The Cubicle Chronicles

Oh, the Humility!

2009-04-18T10:43:00.010-04:00

Good Morning My Fellow Americans!

Thirty-five years before the United States became a sovereign nation, a 20-year-old Benjamin Franklin identified 12 Virtues that would become the philosophical core of how he would live his life. The twelve virtues included: Temperance, Silence, Order, Resolution, Frugality, Industry, Sincerity, Justice, Moderation, Cleanliness, Tranquility, and Chastity. These 12 virtues provided B-Frank with a set of values to guide him through some of his toughest life decisions; such as:

“Should I get krunked with the fellas tonight? Should I pimp that fresh
plasma I’ve been peepin? Should I bang Debbie Reed? If I had to choose between ‘Housewives of New York’ OR ‘Rock of Love;’ which would I choose? If I were to draft the fricken’ Declaration of Independence, should I throw in a, ‘no idiots allowed’ clause?”

Although the 12 virtues provided Benny F. with a formula for success, he realized the poisonous byproducts of Pride and Righteousness may fester if left unchecked. His antidote for this potential illness was to add a thirteenth virtue to his list: Humility.

DEFINITION
According to Dictionary.com, “Humility” is defined as:

“the state or quality of being humble; freedom from pride and arrogance; lowliness of mind; a modest estimate of one’s own worth; a sense of one’s own unworthiness through imperfection and sinfulness; self-abasement; humbleness.”

I believe pride is the root of many evils; arrogance, self-importance, apathy towards others, self-entitlement, and so forth. Pride is a byproduct of a sense of ownership over one’s accomplishments and achievements. I’m not saying that our accomplishments are without value or that we should not recognize those who have achieved great things; rather, it is our sense of ownership of those accomplishments that leads to pride. An attitude of humility helps to combat arrogance, pride and self-importance. Regardless of societal position, contribution, or material wealth or value, it is imperative that one minimize their ownership over what they have achieved.

SMACKDOWN!
The traditional stereotype of an American, is an individual who is ambitious, innovative, and believes in individual achievement and wealth. After all, individual drive for success and consumption fuels over 70% of the US economy. Given the values that are portrayed through the media, one could infer that personal possessions and materialism are among the core values of our country. The culmination of these factors has yielded a media controlled sub-culture of overly self-important, arrogant, ignorant people, who turn an apathetic eye to the needs and views of others. Boom.

My simple point is this: In all his wisdom, Benjamin Franklin understood that knowledge, success, and achievement is all well and good, but he also discovered that pride may be a nasty byproduct, and it's important that we avoid the dellusional path of self-importance.

QUESTIONS FOR YOU HUMBLE SOULS
How does humility fit into the way you live your life?

Do you feel that humility is compatible with some of the notable values of the United States? Specifically, values such as: Achievement, Individuality, Innovation, Consumption, and Materialism

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Name/URL," type in your name, and publish your comments... that's it.... it's as easy being sleazy!

For more information on Benjamin Franklin’s 13 Virtues:
http://changingminds.org/explanations/values/thirteen_virtues.htm

The Passion of the Chimp

2009-03-29T21:37:00.009-04:00

Good Evening!

As I stare at my Netbook's expansive 8-inch screen, I feel like a wildebeest using the fundamental theorem of calculus to find the derivative of an integral. To be honest, I'm feeling a bit rusty. It has been 9 months since my last Cubicle Chronicle posting, and I've decided that it's time for (yet another) rebirth. For the two or three of you who have participated in the chronicles of past, welcome back! For those who are reading for the first time, a little context: The Cubicle Chronicles is my sounding board on philosophy, politics, and other random bits of obsessive thought. The writing and opinions may occasionally dance upon the fringe of acceptable dinner table conversation, but I attempt to select topics that are at least moderately thought-provoking.

Originally, all postings were conceived, birthed, and raised from the confines of my cubicle at work; thus, the name. I encouraged other professionals to break up the monotony of filing TPS reports, and engage in online banter from the bounds of their own fabric-lined cages. Although I'm no longer in a position where I can afford to take a couple hours to craft a chronicle at work (and no longer have a cube...), I am committing myself to publishing chronicles on a bi-weekly basis from this point forward. My cubicle has transformed from its organizational diorama origins to that of the caffeine-peddling establishments across the DC area.

The Cubicle Chronicles is but one spicket from which I attempt to quench my creative thirst; and over the past 9 months, I've grown pretty damn parched! I hope that you'll not only enjoy what you read here, but participate in the banter by leaving your comments. With all of the cordialities out of the way, let's talk about passion!

Passion
It’s what you crave more than gut-rotting White Castle burgers. The most successful people in the world could not have reached the summit of their success without it. It’s the wind that fills your sails and gets you moving across the ocean of life. It’s the commitment that has yielded industrial and scientific breakthroughs throughout history. It expresses itself in many ways, but regardless of its origin or target, it’s the fuel that keeps one's spirit from slipping into cold grey rigor mortis. If you've ever experienced passion for something, or somebody, you know exactly what I mean.

To be, or not to be?
I’ve recently found myself questioning my own passion.

What fills my sails and gives me a sense of purpose?
What is it that invigorates me into a manic state of excitement?
What is it that I am passionate about?

I struggled with these questions, and found myself at a near panic when I could not find the answers. Am I without passion? Am I an empty shell of a human being who schleps through life, simply converting oxygen into carbon dioxide?

After some reflection, I realized that it was true: I have no wind of passion. I am passionless. It was after some reflection, that I realized: passion is bullshit. Passion is bullshit, because it doesn’t exist.

“Okay Don, you’ve gone too far; you’re talking crazy talk!”
Really, what is passion anyway? My quick $0.25 theory is that passion is an emotionally-based psychological energy that may drive people to take action. Sound familiar? Well, that’s because I just described motivation. In psychology, motivation is always based upon reward or punishment. The reward/punishment can come in two flavors; either emotional satisfaction/turmoil (intrinsic), or material or tangible reward/punishment (extrinsic). The psychological explanation of motivation is not as romantic or inspirational as its perverted business/sport pop-psychology cousin, but it serves as a much better alternative explanation. Passion is best left to big-toothed motivational speaker fodder, because it serves no practical or legitimate purpose in reality.

