My Pseudonym

Someone told me that the pseudonym for a porn star is made by combining the name of his first pet with the name of the first street he lived on. My first pet was a dog we called Poochie. We lived on Williamson Road. I am definitely NOT a porn star, but I really like the name.

What's Wrong with Airport Security?

This cartoon by Mike Keefe in the Denver Post says it all. Whether it's nail clippers, a bottle of baby formula, or a sewing kit, airport security agents have diligently and repeatedly located and confiscated harmless items from 80 year-old women and 4 year-old children.

Maybe you feel safer in the presence of this arbitrary and mindless knee-jerk approach to security, but I am just plain annoyed. I have no objection to taking my shoes off and putting them on the conveyor belt. Based on recent history, that's a perfectly reasonable request. But it took them far too long to drop the nail clipper thing. The only folks who resent the intrusion of mindless security more than the bad guys do are the good guys!

Effective security concentrates on persons and items that, as a result of a preliminary screening, are determined to be most likely to cause severe damage. That's called profiling. Profiling can be done in a positive sense (to quickly pass low-risk passengers) as well as the more recognized sense (to single out high-risk passengers for closer scrutiny). But the criteria must be kept strictly confidential in order to retain their validity. With this approach, a few innocents who fail the initial screening will be inconvenienced, but that's better than spoiling travel for all the rest of us. If you are absolutely compelled to look like a duck and quack like a duck, then expect to be treated like a duck. That's the breaks; grin and bear it. Eventually your record of good behavior will put you in the low risk category.

>

There is no room for "political correctness" in the area of security.

Tips for Presidential Candidates

The pundits are saying that the independent voters will determine the outcome of the next U.S. Presidential election. I tend to agree with them. Although I am registered as a Republican, I have always voted based on the issues and on my conscience, not on party affiliation; I consider myself an independent.

So, Hillary and Rudy, Barak and Mitt, John McC and John E, (and all the rest), please listen to the voice of an independent:

1. Don't tell me how terrible things are in our nation. Tell me instead which of the good things you intend to preserve and enhance. You can tell me if something can be improved, if something is broken and needs fixing, or if something is missing and needs to be added, but be prepared to offer a specific remedy.
2. Stop proposing policies that favor the multimillionares who fund your campaigns to the detriment of the other 99% of our population. Make your proposals and your actions truly serve the common good.
3. Ignore the rantings of the blind dummies at the far right and the far left ends of the political spectrum. They probably account for about 5% of the total vote. There are many more voters toward the middle of the spectrum. They are the intelligent, thoughtful and curious ones who are examining all possible solutions to the problems and who are looking for intelligent problem solvers. They are also the ones who will see the benefits of your proposed solutions and embrace them regardless of the party of origin.
4. Make sure you address the important issues. Some candidates don't even have illegal immigration on their issues list. There are other missing issues as well. If you can't see what the important issues are, you aren't presidential material.
5. Don't change your position with every new poll that is published. If you truly believe you are right, hold fast to your position. On the other hand, if one or more polls indicate that 75% or more of the electorate disagree with you, then you should seriously reexamine your position, because they may have seen something you missed. If you are certain you are right, then you had better explain the facts that got you there.
6. Don't patronize me or try to dazzle me with promises of pie in the sky, two cars in every garage, or a chicken in every pot. These offers have already been made and renigued upon. Instead, be specific about the improvements or additions you want to make, and make them realistic in the sense that Congress will be able to implement them.
7. Don't offer me "comprehensive" reforms. These have failed every time they were implemented or attempted (e.g. health care, immigration, congressional ethics, campaign financing). Comprehensive reforms are so long and complicated that they are guaranteed to have one or more elements that will alienate voters of one persuasion or the other. As a result, few voters will support them. Most of our present policies are pretty darn good. They have specific faults that need correcting, or they are not always properly enforced. So identify the specific faults, and propose specific corrective and enforcement actions.
8. Don't be afraid that I will not vote for you if I disagree on an issue--that's exactly what elections are all about. You can't please all of the people all of the time. If you make more good suggestions than bad, and more good solutions than the other guy, you will get my vote.
9. Quit using ad hominum attacks. They have been around as long as politicians have. And they are weak and antagonistic substitutes for substantive positive positions on meaningful issues. Besides, you have just as many failings as the other guy does.

That is a recipe for winning the votes of independents. I suspect and fear that you will not follow it. No presidential candidate since Theodore Roosevelt has come very close to following it. Some of you have already begun your "avoid the issues and torpedo the opposition" campaign strategy. Change now, or lose my vote for sure (and those of most other independents as well).

Class in American Society

Republicans are criticizing Democrats for attempting to define economic "classes" in American society.

