Then some of us consolidate our loans to break it all down in to 1 easy payment. And then? We're offered more credit, to buy more stuff, which we'll have to pay back, so we keep on working harder which helps us stay on top of our payments, which creditors then like to reward and...
Now, take this and then multiply it over all of the population of the US. A pretty staggering concept on how the machine just keeps on growing because we keep on feeding it. Don't get me wrong, I like my Tall Soy Mocha as much as the next person, but just think of what would happen if everyone did that most dastardly deed of the credit game and claimed bankruptcy. Game over? Nonsense. Remember... Bad credit, Poor credit, No credit, No problem.
So What's your take-away? Well, maybe what we have is enough, and maybe using more credit just because we have it is not such a good idea.
Just a thought, before you go out and extend that credit of yours just a little more. As for me, I may put off buying that "Potty Putter" just a little longer. Maybe until I reach my next all important milestone in life... the Amex Platinum Card.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having recently moved to the US from Canada, I was amazed at how people here are practically falling all over each other to give you credit. Bad credit, Poor credit, No credit, No problem. So I got to thinking, doesn't this in the end create an economy that would crash since all its profits would be in the form of credit? And then the beauty of it hit me.
The US is predominantly christian (which may or may not have anything to do with my point). Given that dishonesty and lack of honor is frowned upon (at least in theory) I began to think of how this sets up the motivation. What motivation? Bear with me for a few lines.
So, you have all this credit being given to people that probably shouldn't be having it. Bring in the Socio-moral contract that loosely states that you should essentially pay back what you borrow, and then wrap that in the capitalist concept of always wanting bigger, better, faster and more of whatever the economy has to offer. Suddenly you end up with a perpetual motion economic machine that essentially propagates from it's own cycle of extending credit so that people can buy stuff that is produced. Of course, as time goes on, inflation takes care of the price of things being more expensive.
OH WAIT. STOP! An important aside...
The argument of nominal dollars enters into play here. While some things may be cheaper today than they were 50 years ago because of nominal dollars, the fact is that I was not alive 50 years ago and therefore any debt that I have is in Real Dollars in the context of my lifetime, not some nominal dollar from 50 years ago. i.e. My debt is real-time, The nominal dollar... not so much.
Ok, so where was I ? Ah yes, so, we have people getting credit which they max out pretty quickly (anyone who had a credit card between the ages of 18-24 will know what I'm talking about) and then they have this feeling of obligation to pay back what they borrowed, so they have to either keep their job – or in worst case scenarios, find one – so they can pay back what they owe. If you keep your job and your payments up to date, the creditors reward you by saying "Well done, here's more credit". And then we get a raise and we reward ourselves by treating ourselves to more stuff because, well, we've earned it. Then some of us consolidate our loans to break it all down in to 1 easy payment. And then? We're offered more credit, to buy more stuff, which we'll have to pay back, so we keep on working harder which helps us stay on top of our payments, which creditors then like to reward and...
Now, take this and then multiply it over all of the population of the US. A pretty staggering concept on how the machine just keeps on growing because we keep on feeding it. Don't get me wrong, I like my Tall Soy Mocha as much as the next person, but just think of what would happen if everyone did that most dastardly deed of the credit game and claimed bankruptcy. Game over? Nonsense. Remember... Bad credit, Poor credit, No credit, No problem.
So What's your take-away? Well, maybe what we have is enough, and maybe using more credit just because we have it is not such a good idea.
Just a thought, before you go out and extend that credit of yours just a little more. As for me, I may put off buying that "Potty Putter" just a little longer. Maybe until I reach my next all important milestone in life... the Amex Platinum Card.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OVER POPULATION... AM I JUST NOT GETTING IT?
This summer I began an on-going discussion with my dad about over-population. He maintains that having two kids will maintain the population where it's at and so therefore it's an acceptable number (according to current over-population thought). But, if there is over population now, wouldn't a decrease in population desirable? Through our present state of affairs as far as ecology, population and even socio-economic tensions between people and nations, have we not more or less proven that we are exceeding the carrying capacity of the land?
Also, in regards to the paradigm shifts we need to make in order to move towards a more socially responsible society (at a global level)... As long as we remain rooted in capitalism we will always be making choices that are in the best interest of profits. It is only when the opportunity costs of NOT being socially responsible are higher than those of actually being responsible that things will changes. But, even then, the change is being made as a response to maximizing profits and not necessarily because we actually care.
Case in point, the process for a recall for a car is: they identify the problem and consider what the cost is for the recall; then, if the cost of the recall is more than the cost of projected lawsuits as a result of not doing the recall and dealing with the aftermath of accidents caused due to equipment failure, they do not go along with the recall.
Capitalism has always held to the premise of acceptable losses, and unless we fundamentally address THAT paradigm, we will be forever sitting down in our pissed off little groups talking about how we can change the world while drinking our double-shot caramel lattes from Starbucks. I really do believe that there are bigger paradigms to shift before we start considering these types of changes. Unless we fundamentally change our values in regards to the disposable and negotiable nature of everything we come in contact with, then we will never really believe in a change enough to make the appropriate sacrifices in order to make it a non-negotiable part of our values.