Questions for the masses…
Do you believe in the existence of “passion?” If so, what’s the difference between “passion” and “motivation?”

Do you feel that passion is merely enough to manifest action and accomplishment?

I look forward to hearing from you; for it fuels MY passion. Oh, and welcome to The Cubicle Chronicles!

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Name/URL," type in your name, and publish your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as pie!

It's a cruel Crude world!

2008-06-23T10:58:00.006-04:00

Buenos Dias Mis Monos Locos!

It seems that everybody is having to deal with that smelly problem of gas! And "no," I'm not talking about the gastronomic byproduct of digestion. Rather, it's the pain we're all feeling when bent over at the local filling station, sticking that fuel nozzle where the sun don't shine. "Cha-ching!"

I remember my pre-license childhood days when I'd roll my parents' Bronco II out of the driveway in the middle of the night and take it for a spin. After a night of freedom and sliding sideways across lawns, I'd fill that bad boy up for $0.85 a gallon. Fast forward 18 years, and I'm pumping at $4.13 a gallon in the DC area. If the natural law of inflation is about 3-4% a year, we should have expected gas to increase from $0.85 a gallon in 1990, to $1.58 a gallon in 2008 (calculating at 3.5% per year). Obviously, that's not the case.

Crude behavior...
So how did gas skyrocket past natural inflation, most notably in the past few years? It's elementary my dear Watson: Crude Oil. You're familiar with the concept of supply and demand, right? If you look at the price of a barrel of crude in 2006 ($66) versus a barrel of crude now ($122), you see a ridiculous increase of 85% in the course of only two years. Although developing countries like China and India are starting to demand more crude, the largest consumers of crude in the world are the citizens of the United States.

Let me be crystal clear; the US produces about 5.1 Billion gallons of crude per day; however, we consume about 20.7 Billion gallons per day. Keeping with the United States' general strategy of consumption beyond our means, we have a deficit of 15.6 billion gallons of crude per day. (http://www.eia.doe.gov/steo) You don't have to be a mathematician to figure out that we must import 75% of our crude! Oh by the way, the billion people in China consume 6%, while the 300 million people in the USA consume 25% of the world’s oil.

Where it's at?
So who holds the keys to future oil production; or in other words, who has the largest reserves? What region could possibly be so important? Well, if you were to add up every ounce of black gold from the USA (2.2%), Russia (5%), Venezuela (6.2%), China (2.6%), and Mexico (1.5%), you would only amount to 17.5%.

Saudi Arabia holds 25.5% of the world's reserves, and if you throw the United Arab Emirates (7.8%), Iran (9.2%), Kuwait (9.5%), and Iraq (11.1%) into the mix; you have about 2/3rds of the world's oil sitting in the Middle East! (http://www.marktaw.com/culture_and_media/politics/GlobalOil.html) Wow, converting third world countries into friendly capitalistic business partners never seemed so smart! Yay freedom!

Solutions Anyone?
If you believe that the USA can become independent from foreign oil, you probably also believe in creationism; and just for the record, both are based upon wishful thinking and lunacy.

If you want to see what the presidential nominees suggest:
BarRock 'em Sock 'em Obama:
(http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/)
Johnny "Bring the Pain" McCain:
(http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/da151a1c-733a-4dc1-9cd3-f9ca5caba1de.htm)

Preguntas para mis amigos:
What are you thoughts on USA's demand for oil?
Hey, we're producing 10% and consuming 25% of the world's oil; somebody's making mad cash, and it ain't us.

What are you paying to fill up your ride?
How much are you willing to pay before you say "enough is enough!"

Does your perception of our involvement in the Middle East change given that the Middle East holds almost 2/3rds of the world's reserves? Might I remind you that Saudi Arabia produces 11.6% of the world's crude, consumes 1.9%, and is sitting on 25.5% of the world's reserves.

Put down the TPS report and hit us with your mad wisdom!

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Name/URL," type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as sin!

Like Madonna: Shiny & New!

2008-06-11T13:32:00.008-04:00

Good Afternoon!

I know! It's been quite some time since I last was at the helm of the Cubicle Chronicles.

Long story, short:
You might remember a past Cubicle Chronicle entitled: "All the useless people..." This posting was a wonderful narrative of the behavioral parallels between primate hierarchies and my former workplace. However, one response to its posting threatened reprisal from an anonymous prankster who possessed detailed knowledge as to the layout of my employer's building. As a result, I hastily and regrettably deleted all postings with topics referring to my prior workplace, and sealed the door to the Cubicle Chronicles indefinitely.... until today....

A New Day!
Today I was spiritually penetrated with inspiration by an article I read in the New York Times about Hyman Restoration Surgery. I couldn't think of a better topic to bust back into the Cubicle Chronicles, than one about redemtion and new beginings. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/11/world/europe/11virgin.html)

Rebuilding Rome's Chapel of Chastidy...
Hyman Restoration Surgery is a growing trend for young European Muslim women who find themselves split between traditional culture and modern day freedom. In Paris, for $3,400, you too can set your female odometer back to "0!"

Grade "A" virgin women are a desired prize for Muslim men looking for marraige; and often times, the ONLY suitable mate for the distinguished Muslim gentleman. A woman who is found to have lost her "freshness seal," may risk rejection from suitors, a beating, or even an "Honor Killing" at the hands of her father or brother. Thus, many Muslim women feel that the surgery is their only path to redemption and of avoiding the pain of rejection.

WoMan vs HyMan?
The anullment of two young Muslims was granted by a French court when the groom found out that his new bride had previous milleage. His legal justification for anullment was that "she was presented to him for marraige as single and chaste;" basically, a breach of contract.