The Republicans are dead wrong in their criticism. American society comprises two classes: The extremely wealthy, and the rest of the working families. These classes are not defined by the Democratic Party. They are defined by the words and actions of the wealthy elite.

Here is how they define and create their exclusive social class:

• They isolate themselves from the hoipolloi by living in gated estates or gated communities
• They avoid the use of public transportation. They use private limousines instead of buses or trains; private yachts, or first-class accommodations on cruise ships; private jets in place of commercial airlines
• They have assistants do their shopping for them, and if they do shop for personal items, they have the shop owner close the shop to other customers while they are there
• They guard their income and their sources of income from taxation by receiving funds out of the country and storing their funds in offshore accounts
• They either are our nation's lawmakers, or they influence the lawmakers by means of contributions and personal favors. For example, the Federal tax code is full of special provisions for the wealthy--treating capital gains at a lower rate than other income, allowing adjustments credits and deductions applicable only to people of wealth

The wealthy elite have defined their own class, and you and I are not part of it. Just about anyone can knock on your front door and speak to you, face to face. That's not true for the wealthy elite.

Another Tax Proposal

Don't laugh too hard--it just might work, if the proposal is indeed revenue-neutral. Some specific provisions are essential:

• The $100,000.00 figure should be tied to an inflation index to protect upper-middle-income folks from drifting into the higher category.


• A more gradual transition to the upper bracket may be needed so that, for a person earning $98,000.00, a 4% raise does not give him a big cut in take-home pay.
  
• "Income" must be defined as gross, from all sources and activities; no "adjustments," no "allowances," no deductions, no loopholes.

Like any proposal, this one has its benefits and drawbacks. Readers can identify those and sort them out. In general, though, it is a promising attempt to spread the tax burden more fairly.

Rep. Rangel's Tax Proposal

I read an article about Rep. Charles Rangel's recent tax proposal in the Business Section of the L.A. Times for October 26. Some of my Republican friends may brand me a heretic when I say that his proposal is worth serious consideration. The ones who know me really well may understand why, though, and those who don't can read my posting on taxes (9/14/2007) and my posting on income inequality (6/24/2007) to sample some of my ideas on the subject. Like Rep. Rangel I firmly believe that we need to restore fairness to the tax code. I also think the plan needs some refinements.

If I can believe the Congressman and the article, the Rangel plan is revenue neutral, that is, the proposed tax increases in some areas would be offset by decreases in others. The right wing critics complain about the increases but do not mention the offsetting decreases. If you read my posting on income equality, you will see that I do not oppose shifting some of the tax burden to the extremely wealthy people.

When we talk about tax reforms for fairness, however, we need to be very clear on how the income is defined. That is, are we talking about gross income, or adjusted gross income, or taxable income? Both the second category and the last take into account adjustments and deductions that allow wealthy taxpayers to duck their fair share.

Another concern in Rep. Rangel's proposal is whom we define to be weathy. According to the Times article, less than 2 million taxpayers would see a tax increase under the plan, predominantly those who earn more than half a million dollars per year. Half a million is the number I would have picked, if it is considered to be gross income. But the Rangel plan imposes a 4% surcharge on households that earn at least $200,000.00 for couples filing jointly. That seems to dip well below the half million earned dollars per taxpayer mentioned in the article. Whatever number is chosen, it should be indexed in some way to inflation.

The plan increases the standard deduction, increases the Earned Income Tax credit for the working poor, and increases the refundable child tax credit. These changes clearly benefit wage earners who are not considered to be wealthy.

The plan proposes to cut the top tax rate for corporate income from 35% to 30.5%. This feature should diminish the concerns that the plan will cause job losses and other adverse economic impacts. The plan also eliminates current provisions that Rangel considers to be loopholes. I don't know which ones they are, but I am sure that there are some loopholes worth closing. The problem I see is that any increase in the taxes for businesses will be passed on to wage earners in the form of higher prices and/or work force reductions. That does not hold in the case of individual income--an increase in the top tax rate for wealthy individuals is worth considering.

The plan proposes eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax. The fact that the income level at which the A.M.T. kicks in is too low and is not being adjusted for inflation makes me agree with this aspect of the plan. But the A.M.T. should only be eliminated if we also eliminate the loopholes and adjustments that allow members of the half-a-million-dollar-plus club to claim zero or minimal taxable income.

The plan increases taxes for managers of private-equity funds, who have been claiming their earnings at the 15% capital gains rate. This change is long overdue.