So, what is the solution? I believe that all these groups (large and small) should actually get together and address the larger problem. Once the larger paradigm is shifted, they will find that not only their audience will be more receptive to what they are saying (en mass), but that some of those changes will begin to happen by themselves because it will really BE a part of everyone's values and lifestyle. It will no longer be passive activism by convenience. It will just be the new way things are done. Period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, in regards to the paradigm shifts we need to make in order to move towards a more socially responsible society (at a global level)... As long as we remain rooted in capitalism we will always be making choices that are in the best interest of profits. It is only when the opportunity costs of NOT being socially responsible are higher than those of actually being responsible that things will changes. But, even then, the change is being made as a response to maximizing profits and not necessarily because we actually care.
Case in point, the process for a recall for a car is: they identify the problem and consider what the cost is for the recall; then, if the cost of the recall is more than the cost of projected lawsuits as a result of not doing the recall and dealing with the aftermath of accidents caused due to equipment failure, they do not go along with the recall.
Capitalism has always held to the premise of acceptable losses, and unless we fundamentally address THAT paradigm, we will be forever sitting down in our pissed off little groups talking about how we can change the world while drinking our double-shot caramel lattes from Starbucks. I really do believe that there are bigger paradigms to shift before we start considering these types of changes. Unless we fundamentally change our values in regards to the disposable and negotiable nature of everything we come in contact with, then we will never really believe in a change enough to make the appropriate sacrifices in order to make it a non-negotiable part of our values.
So, what is the solution? I believe that all these groups (large and small) should actually get together and address the larger problem. Once the larger paradigm is shifted, they will find that not only their audience will be more receptive to what they are saying (en mass), but that some of those changes will begin to happen by themselves because it will really BE a part of everyone's values and lifestyle. It will no longer be passive activism by convenience. It will just be the new way things are done. Period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUALITY VS. QUANTITY
So I was repairing some tiling work in our bathroom when , big surprise, I had an epiphany. My son was helping me with the tiles and I got to thinking about what kind of a life we were providing for him.
I remember being younger and hearing the phrase "I want to give my children a quality of life that I never had". At the time I remember thinking "but your stories of childhood always sound so fun". And then it hit me. It has become all too easy to confuse giving you children the "quality of life you never had" with the "quantity of life you never had".
I distinctly remember playing soccer on the street with a ball made from a bunch of newspaper stuffed in a piece of a leg of pantyhose. We figured that we could always nick a pair of pantyhose from our moms and get at least 6 balls out of one pair.
Given that we didn't usually play on Sundays – and there was always at least 6 of us – we would each nick a pair of pantyhose from our moms about once every six weeks. Which was perfect since the lapse in time made them none the wiser to our scheme. If confronted while in play, it was always someone else's mom that had "given" us the pantyhose.
Oops, yes, my point. My point is that part of the fun of growing up is the creative process of invention. But, if necessity (as the saying goes) spawns invention, then that quantity of life may in a sense stunt the growth of the inventive spirit.
So next time your kids get all "whine-ona" on you because you are not just going out and buying them the ready made solution, remember that other old cliché... "It builds character". Don't deny them the opportunity of their own fun childhood stories.
As for me, I just hope when my wife notices her pantyhose missing that she doesn't think I'm secretly wearing them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I remember being younger and hearing the phrase "I want to give my children a quality of life that I never had". At the time I remember thinking "but your stories of childhood always sound so fun". And then it hit me. It has become all too easy to confuse giving you children the "quality of life you never had" with the "quantity of life you never had".
I distinctly remember playing soccer on the street with a ball made from a bunch of newspaper stuffed in a piece of a leg of pantyhose. We figured that we could always nick a pair of pantyhose from our moms and get at least 6 balls out of one pair.
Given that we didn't usually play on Sundays – and there was always at least 6 of us – we would each nick a pair of pantyhose from our moms about once every six weeks. Which was perfect since the lapse in time made them none the wiser to our scheme. If confronted while in play, it was always someone else's mom that had "given" us the pantyhose.
Oops, yes, my point. My point is that part of the fun of growing up is the creative process of invention. But, if necessity (as the saying goes) spawns invention, then that quantity of life may in a sense stunt the growth of the inventive spirit.
So next time your kids get all "whine-ona" on you because you are not just going out and buying them the ready made solution, remember that other old cliché... "It builds character". Don't deny them the opportunity of their own fun childhood stories.
As for me, I just hope when my wife notices her pantyhose missing that she doesn't think I'm secretly wearing them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUST A THOUGHT....
In studying Theology and the problem of evil I begin to wonder if life isn't like some epic premiere that we are all invited to. At the end, as we leave we are asked by people in the lobby "So, what did you think? Did you like it? Was it a let down? Were there parts that were weak?". Almost as if they were fine-tuning life in general with every passing person and/or living thing.
What do you think? I'd really like to know. Drop me a line.
Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you think? I'd really like to know. Drop me a line.
Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)