This issue brings to light the underlying issues of religious intrusion into legal unions, equal rights, and the social acceptability of intimate behavior (the censored version for those of you with pesky IT filtration systems).

My questions for the masses:

Do you feel that religious tradition should trump efforts for gender equality? Keep in mind that it doesn't matter if the groom is a virgin on the wedding night.

Even beyond religious beliefs; do you believe that there are double-standards for women and men in the USA for "intimate behavior?" One person's "Ho" is another person's "Hero."

Also, how does it feel to see the Cubicle Chronicles back in the mix of daily bantor and pointlessness?

Hit us with yo' mad wisdom mon!

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as breaking a hyman!

Fight Club or Hunt Club?

2007-08-23T14:13:00.000-04:00

Good Afternoon Sirs & Madams!

I wouldn't consider myself a "sportsman." I don't own a hound, fishing pole, horse, firearm, or a pickup with a NASCAR bumper sticker for that matter. However, I believe I have just read the dumbest thing that I can honestly say I've read in quite a long time; and shit, I work in public sector...

Vick-torious?
As most of you know, the Atlanta Falcon's quarterback/runningback, Michael Vick, has found himself in a bit of a tussle lately. For those who aren't in the know, or just prefer to live life fully indulged in the finer pleasures of American Idol, Michael Vick is being brought up on federal charges of "conspiracy to travel in interstate commerce in aid of unlawful activities and conspiracy to sponsor a dog in an animal fighting venture..."

In a nutshell: Mikey has a house in Virginia where a couple of his ghetto cronies set up a pit bull fighting club. Bets were made, dogs fought, and dogs were destroyed by electrocution, strangulation, drowning, gun shot, as well as by the Wake of Juda's Cradle... (well, fortunately not the latter; but look it up if you want a good giggle...) Since Mikey owned the house and allegedly took part in some of the events that unfolded, he's being brought up on charges that may land him in prison for upwards of 18 - 36 months and most likely kiss his $37.5 million dollar a year football career goodbye. Latest news is that Vick plans to plead guilty; well, because he is.

"Buffy, prepare the hounds!"
An article printed today indicated that some dipshit New York Knicks guard by the name of Stephon Marbury defended Mikey comparing dog fighting to hunting. And I quoth:

"I think, you know, we don't say anything about people who shoot deer or shoot other animals. You know, from what I hear, dog fighting is a sport. It's just behind closed doors."

Words have not be so carefully crafted and joined since Shakespeare; by the way, Steve-O pulls in $13.5 million a year; one would think that a free education would come with some of that salary. This brings up a good question: What exactly is the difference between hunting and dog fighting? and what exactly constitutes a sport?

We've already discussed the stupidity of calling hunting a sport in a past Chronicle, however, "cock/dog fighting" never was mentioned as being in the same league.

Let's take a quick look at the two types of "sport" in question:

Cocks & Dogs!
While in the Philippines, keeping it real with my peoples, I was able to witness a cock fight first person. It was interesting. The rooster handlers attach razor blade talons to the legs of the roosters, have them peck at each other, and then throw them into the ring where the roosters will peck, scratch, and flap their wings at each other until one of them either doesn't fight anymore or drops dead. Dog fighting is where you raise dogs strictly for the purpose of destroying each other. After a dog loses or is no longer able to fight competitively, it's exterminated.

I see elements of competition & conditioning, which are traditionally associated with sport; however, there are two distinguishing differences: 1) the athletes are not human and 2) the athletes are not willing participants, rather are forced to fight for their lives.

The Hunt for Bambi in November!
While I have family members who hunt animals of varying species, (may I note that they are not true "blood" related...) I would not consider anyone who hunts, an "athlete." There is no real competition in hunting/fishing other than seeing who can bag the biggest or most impressive rack. We find similar pursuits by men in across the USA; but I digress.

Questions for those who have answers, ideas, or thoughts...

Is Stephen Marbury just a fucking moron, or does he truly have a point? The animals that are hunted are usually unaware of their participation in their "sport", just as the cocks and dogs in their competition for life. However, it's only fair to say that most hunters go for the quick kill and do not torture their prey as many cock/dog fighter handlers do. So where's the line?

What do you think constitutes a sport? Were the gladiators who were forced to fight for their lives against animals and each other, athletes?

What are your thoughts about Michael Vick being "e-Vickted" from football? It just goes to show that money does not buy common sense or intelligence. However, I think he was one of the most fascinating quarterbacks in the league; a sick, thug, asshole, but the kid could run and throw like the Dickens!

Hit us with yo' mad wisdom mon!

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as criticizing the President on his exit strategy!

When Generations Collide!

2007-07-13T11:36:00.000-04:00

Howdy Pot'nas!
I'm not that into the whole "Book Review" thing; I mean, who am I... Oprah?!? However, I read this book a while back and decided to share a summary of it with y'all to get your thoughts.

The Book
"When Generations Collide", by Lancaster & Stillman, is a book based upon the results of the “Bridgeworks Generations Survey” (conducted by the authors' consulting firm...) which indicates that the generalization of people’s generational context may be a more effective stereotype in the workplace than race, religious background, or gender. “Traditionalist (1900-1945),” “Baby Boomer (1946-1964),” “Generation X (1965-1980),” and “Millenial (1981-1999)” generation groups are identified by the authors to be of particular interest, as they are all simultaneously working in the American workforce. It’s argued that the each generation group has experienced specific cultural values and economic conditions during their respective lifetimes which have in turn molded generation-specific workplace values, employment patterns, as well as communication and behavioral norms. Considering the increasing number of generations in the workplace, this book is a unique way of conceptualizing differences between “generation groups” and proposes strategies of increasing the cohesion and sensitivity among those stereotypical groups.

The Traditionalists (born 1900-1945)
Born pre-depression era, they learned that employees should be committed to the company in their entirety and “just be happy that they have a job!” They are found in the upper echelons of large corporations and government agencies and have had the opportunity to see economic changes & organizational trends for the better and worse.