For many of the people in the half-a-million-dollar-plus club, wages did not comprise the majority of their income, and they did not pay at or near the top bracket rate of 35%. That's because of the myriad of provisions that create loopholes by allowing adjustments, deductions, and the re-categorizing of income. Serious consideration should be given to eliminating some of those provisions. I don't expect much help from Congress in this direction, as many of our legislators are members of the half-a-million-dollar-plus club, and they won't vote against their own personal interest.

Some people are terrified at the thought of a flat tax based on total income, above some defined poverty level, from all sources. If we could ensure that ALL income would be reported, the actual rate of that tax would lower than most people fear. But if we are unwilling to take the flat tax leap, then Representative Rangel's plan (with some fine tuning) deserves some serious consideration.

Ephemeral Culture

More and more people are downloading music in the form of MP3 files instead of purchasing CDs. All around us we see the demise of local record shops big and small. Some very important things are lost when CDs are replaced by MP3 downloads: sound quality, the artistic expressions of many great historic performers, and a tangible, durable storage medium.

Those who appreciate fine music are not satisfied to download "a song," play it a few times until they are tired of it, then discard it. Rather, they search out the best performance(s) of a symphony or a string quartet. They listen to it over and over to experience the nuances of emotion conveyed by the performer. They may put the recording aside for months, or even years, and then re-visit it for a renewed experience. They share it with friends. They hope that the sublime listening moments will be preserved for the enjoyment of future music lovers. The MP3 downloads are limited to recent performances, have reduced sound quality, and can disappear with the stroke of a key, or a power surge.

But only 3% of the population is sufficiently discriminating to pay the necessary cost of these treasures. Because our public schools are failing miserably to communicate the stronger cultural and aesthetic values, I worry that the size of this elite group will diminish.

To be financially sound, orchestras and recording companies must market to the other 97%--people who value things that are “good enough” for them: low cost, sound quality that is adequate for the low-cost playback machines, performances by people whose names they recognize, and the “instant gratification” that speedy delivery provides.

Fortunately, CDs were the medium of choice for several years before MP3 downloads became available. A greater variety and depth of music has been transferred to CD than was ever available on long playing records or magnetic tape. Some of the non-classical items in my collection demonstrate the scope: Sea shanties, Scottish pipes, Portuguese fados, the jazz recordings of Bix Beiderbecke. The rarities are hard to find, and they may have to be shipped across the country, but to those who appreciate them, they are worth the wait. They will probably never be available for download, because almost nobody is interested in them.

Some few entrepreneurs will pursue the 3% niche market, and continue to make CDs available. They will offer their products on the internet because they reach more potential customers than dozens of record shops, and they require only one inventory site. I really miss the opportunity to browse the bins of my local record store for historic recordings. But the inventory of the local record stores only touched the surface of the tremendous variety available. By searching the on-line sites, I can learn of their existence, locate them, and acquire them. I periodically check about 15 different sites for new releases, many of which are on small independent labels.

Much of the new technology does tend to isolate people. The philatelist who used to meet a few times a year with fellow collectors to buy, sell, and trade both stamps and information about them now seems content to sit in front of a keyboard and a monitor exchanging key strokes with other machines out there. The listener who downloads MP3s misses the opportunity to share opinions with fellow music lovers in the local record shop. We have even devised anwering machine 'trees' so that the telephone becomes an isolation machine instead of a means of talking with people. We are engaged in a struggle to make our machines work for us rather than letting them make us work for them. When we succeed, we are rewarded with great bounty. If we give in to the machines, the trend could make intellectual dummies and social cripples of us all.

Vivaldi Released

I just purchased a recent cd release of Vivaldi violin concertos, performed by Giuliano Carmignola violinist with Andrea Marcon and the Venice Baroque Orchestra. If you enjoy Vivaldi, and are tired of The Four Seasons, you should give this one a try. Carmignola's violin is passionate and fiery. The five concertos have not been recorded before. This premiere is wonderful listening.

Ironically it was his recording on Sony of The Four Seasons that introduced me to Carmignola. His approach to those over-recorded concertos is fresh and vigorous. Marcon and the Venice Baroque orchestra play with obvious love and enthusiasm for the music. Carmignola released two subsequent discs for Sony containing previously unrecorded Vivaldi concertos. All of them are wonderful listening.

In case you want to check it out, this recent release is on DGG Archive, B0006504-02.

Another Site for Classical CDs

I just added Universal Classics to the list of recorded music sites in the box at the right. This page has links to catalogs of Philips, Decca, and DGG compact discs.

Blog Anniversary

I planned to do this post last Tuesday.

Tuesday, September 11, 2008, was the sixth anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center. It was also the first anniversary of the my first blog posting. In the last year, some things that I discussed have improved, and some have not.