Workplace & Career Values:

Dedicated & loyal to a single company who has provided for them their entire careers and will continue to do so into retirement; the company is a “paternal” figure of job security
Believe in tradition, following the “chain-of-command” and hierarchical organizational systems
Have a sense of duty to the company, want to build a legacy and value satisfaction of “a job well done!"
Believe in hierarchical management strategies of “No news is good news” and “management by exception”

The Baby Boomers (born 1946-1964)
After WWII, there was a “boom” in the birthrate, followed by increased competition for jobs, and later, an increase in outsourcing which resulted in mass layoffs and RIFs. This was the generation of Vietnam, Wall Street, big organizational gains & losses, as well as the rest of the craziness of the 60’s, 70’s & 80’s. The Baby Boomers are currently preparing for retirement to enjoy their families and the fruits of their labor.

Workplace & Career Values:

Ambitious with a “dog eat dog” mentality, they are optimistic and want to make a difference in the system
Believe in working long hours, putting in “face time,” and “changing the chain of command” for the positive; “live to work” perspective
Desire building a stellar “career” and have traditionally found self-fulfillment through the attainment of money, titles, recognition, and the “corner office”

Generation “X” (born 1965-1980)
Growing up in latch-key, playing video games, and seeing their parents’ employers downsize in an unstable marketplace, Generation “X” became the generation known for technology and “job-hopping.” The smallest of the four generation groups, they’ve had unparalleled opportunity and success, and will continue to have significant impact upon the workplace as prior generations exit the current workforce in droves.

Workplace & Career Values:

Skeptical of the stability of organizations and jobs, they are focused upon freedom, independence, work-life balance, and a self-commanded approach to the personal development of portable knowledge and skill sets
Job stability is attained by taking advantage of a variety of employment opportunities to develop knowledge & skill sets; “job-hopping” is the product of not finding growth opportunities within a single company
Believe that “face time” and being a “company man” is a waste of time; work is viewed more as a means to an end; a very “Work to Live” perspective
Very focused upon continual feedback, performance management, and perpetual stimulation & challenge

The Millennial Generation (born 1981-1999)
Growing up with immediate access to information and professional work during high school building websites, this generation is just entering the workforce and will become its future. This generation has been exposed to the professional workplace, technology and information at a younger age than prior generations and promises to further revolutionize the nature of the workplace, organizational structure, and typical career path.

Workplace & Career Values:

Value collaboration, adaptation and flat organizations rather than hierarchy and “chain of command”
Have been accelerated-learners and desire to work for forward-thinking, innovative, and adaptable organizations; expectations are for this generation to not only change jobs and organizations regularly, but have multiple careers
More of an emotionally-based value of work with meaning rather than purely monetary value
Believe in collaborative management styles with immediate and continual performance feedback and development

“Cuspers” – Are identified as those individuals born in the last five years of a particular generation range and may possess values of more than one generation.

The Skinny
The overall gist of the book is to promote organizational flexibility, sensitivity, and consideration of different generational values and norms in recruitment, development, motivation, and reward systems currently in place in the workplace. The weaknesses are the over-emphasis on static generational differences and the assumption of organizations being flexible enough to customize their management & benefit systems to meet the differences and needs of different generation group values; however, that’s not to say we should throw the baby out with the bath water.

Questions for the cowpokes...

Which generation group do you feel you fit? Is it the same group to which you actually belong?

What's the practicality of applying these group differences? Is this just another, "nice to know, but doesn't really matter" type of things, or does this imply that we should be more flexible in understanding the differences in perspective and values of generational groups?

Do what you do and express yo'self....

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as growing hair in areas you really don't want to grow hair!

Can We Heal Healthcare?

2007-07-06T12:12:00.000-04:00

Good Afternoon Living Beings!

I'm a beneficiary of circumstance, genetics, and my lifestyle. I've never had a major illness or have even broken a bone; hell, I've only had 2 cavities! My LDL cholesterol and blood pressure levels are ideal, on average I exercise 2-3 times a week, eat much healthier than the average American, and am in overall excellent health; just ask my yuppie physician. I am by no means a perfect specimen of the human race; however, health insurance is not one of my top ten concerns... (besides, I work in public sector for fuck's sake; if there's any reason to be there, it would be for the benefits if you're an unhealthy fat slob with a litter of children!) More importantly, there's a huge debate over universal healthcare in America and the topic is going to be a significant factor come November of 2008. I've taken a look at some of the healthcare reform plans that some legislators and presidential candidates have proposed, and I'm here to break them on down for you like M.C. Hammer! (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/politics/HEALTH_POSITIONS_2.html)

Note: I haven't had a chance to see Michael Moore's "Sicko", so I won't be addressing his socialist point of view; just those of the presidential candidates; and of course, my own.

Democrats; big government....
Most democrats are pushing for universal healthcare; they just don't agree on how to make it work. Most of them want employers to pay a bigger chunk; good for employees, not so much for business owners. They also want states and the federal government to subsidize the costs of healthcare by "ending the Iraq war" and eliminating tax cuts for the wealthy. Some believe that with a "not-for-profit" healthcare system, we could use all the profit that insurers made and in turn fund the system (Kucinich). While others believe that a universal voucher system will not cost any more than the existing system (Gravel). Hillary goes into the most detail with a 7-point plan to controlling costs. Regardless of opinion, in general the democrats want the government to be responsible for providing healthcare coverage for citizens with funding most likely coming from employers, states, and the federal government.

Republicans; small government....
Similar to their perspectives on retirement, the republicans want to maintain private healthcare that citizens may purchase, while offering tax deductions and cost control measures to make it relatively affordable. Ascribing to the capitalistic model, consumers will have higher quality care with increased options and competition among healthcare providers. In regards to paying for this system, most republicans either don't address the issue, or they indicate that competition and free market will not require much money. Some candidates point out that 25% of the 50 million uninsured Americans are illegal immigrants, so fuck 'em (paraphrased from Tancredo). Regardless of opinion, the main divergence from the democrats is that the republicans do not want the government to run healthcare; rather, they want the government to try to control costs of private healthcare.

Don's Healthcare System; a chimp's view...
I believe in individual differences. I don't think that quantity should be more important that quality. Those who become detrimentally ill (like the Beastie Boys!) for reasons outside of their control should be provided with "special" coverage regardless of their financial or employment status. Those who become sick with preventable illnesses due to obesity, drugs, and other lifestyle factors should have to pay extra for healthcare. So how can you build a system with these parameters?

I believe that every U.S. CITIZEN should have a basic-level of universal healthcare coverage that includes emergency and preventative medicine (1 annual exam that includes an evaluation and recommendations). The cost of this basic coverage should be absorbed primarily by state and federal governments (and you and I indirectly through TAXES). Understand that if you are sick, need by-pass surgery, a prescription, or a new organ, you will NOT be covered. Rather, if a citizen requires anything beyond emergency or a yearly examination, they will be required to purchase additional insurance from private insurers; subsidized by employers and made reasonably affordable with government tax breaks for citizens and incentives for businesses.

Furthermore, I don't believe that healthcare is purely an economic or political issue, but a social issue. If you drive and treat your car like shit, why should the government (that's OUR money) be responsible for paying a mechanic to fix your car? I believe we need to take a proactive role in our health and stop expecting doctors to be our mechanics when we destroy our bodies. Obviously, those who become ill outside of their own control should not have to worry about healthcare. Therefore, I would propose that ALL citizens be REQUIRED to purchase an additional "special coverage" insurance (I mentioned earlier...) that would cover unpreventable diseases (i.e. cancer, Alzheimer’s, lupus, etc.). Although only a minority of people may develop these diseases, it's in our best interest as a society to provide the money for the research and treatment of these conditions; besides, you never know if you'll be next.

Finally, hospitals in urban areas, where patient to doctor ratios are shit because of higher volumes of emergency and low income patients, should be subsidized and given incentives by state governments. It's important to provide excellent care regardless of location or income.

In conclusion, I would argue that the "Don Healthcare System" would not only provide basic emergency and preventative medicine with the ability to purchase customized coverage to suit individual needs, but would also maintain a competitive healthcare insurance market. Furthermore, my approach makes "special coverage" of unpreventable diseases available to all U.S. citizens, while holding those citizens who engage in unhealthy lifestyles responsible for paying their own way. Hey, it's just an idea....

The questions for the living:

What are your ideas or thoughts on universal healthcare?

Do you believe in more of a socialist/democrat view of government run healthcare, or more of a capitalist/republican view of privately run healthcare?

Any criticism of my proposed plan when I become president? (of the "I love beer" club)

DO IT TO IT!

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as getting shit-canned from your job for blogging!

In Search of the Yuppies!!!

2007-06-28T07:46:00.000-04:00

Shalom Chosen People and Goyim!

Recently, Forbes magazine published their annual list ranking 40 major American cities by their attractiveness to "Yuppies"; Young Urban Professionals ages 20 to 34. To my surprise Tampa was dead last in the rankings following Detroit! Not surprisingly, New York, San Francisco, and Atlanta were in the top three slots. Being the obsessive monkey I am, I decided to do my own analyses using the most recent census bureau data from 2005. I selected 10 major metropolitan areas that some of my readers may find particularly interesting, including: Tampa Bay, Detroit, New York, Denver, Los Angeles, Boston, Atlanta, San Francisco, Chicago, and at the last minute I threw in Salt Lake City just for yucks.

Yuppie Who?
The national percentage of yuppies in the total population is 20.2%. With that said, it's surprising that the metropolitan area with the highest Yuppie population per capita is Salt Lake City, UT! "S.L.C." as I like to call it when I'm hangin with my street peeps, has a yuppie population that is 26% of its 1,017,572 total population. Jockeying behind Detroit (18.5%), the big ole' Tampa Bay came in last with only a 17.7% yuppie population; strike one for the bay...

"Hookup" potential...
If there's one thing yuppies like to do, it's to screw... hmmm, maybe I'm projecting my own preferences through some mad weak rhymes... Anyway, the national percentage of yuppies who are currently married is 38%; 5.4% are divorced or separated, and 56.5% have never been married. Although they have the highest yuppie population per capita, you probably shouldn't go to Salt Lake City because 48.3% of them are currently married and 7.2% of them are either separated or divorced; the highest percentages in both categories. What's going on out there Mormons?!? If you're looking to hookup with a fellow yuppie, I recommend going to New York, where only 30.9% are currently married and 66.1% have never been married. If you don't like New York, why not fly to Boston, L.A., or San Francisco, as they all followed New York with low "married" and high "never married" category percentages. So, why not take a bite out of that Big Apple and enjoy the sin!

Edju-mi-cated
The national percentage of yuppies that have earned a bachelor's degree or higher is 29.9%. I've always read that Colorado is the most educated state in the country, but apparently all those sheepskin scholars must be hiding up in the mountains, because it was Boston that ran away with 50.9% of its yuppies earning a bachelor's degree or higher. If BU and Harvard intimidate you, perhaps you should take a trip to San Francisco (47.2%) or New York (42.4%) for some intellectual stimulation. Salt Lake City? Well, I'm not sure whether Joseph Smith would be pissed or elated, but they came in with the lowest percentage at 27.3%; but don't worry, Tampa bay was schlepping right behind with 29.9%.