• Thanks to the idiots in the executive and legislative branches of our government, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan continue to be American political issues, as opposed to military issues, or parts of the campaign against terrorism. One group of politicians stubbornly refuses to acknowledge its errors, another group continues to be more concerned about their own political ambitions than about the safety of either Iraq or the U.S. They are just too self-centered and they have too much power and too little knowledge or intelligence to do the right things.
• Hatred and ad hominum attacks continue to pervade the American political scene, as opposed to sensible, concrete proposals to improve our society. The voters are still voting for the smile and the charisma of ignorant and crooked candidates instead of supporting people who show exceptional knowledge of the problems to be solved. Politicians who are not intelligent enough to propose a better solution than their opponents investigate and denigrate them instead.
• The politicians talk about compromise, cooperation, and eliminating corruption. But their actions are exactly the opposite of their rhetoric.
• We have seen little progress toward securing our borders to eliminate illegal immigration while establishing a sensible program for importing temporary labor. This continues to be a political issue, as opposed to a social problem. Politicians sense that no one comes away from a compromise completely happy. They fear losing votes and financial support resulting from a solution more than they dislike the damage resulting from the status quo.
• "Political correctness" continues to poison our literature, our entertainment, and even our daily actions. People just do not understand that by eliminating or changing a word or other symbol we cannot abolish either a concept or a past event. But they find it easier to "erase" the symbol than to teach people the proper understanding of the concept or the perspective of the event. When you erase the symbol, the concept still exists--it just becomes represented by another symbol. The hard solution is the right one, but we remain too lazy to work it.

But it's not all bad--I just lament the lack of progress on some of my most vexing issues. Bonnie says that I am too cynical, and that I should look on the bright side and talk about happier stuff. So I will do that.

• In spite of the sub-prime mortgage fiasco, and the housing boom and bust, the nation's economy is fairly robust and unemployment is relatively low.
• From I-phones to HDTV to X-boxes, we have more technological advances and high--tech toys than our grandfathers ever dreamed of. I don't use many myself, but many people are enjoying them.
• My personal life continues to be as positive and rewarding as I can make it. I made significant progress on the plans for a convention of the American Political Items Collectors in Las Vegas in August, 2008. And, my own campaign collection has seen modest gains.
• Despite the demise of Tower Records, I have added some excellent classical CDs to my collection, giving me many hours of listening enjoyment.
• My renewed interest in the ukulele has brought me some pleasure, probably not as much for Bonnie. I added about a dozen songs to my repertoire.
• My part-time teaching job has enabled me to enrich the knowledge and values of hundreds of young children. And it has added some really fine acquaintances to my network.
• Although we blew right through our initial budget, Bonnie and I are pleased with the results so far in the redecoration of our living room and dining room. We are about 80% done, and we like it every bit as much as we hoped to.
• Bonnie and I and the two shar peis are all enjoying reasonably good health. We have begun to adjust to a more healthy diet, and have shed more than a few excess pounds.
• Thanks to the computer and the internet I have been able to maintain contact with many long-term friends, and to make some valuable additions to that network. We mostly swap humorous emails, but we also exchange ideas and information.
• Bonnie and I are fortunate to live close to both of our daughters and their husbands. To see their happiness and success is a source of joy to us.

So, I continue to make the most of the things that I can control. And for those things beyond my control, I will use the blog as my soap box. Maybe in a small way I can encourage somebody to take some steps in the right direction. Besides my own visits, the blog has experienced well over a thousand hits. It must be very boring, or a lot of readers share my views, because I have only received a couple of comments against over 100 postings.

Taxes

Someone once said that the essence of a communist philosophy is that people should contribute to the society according to their ability, and derive from society according to their need. To capitalist, that is the wildest form of heresy; rather, one should derive in proportion to his ability.

Several presidential candidates in the Democratic party have been criticized for proposing tax increases in order to increase existing welfare programs and to add new ones. They claim that they only want to tax the wealthy, but many of the folks they call wealthy don't have much more to contribute. Candidates in the Republican party claim tax cuts for the wealthy increase revenue and improve the economy, but many of the extremely wealthy are performing artists, athletes, and politicians who neither develop nor produce new products nor do they hire large numbers of employees.

Part of the conflict is that while the term "wealth" is relatively easy to define, the term "need" is a little more ambiguous. For example, as a person's wealth increases, so does his "need." Most of us can get along just fine owning one house; many feel the need for a second "summer home;" and the very wealthy "need" to maintain several homes. The need for cars, TV sets, and many other items also grows as a person's wealth increases. I can get along fine with 2 or 3 business suits in my closet, but a wealthy man "needs" two dozen suits. A two thousand square foot house is adequate for most folks to live in, but when you are wealthy, you "need" a 20,000 square foot house on 10 acres of land. The wealthy few "need" all of these things that the other 99% of us consider to be pure excess. They cling to their excesses, and will not cut back on them to help the poor.