Jobby-Job
The national unemployment rate for yuppies is 6.1%, median income is $51,314, and average work commute time is 25.1 minutes. Salt Lake City takes the cake with the lowest unemployment rate at 4.2%, as well as the lowest average commute time at 21.9 minutes! Utah's "Golden Arches" must always be hiring and just be a stones throw away; given the education deficit. It's only fair to mention that Detroit runs away with the prize for highest unemployment rate at 9%, followed by its Mid-west buddy Chicago (6.9%), and New York had the longest average commute time of 34.2 minutes, trailed slightly by Atlanta (31.1 minutes) and Chicago (31 minutes). In regards to income, it's kind of a "no-brainer" that San Francisco ($73,755), Boston ($70,863), and New York ($63,030) had the highest median incomes; but then again, if you make that much in any of those cities, you're probably receiving food stamps and live in your cubicle. Tampa Bay ($49,584) is saved by the hair of its goatee, cause good ole' Salt Lake City swiped the lowest median income from them at $48,666. It's only fair to mention that "cost of living" is a huge factor in regards to income level; despite that fact, we do start to see some superficial support as to the relationship between education levels and income (New York, Boston, & San Francisco vs. Salt Lake City & Tampa).

Sum it up already...
It appears at first glance that The Big Apple is where a yuppie would want to hookup with other well-educated, single, higher-paid professionals while sitting on the train for 34.2 minutes. However, Boston and San Francisco are very competitively close and each has its own unique flavor. Unfortunately, the only thing that Detroit can really brag about is the highest unemployment rate, top ranked professional basketball, hockey, and baseball teams that have not been able to follow through with a championship, the "Murder Capital" title, and the fact it came in third to last in the rankings.

It's dissapointing that Chicago, Atlanta, and Denver did not rank as high, but obviously there are a lot of environmental variables that are not quantified such as beaches, mountains, parks, weather, cost of living, racial/cultural diversity, economic growth trends, taxes, and other quality of life factors.

I concede. Based solely on the aforementioned data, Tampa Bay really does fucking suck; but hey, at least it's not Salt Lake City!

The questions for the Yuppies and other demographics:

What's important to you in determining where you would like to live?
Do you think these numbers really do Salt Lake City & Tampa Bay justice?
Do you think New York should reign supreme?

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as sin!

If you're interested in checking out the Forbes.com story on the Top 40 cities for yuppies, you can do so here: http://www.forbes.com/video/?video=fvn/lifestyle/mw_re062107_jal

The Continuum of Human Attitude

2007-06-26T12:21:00.000-04:00

Top of the morning to you!

There is a 12oz glass containing 6oz of liquid on a counter in front of you. Is the glass half full or half empty?

A) It's half full of course!
B) It's half empty.
C) Is there really a glass in front of me?
D) Who drank half of my fucking whiskey?!?

If you answered (A), you're probably an Optimist or a Humanist. If you preferred (B), most likely you're a Cynic or perhaps even a Misanthrope. If (C) suits you; the cold logic of Existentialism, Empiricism, or Rationalism may be your bag. However, if you answered (D), well, you're just an alcoholic...

You define me....
Just so we're all on the same page here are some definitions; courtesy of Dictionary.com:

Optimist: a disposition or tendency to look on the more favorable side of
events or conditions and to expect the most favorable outcome. The belief
that good ultimately predominates over evil in the world.

Humanist: a person having a strong interest in or concern for human welfare, values,
and dignity. A student of human nature or affairs

Existentialist: a philosopher who emphasizes freedom of choice and personal responsibility but who regards human existence in a hostile universe as unexplainable

Empiricist: The view that experience, especially of the senses, is the only source of
knowledge

Rationalist: The principle or habit of accepting reason as the supreme authority in
matters of opinion, belief, or conduct

Cynic: A person who believes all people are motivated by selfishness. A person whose
outlook is scornfully and often habitually negative.
Misanthrope: One who hates or mistrusts humankind

Born into Attitudes
Despite what most people think, our attitudes are not innate. Although people are born with varying temperaments and dispositions, the significant driver of attitudes is socialization. What's the magic equation between disposition and socialization? Hell, if I knew that I would be very rich. However, the reality is that the number of variables involved in forming human attitudes and behavior make it very difficult to calculate with precision. Furthermore, the necessary research to adequately understand those factors would most likely not be considered "humane."

Altruism; yea right...
Most who know me would consider me a cynic. On the contrary, I am not habitually negative or scornful. However, I believe that all people are naturally selfish and that there is no such thing as altruism; "the principle or practice of unselfish concern for or devotion to the welfare of others” I don't believe that being selfish is a negative thing. I volunteer to help the homeless, disabled, unfortunate, as well as my friends, etc. for no one but my self; does that devalue my positive contributions? Being selfish is only questionable when one looks to benefit while knowingly causing negative impact on another person or animal.

Personal responsibility...
I support the existentialist emphasis on personal choice and responsibility; however, I think the universe is neither hostile nor unexplainable. I believe that every single person must be the writer of his or her own destiny. You write the pages of your book of life by the actions and lack of action you take every second, hour, day, etc. No excuses. I don't respect those who blame other people, gods, or anything else for their misfortunes or successes. Don't just talk the talk; walk the fucking walk; that's the only way you can get where you want to go...

Humanist, no sir....
As opposed to humanists, I care about the wellfare, value, and dignity of all in the natural world. I believe that nature is our resource of life, so therefore it's much more valuable than any individual or group of humans. It's not enough to appreciate nature through pictures and the occasional park; it's our responsibility to appreciate nature through behaviors in governmental policy, personal conservation, volunteering, as well as through the proper treatment of all parts of the natural world; water, air, land, plants, animals, etc.

Logic & Emotion...
I strongly believe in the pursuit of logic and scientific research. However, cold, hard logic is pointless without values and meaning. Things are innately difficult to understand because we have a very cognitively logical, yet highly emotional brain. The premise that an all-knowing, all-powerful higher being consciously created existence is very improbable; basically, it's downright philosophically and scientifically ridiculous. However, the fables that help children understand how to respect and interact with others in an ethical and socially acceptable way are invaluable; every culture has them, and there are many social and psychological benefits as a result. My point here is that I believe it's important that we distinguish between logical approaches to understanding, such as "science," from ethical philosophies of society, as found in "spirituality" and "ethics” One without the other is doomed to collapse, as they are both are needed for a functional society; but we must not confuse the purpose of each.

Evolution of attitudes
My curiosity in this particular topic is in regards to those socialization factors and types of attitudes that develop throughout one's life. Perhaps you started out as an optimist and now you're a misanthrope? Or maybe, you were a cynic in high school and as you've grown older you've become more of a humanist? Either way, I'm curious as to why; or rather, what you think as to the reason why your attitudes have shifted.

Take a couple of minutes and share with us your attitudes. What are they? Have they changed over time? and if so, why do you think that is?

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as getting hit in the head!

Okay here's a bonus question for extra credit.
You have a 3 gallon bucket, a 5 gallon bucket, a drain, and a water faucet. I need exactly 4 gallons of water. How do you go about meeting this task given the mentioned items? Discuss...

Hijacking Property Tax!

2007-06-12T12:42:00.000-04:00

Good Afternoon!

It's about that time again. Tumultuously humid days, followed by sweaty pillow nights. Daily torrential downpours, followed by steamy sunsets. Shark sightings. Shark bitings. It's all fun under the scorching, unrelenting, conflagrant beast that is the sun. Ah yes my friends, it's summer in Florida! Along with the incapacitating heat of the summer's sun, is the boiling rage of Floridians who receive their property tax bills.

I am one of approximately 5 million homeowners in the Sunshine State. Ask any home-owning Floridian about his or her feelings about property tax, and you're bound to receive a glimpse at the primal nature of man. I have a 1,158 sq. ft. condo in Ybor City and my property tax bill this year sums a horrid $5,190... An optimist would frame this atrocity in terms of my great fortune in enjoying ideal weather and some of the country's best beaches 8 months out of the year at an insignificant average of $14.22 a day in property tax..

Where does the money go?
1/3 - City of Tampa Government
1/3 - Hillsborough County Government
1/3 - Hillsborough County School Board

Notice the money isn't going to the State of Florida; however, it is the legislators in Tallahassee that are deliberating on correcting the property tax situation. As to be expected, every city and county government official is blanketing the airwaves with "woe is me" speeches that use fear tactics from "government workers will lose jobs" to "the sky is falling and we'll have no police and firefighters left to prevent the chaos that will ensue!"

Cash Money!
In a nutshell, there are three options; obviously, all three of them negatively impact local government funds. Bottom line: the impact of the three proposals in the legislature will cut between $46 to $217 million dollars of funding for Hillsborough County Government; directors and county leadership prefer to illustrate that this represents the loss of 100 to over 500 jobs in county government. Just for reference, the county's budget is normally $800 million and it employs 11,000 monkeys; for those mathematicians out there, that's potentially a 27% cut in budget and about a 5% cut in the workforce. Since there will be a loss of funding and workers, our great county leaders warn that there will be a decline in many public services; keep in mind county government includes the water resources, parks & recreation, aging services, children's board, property appraiser, fire rescue, sheriff's office, planning & growth management, public works, health & social services, library services, among many others. As tax payers in this country, we expect the government to provide services and programs for the benefit of our communities. However, we don't want to waste our money on the bureaucracy and inefficiencies associated with government; we want more bang for our buck.

Don's Smackdown
If there is a vote for this property tax reform, I will vote for the largest cut possible. The inefficiencies and bureaucracy of government have bittered me to the very core. The attitudes of deservingness, "use it or lose it" budgeting, and supervisory ego, have built a culture of low-educated, low-paid, mediocre employees who are led by even more mediocre supervisors that have created a departmentalized hydra of dysfunctional government.

I believe we can do better than 11,000 mediocre employees. If government had higher quality employees at higher salaries, supported with appropriate and integrated technology, we could provide the same or better quality service with fewer people. Although higher pay and better technology would cost money, the increased savings in efficiency, quality of service, and employee health care with fewer employees would outweigh the costs; saving millions. It's time for local government to start running this bitch like a business and stop pissing money away on inept out-of-date employees. I don't mind paying property tax, I just want the most impact for my money.

My questions for y'all:
For those homeowners, how much is your property tax bill?

Do you believe in big government that employs more people, has more departments, and provides more services to the general public? Or do you prefer small government with fewer employees, departments, and services?

What traits, personalities, knowledge, skills and abilities come to mind when I say "government employee?"

Come on people, let me hear you...

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as indigestion!

P.S. - if you're a Floridian, here is a link to some really good information about the property tax issue and its context: http://www.floridataxwatch.org/news/propertytax.php

Wipe your News!

2007-05-31T10:49:00.000-04:00

Bon Giorno!

So I was on the toilet the other day and thought to myself: "You know, energy transference is pretty cool." For example: let's say there's an object falling into a pool of water; energy from a falling object is transferred from the object to the water resulting in relative degrees of turbulence; at times producing a "kerplunk." The degree of turbulence is linearly related to the mass and velocity of the object entering the water. Technically, I would argue that it's more appropriate to think of the energy transference described above as a manifestation of gravitational energy... For without gravity, there would be no "falling object" nor would there be a cohesive collective of water to observe turbulence and make that cool "kerplunk" sound. Physics is an amazing discipline.

Anyway, it's awareness that is the issue today. I'm not talking about Freud, formal education, or the fact that the fucking Pistons have let LeBron James even the Eastern Conference Series to 2-2!!! No sir or madam, I'm talking about being aware and informed of the current events in our towns, states, country, and world.

"Extra, Extra!" - A Dying Breed

Traditionally, the newspapers that have held the torch and payrolls of those responsible for investigating and reporting the news that's fit to print. However, newspapers are also a business. Yes folks, ask any CEO why they're in business, and if they don't tell you it's to make money, they probably aren't going to be CEO for very long. The problem here is that it's pretty damn pricey to pay some chump's travel expenses to investigate and write up a story, then you got to have another person edit, format, print, distribute, and sell the damn paper for $0.25. Advertising Space? Sure it pays; but not that much...

Mergers, acquisitions & RIFs; oh my!

The advent of the internet and television, coupled with impatient and short attention-spanned generations, has devastated newspapers.