For even the poorest people, "need" has increased significantly. People who can barely afford food for the table have satellite dishes on their rooftops, tied to multiple TV sets. They are behind on their mortgage and utility bills, but their children have cell phones and wear designer shoes to school. And the politicians tell us that EVERYONE needs access to a computer.

Most of the people who draft our tax laws are wealthy. They are members of that elite 1 or 2 percent of our population whose annual income exceeds $500,000.00. While they claim to increase taxes for the "wealthy," they actually want to raise the taxes of folks whose annual income is in the $50,000.00 to $499,000.00 range. Their rationale is that the "over $500,000.00 club" are already paying more than their "fair share."

But in reality, 99% of us would really feel the pinch if our income tax increased by, say, $2,000.00 next year. But do you think for a minute that an executive, an athlete, or an actor who earns $3 million dollars next year would have to endure hardship to deal with an increase of even one hundred times that much?

Some people will argue that many of the wealthy are indeed generous--they build schools for the underprivileged, they donate computers to the public schools, etc., etc. That is true, but their is a big difference between what they do and what they want us to do. You see, they determine not only how much they will give, but when and to whom they will give it. They know that their money will be better spent if they donate directly to the cause than it would if they gave it to the government to spend. And, if they want to buy a new private jet this year, they will skip the donation.

The rich don't want you to have those choices. You will be forced under penalty of law to donate an amount they determine to the government every year. The people who set the policies and the people who write our tax laws are mostly members of that wealthiest 1%. They don't want to forego their third house or their fifth automobile, so they will increase the taxes of the people in the upper middle income range. This also serves as a barrier to keep others from joining their ranks and competing for the luxuries.

It's not an organized conspiracy; they wealthy just think that way. The extremely wealthy are the "royalty" in an otherwise democratic society. They exempt themselves from the very requirements they place on the commoners. They agree with each other, and they write the laws. You see, it's a really good deal for over half of the voters who get the handouts but not the tax increases. That's why the rich guys keep getting re-elected. They "buy" their votes with entitlements that are funded by our tax money, not their own. The result is forced charity. Think about that before you select the next candidate to get your vote.

Airlines: Overbooking and Bumping

A recent opinion piece in the Orange County Register attempted to justify the policy of most airlines to overbook flights, then bump some passengers to a later flight.

I almost never travel by air anymore because the reductions in service and the added security measures have eliminated what little enjoyment used to be associated with the experience.

The writer of the opinion piece bases his position on the following arguments:

1. Only about 1.45 of every 10,000 passengers get bumped.
2. People who make last minute reservations are actually more likely to get a seat. Without the overbooking policy, they would not have the opportunity to get a seat reserved by a "no-show."
3. The overbooking policy permits more planes to fly at full capacity, so all flyers benefit from the lower fare per seat.

On the surface the article seems to make sense, but I am concerned about those 1.45 passengers who get stiffed. The author gives us no data about the percentage of seats that are "no-show," or about how many last-minute flyers benefit from getting those seats. If those who benefit amount to 30 or even 3 per 10,000, it may "offset" the inconvenience for the 1.45 who are bumped.

The lack of data on the number of no-shows also gives us no insight into the financial benefit for the 9,998.55 passengers who get seats. If, on those flights, there are only 500 no-shows, the per ticket savings on fares may be around $5.00. So the 9,998.55 passengers are $5.00 per person happier at the expense of those 1.45 people who are grievously inconvenienced.

In the absence of more data, it appears to be another business decision that benefits the airline company by dumping on some of its customers.

Redecoration, Part 4

Well, the painting is finished. It involved 4 colors: a medium gold ("Blonde") for the walls in the living room and dining room, a light gold (Ivoire) for the ceilings and for the entry and the hall, a dark brown for the built in cabinets in the living room, and a white (Atrium White) for the baseboards, doors, and crown moldings.

We learned a lot about the effects of different kinds of light on the perceived color. Window light and incandescent lamp light make a single pigment appear two be two different colors. During the day, the light from the living room windows makes the walls look lighter than the dining room walls, but at night, they look more nearly the same. Although the walls and the ceiling of the entry way are the same color (Ivoire), the ceiling looks darker than the walls, which get more light. Although the hall is the same color (Ivoire) as the ceilings and the entry way, it looks much darker--almost the same as the (Blonde) walls in the dining room. Even within the dining room, two of the walls appear to be a darker gold than the other two. The lesson is that it is impossible to select colors based on small paint chips in a store. You need to get large samples, bring them home, and hold them to the walls in all of the areas you plan to paint. Better yet is to buy a quart of the paint you think will work, and paint 2'x 2' squares on every surface that you plan to paint. Even after we did that, the results were sometimes surprising, but, I might add, very pleasing.

I did the last of the painting Thursday, well behind my original plan. The delay had no effect on the overall schedule, however, as we are awaiting delivery of a ceiling medallion for the dining room. When that arrives, the carpenters can install it and the decorative overlays for the cabinets and mantel in the living room. And the electrician can install both the chandelier in the dining room and the rope lighting inside the crown molding in the dining room and the hall.

The job has not been problem-free. The pocket door from the kitchen into the hall came off its track. Repair would entail cutting a large section of dry wall out of the hall, and could cost from $300 to $800, depending on what we find is wrong. We decided just to leave it open for now. The painters accidentally knocked over a 7-foot etagere in the living room, and shattered the glass mirror backing. They will get it fixed for us, but that is going to take a while.

I have already installed new ceiling lights in the hall and the entryway. And the dining room table arrived Thursday afternoon. It is our first large piece of new furniture, and we both love it.

Since the entry way is complete, we plan to replace the decorative accessories we had in there today.

So it is pretty much downhill from here. We still need revised estimates on drapes for the living room and dining room (the first plan was just too expensive). We are waiting for the rest of the furniture to arrive. The rest is just accessories (lamps, paintings/prints, etc.).

We are still trying to hold the total cost to just about twice our original budget. The main reason is that reproductions of Victorian furniture are very expensive. Because they are typically very ornate, most of them are hand-made, often in North Carolina. The quality of the woods, the finishes and the decorative inlays also drive the cost up. But we believe the enjoyment we get from the Victorian look will be worth the expense. You can be sure, though, that the results will not be described as "contemporary," "clean lines," or other euphemisms for modern bland.

When the job is completed, I will post some pictures to the blog.

Redecoration, Part 3

Despite a suggestion from the drywall and molding contractor that the painters may prefer to do the ceilings and moldings before I paint the walls, I started to prepare the walls for painting this week. The painters will not be able to start until some decorateive overlays for our cabinets arrive. We hate to see so much time pass without some signs of progress.

So I spent Tuesday and today removing a decorative border from the living room and spackling the nail holes and other dings in the walls. Tomorrow I plan to sand the spackled areas and paint the living room and dining room walls. If all goes well I will paint the entry and hall walls on Friday. I also need to put some primer on the new door for the dining room.

It sure seems like a lot of work. I'm glad I did not try to do it all myself. With a little luck, we should be able to start moving the new furniture in the week after next. The biggest jobs after that are draperies and accessories. Bonnie and I are anxious to see the results.

Simpsonized

Yes, I have been Simpsonized. I wondered what I would look like if I lived in Springfield, so I went to the web site via a link from the Simpsons movie web site. At this site, you upload a head shot, and it is morphed into a Simpson character. If you don't like their choices for some features, they let you select from a large variety of replacements. You may want to give it a try: http://simpsonizeme.com/#

The images are in .png format, but I cropped mine, and converted them to .jpg format.

They even let you place yourself in a typical Springfield background. Since they gave me a hammer, I put myself in the kitchen, ready to start some repairs.

The Simpsons movie page lets you create a Simpsons avatar to tour springfield with Homer, but no photo is involved; you select your own characteristics from a limited set.

I have to go; those repairs need to be attended to.

Redecoration, part 2

The base boards, door casings, and crown moldings were installed Saturday. They really look great! There was one base board by the front door that did not look right to us. A man will be out this afternoon to fix it.

In order to put the lighted crown molding in the hall, they had to lower the top of the arch that leads to the family room. Lowering the top also allows us to replace the door casing around the arch, for which there was not room before. The change left a 6-inch piece of molding between one side of the arch and the ceiling that I did not care for, and of course, the new section needed painting. I removed the molding and painted the wall Monday. Now it looks like it was always that way, except of course for the new casing.

Next the painters will come to caulk all of the cracks and nail holes in the woodwork, and paint the woodwork and the ceilings. But they have to wait until we receive some ovelays for the living room cabinet doors and a medallion for the dining room ceiling. So things will be messy until well into August.

Now that work has started, we feel more anxious to finish the job

Redecoration, Part 1

Bonnie and I decided that our big project of the year would be to redecorate our living room and dining room. Although the two rooms are coordinated in terms of color, the dining room is sort of modern (if you call 1980's modern) and the living room is sort of traditional, except for the sofa. Although they are pleasant enough, they have always seemed a little cold, formal, and uninviting. We want to tie the two together in a Victorian style with darker woods and warmer colors.

Bonnie found a decorator, and we have been selecting fabrics, furniture, paints, and accessories for a few months now. We will replace all of the door casings, the baseboards in all of the areas, and the crown molding in the dining room. The new crown molding will be lower, and will have an embedded 'light rope' to provide indirect lighting. The chandelier in the dining room will also be replaced. And there will be new window treatments.

We have selected most of the furniture--a custom sofa, 2 club chairs, a coffee table, and 3 lamp tables for the living room, and a new dining table and custom chairs for the dining room. All have been ordered, and the coffee table and lamp tables have arrived already. We stuffed them into our 2 extra bedrooms.

The project really got underway last Sunday, July 15, when we cleared all of the furniture and accessories out of both rooms. We also cleaned out the entry way and the connecting hallway. The project extended into the two halls because we decided to remove the acoustic 'popcorn' from the ceilings. Now we have decided to add some indirect lighting to the hall as well. With the added tasks and the unexpectedly high cost of the furniture we selected, the project is already about 100% over the originally planned cost, even though we ditched our plan to put a raised tin ceiling in the dining room.

Disposing of the old furniture has been somewhat problematic. Everything has that dated " '80's look." The lamp tables are a lighter wood that is out of vogue these days, as are the wing back chairs--the local consignment shops would have nothing to do with them. We sold the travertine dining room table on eBay. When the guys came to pick it up, we started to lift the top off the pedestal, and the top cracked across the center into two pieces. After we all recovered from the shock, the buyer agreed to take the table and we agreed to accept 1/2 of the sale price. Nobody was very happy at that point, but at least the table was gone. Bonnie found a friend at work who took the sofa and the dining room chairs.

On Monday the 16th the dry wall crew arrived. They scraped the ceilings and removed most of the existing base boards, door casings, and crown moldings in the 2 rooms, the entryway and the hall. An electrician wired the power and switches for the indirect lighting in the dining room and the hall. And a lady arrived to measure the windows for drapes.

Tuesday and Wednesday were pretty much 'off days,' except that on Tuesday the material for the new base boards and moldings arrived. The door casing material was not the pattern we wanted. So they had to take it back and get the molding that matches the door frames in the family room.

Today, Thursday the 18th, the dry wall crew is back. They will re-surface all of the ceilings.

Saturday will be molding day. On Friday, I plan to paint just the top one foot or so of the halls in the dining room and hall in preparation for the crown molding. Then I get to paint all of the walls next week. We will have a professional painter do the ceilings and the trim.

When it's all done I will take and post some pictures. I regret that I did not take some "before" pictures. Maybe I can find some in the archives.

The Arrogance of Power

Power begets arrogance. Republican or Democrat, President Bush or Senator Kennedy--it matters not. Once elected to public office, some people believe they are BETTER than the people who elected them. The believe themselves to be smarter, better informed, and more deserving of special treatment and benefits. I know I am not the only person who sees this arrogance. A letter from Larry Lipson of Orange, California, to the editor of the Orange County Register is a perfect example:

"I feel my senators' pain, and they will feel my vote

"I fully empathize with the frustrations expressed by numer­ous senators, such as Harry Reid and Dianne Feinstein, as they complain that President George W. Bush ignores their constant pleading to start withdrawing troops from Iraq. The president ignores them and does what he wants to do.

"I feel my senators' pain because it is the same pain that I experienced after sending many letters and e-mails to my senators pleading for them not to pass the amnesty bill that they seemed so bound and de­termined to pass.

"The responses that I received said that I did not 'understand' the real­ities of the situation (being the unin­formed citizen-voter that they be­lieve I am) and only they, the omnip­otent senators; know what should be done for the good of the country.

"Talk-radio rallied millions of citi­zens to action. The senators' e-mail system was overwhelmed and the Senate's phone system crashed un­der the load of citizen-voter calls. The Senate's response to this citizen pressure was first to kill the amnes­ty bill (they whined and complained about the stupid citizens interfering with what the senators wanted to do, but killed the bill, anyway). Sec­ond, the Senate attempted to pass a bill to return the "fairness doctrine" to throttle talk-radio broadcasting, hoping to prevent a re-run of this type of illumination of the self-exalt­ed (and obviously none of my busi­ness) Senate deliberation process and to prevent a re-run of citizen in­volvement in the federal lawmaking process.

"My plan to ameliorate the pain of my arrogant, omnipotent senators is to vote the straight 'non-incumbent' ticket in the next election. It is time for citizen-voters to take this coun­try back."

Larry's plan will not work, first, because a significant number of voters will not do as he does; second, because if enough voters did that, they would be removing the good guys along with the bad. It sure would be refreshing if voters in general perceived this arrogance and voted against it in future elections. We should vote for people who support our positions on major issues and who offer sensible solutions to the nation's problems, not for the ones who offer glib rhetoric or charming personalities.

Politicians tell us over and over again that they are smarter than you and I. I don't know about you, but it's not true for me. I received better grades than Bush, or Kerry, or Kennedy in an Ivy Leage College. They say that they know more than you or I. It's true that they have access to more information than we do on some subjects, such as progress in the Iraq war, but they don't read all of it. They have staff members that filter out what they know the boss "is not interested in." They ignore or trivialize the facts and statistics that do not support their personal beliefs. And they brush off the questions and comments of those who disagree with them. One hundred senators voted on an immigration bill that most of them had not read all the way through, and many voted in favor of it anyway.

Our elected officials put their pants on one leg at a time just as we do. We are "smart" enough to have elected them to office. But once they are in office, the arrogance takes over, and they no longer pay attention to the voices of the very people who elected them. Shame, shame, shame...

Wealth and Happiness

"Money can't buy happiness," our parents always told us.

Apparently that's true for society as a whole. We are more affluent than ever, and we have luxuries that our grandparents never dream of. In the last thirty years, our homes have become larger, and they are stuffed with all kinds of devices--big screen color televisions, microwave ovens, digital cameras, personal computers, compact disc players, DVD players. But surveys show that people are not any happier. Over the last 30 years, the statistics have changed very little: Very happy, about 34%; pretty happy, about 55%; and not too happy, about 11%. Our increased wealth is just not producing increased happiness. The question, of course, is why?

In a book titled Falling Behind, Robert Frank, a Cornell University economics professor, argues that one reason may be that increasing affluence causes us to be in continuing consumption contests. People want larger homes because their friends have larger homes. They may take a second job or assume more debt to get the larger home, and that results in less leisure or more stress, or both. Moving farther out into the suburbs creates more traffic congestion and pollution, and commuting leaves us less leisure time.

It's obvious to me that larger homes and more complicated machines require more maintenance. They break, and need to be repaired. We become so accustomed to them that it is very frustrating to lose the use of them even temporarily. Again, the result is less leisure and more stress.

Robert J. Samuelson, a columnist for Newsweek and The Washington Post, believes that a major barrier to happiness today is increased econonomic insecurity. The median job tenure for men aged 45 to 54 dropped from about 13 years in 1983 to 8 years in 2006. The increased practices of outsourcing and importing labor give many people cause to worry.

On the other hand, the sources of true happiness are probably fairly constant in our lives--things like our relationships with family members and friends, the satisfaction we get from helping others, and the enjoyment we derive from our hobbies, the pleasure we get from fine music, literature, and art.

I think that a lot of happiness comes from within. Regardless of our wealth, life is going to present us with good events and bad events. It's how we deal with those events that determines our degree of happiness. Some people complain no matter how wealthy they are; others will smile through the worst of tribulations. I once mentioned to my boss on a new job that the job presented a lot of problems. He said, "Those are not problems; they are opportunities." When I have one of those days when everything goes wrong and I start to feel angry or depressed, I try to remember those words.

Strategy for a Presidential Campaign

In the Los Angeles Times Opinion section on Sunday, July 15, Frank Luntz proposes a "GOP comeback strategy. Actually, this approach might work well for just about any candidate for the Presidency:

1. Empathize with and embrace a nation of voters who are "fed up" with the current situation in Washington. Many voters are unhappy with both the executive and legislative branches of government. Congress has failed to deliver on tough ethics standards, elimination of wasteful spending, and fixing the immigration problem. And the President has the lowest approval score since Richard Nixon.
2. Develop a message of hope--offering a vision for what America can and should be. Don't tell us what is wrong. Tell us what you will do right. Don't talk about the past. Talk about the future.
3. Be authentic. Don't re-hash another president's theme. The "great society" and the "shining city on a hill" belong to other persons and to past times that cannot be copied or recaptured.
4. Win Ohio. This means, Mr. Luntz explains, articulate a culturally conservative message fused with government accountability and economic opportunity, tailored toward voters in the industrial heartland of the nation.

There is a lot of good sense here. A good campaign avoids ad hominum attacks, which are a scoundrel's substite for a well-articulated vision of the future. An effective campaign looks to the future, not to the past. It offers specific improvements in an atmosphere of respect, integrity and trust. It responds positively to the voiced requests of the majority of the voting public as opposed to the hidden agendas of the wealthy few.

Whether one takes guidance from Dr. Norman Vincent Peale's The Power of Positive Thinking, or Rhonda Byrne's The Secret, or just tries to Keep on the Sunny Side of Life, he will find that the greatest achievements are accomplished by concentration on a positive vision, not by constant criticism, complaining, and bickering.