Now I love the internet as much as the next porn-hungry, price-savvy, bored civil servant, but regardless of the sources of news you read on the internet, it's all pretty much recycled and repackaged from a newspaper. If you've ever watched the evening news on your local TV. station and vomited, don't worry it's a common reaction to newscasters. (hey, if you can't act or write, but you're moderately good looking and can read out loud well; you should be a local newscaster!) Regardless, the majority of news comes from newspapers.

CNN & MSNBC are starting to take matters into their own hands by having reporters out in the field, but they also still rely on the associated press for information. Your local paper probably has a few "local" writers; however, your local paper is probably owned by a large paper that takes care of the national and international news.

My point here is that although we all love the immediacy and diversity of the news we access online or on TV., newspaper companies are the big dawgs of news reporting. Unfortunately, newspapers are going bankrupt and are consuming each other to maintain profitability.

"Yo man, my paper broke down, can I get a dollar?"

For very obvious reasons the government can't subsidize the newspapers; so that's out! (if you're nodding your head, yet have no idea what I'm talking about; I want you to turn towards the nearest wall and pound your thick Neanderthal head against it...)

This begs the questions for the peoples:

Should we be concerned that there are fewer reporters and investigators bringing us the news? Wouldn't that lead to a fewer perspectives? Anyone see a problem with having a central "Wallmart" of news?

We've worked so hard for freedom of press, but what about the potential for abusing the power that the media has over the mindless lemmings of American society? How do we enforce a code of un-biased reporting? Is "un-biased" reporting even possible?

What's next? How can the newspaper companies evolve their business plans to not only adapt to new technology and attention spans, but still bring high quality information to the people?

Read, think, respond, and enjoy! Do it....no seriously, do it...

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as pooping!

Drugs: beyond Good and Evil...

2007-05-24T08:17:00.000-04:00

Howdy!

Let me begin by saying: "Damn those Red Wings!!" With all of the perpetually depressing attention targeted at the Motor City, Detroit needs all of the positive spin it can scrounge up, even if it is via professional sports; oh well, there's still hope for the Pistons...

I'm willing to bet that every one of you who is reading this (all two or three of you...) has some degree of prejudice influencing your perceptions of drugs. When I even mention the term "drugs," some of you may cringe, some may "whoop," and others may think "well, what kind?" That's just my point.

Attitudes have been groomed by a conflicting mix of information regarding the Social Acceptability and Impact of drugs. Today, I'm interested in exploring the nature of your attitudes towards drugs.

He said, she said....
Pharmaceutical Companies love drugs because they love money! Churches frown upon drugs because they're competition to the greatest drug of all: religion! The government decides what drugs are legal & illegal depending upon the number of votes and contributions of the aforementioned two groups!

In America, there's always three sides of the coin; two sides to oppose each other, and a third to profit from the struggle (can you guess which side the government plays for?)

Medicine
Pharmaceutical companies invest millions in the development of solutions to address the most marketable diseases and conditions so they can in turn market those solutions to both you and your doctor.

If we can make Bob Dole's penis hard, why can't we cure cancer?

Well my dear Watson, the solution is simple: cancer doesn't pay as much as a bunch of horny rich old men (that, and cancer is a bit more complicated... see, I'm a fair journalist...) Either way, I hate to break it to you, but the majority of medicinal drugs have the purpose of treating symptoms, NOT fixing the problems themselves.

Recreation.. NO RVs please...
People like to feel good. Nobody likes to feel bad; well, except for artists, and that's usually for purposes of creativity... People enjoy interacting with other people and having a nice buzz to boot; particularly if they don't really care for the people they're interacting with. Alcohol (legal) is the most prevalent social drug in the USA, immediately followed by marijuana (illegal). I'm not going to bother to try and cover the science that supports the fact that marijuana is less damaging to the human body than alcohol; if you don't believe me, try doing some research instead of listening to your high-school dropout guidance counselor. Noting the differences in legality between the top two drugs used for recreational purposes leads us to the third issue: government policy.

The political side of the coin...
Pharmaceutical companies give garbage trucks of money to lobby policy change in the United States. The stench of cheap wine from the right wing has influenced politicians with votes and spread "scientific" propaganda from monkeys who still debate the probability of evolution and existence of gravity. In turn, this has led to the ironic conflict between promoting "medicinal drugs" while waging a "war on drugs." America seems to have a knack for hypocrisy and ridiculous wars that can never be won.

My questions for you monkeys:

Should drug policy be based on practical analyses of the health/social benefits versus detriments associated with a particular drug, instead of dirty money & biased information from pharmaceuticals & collection baskets?

With all the money that the government pisses down the toilet on fighting the "war on drugs," wouldn't it make more sense to legalize and tax non-life-threatening drugs? We tax cigarettes, even though they have killed more people than Al Qaeda...

Is it really a good thing that we have returned erectile power to a bunch of old horny old men? I mean really.... come on.... that just scares the hell out of me above all else...

Do what y'all do and speak your mind...

All right, click the "comments" link below to read the responses of others, as well as share your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... it's as easy as avoiding taxes!

Best Friends: A Dying Breed

2006-07-03T09:14:00.000-04:00

Good Morning Friends!

Happy Pre-Independence Day!

A friend is “a person whom one knows, likes, and trusts.” (dictionary.com) However, I feel there’s a continuum of friendship that may range between an “acquaintance” to a “best friend”, based upon levels of identification, intimacy, and shared experience. For example, an “acquaintance” may be someone who you may have met a few times; you enjoy his/her company, and you think fondly of him/her. As opposed to a “best friend” who you may have known for an extended period of time, regard as a personal confidante, and feel that you have a significant psychological connection with as a result of shared experience and personal information exchange. Obviously there are many contexts and variables that come into play when determining where a friend may fall within a continuum of perceived levels of friendship. However, is it possible that social context and norms have made us more self-isolating & decreased the quality and number of our closest friends? Today, we’ll discuss some of the societal factors influencing the distance between us.

Growing Up
Childhood is the 18-year training ground where individuals learn how to relate to one another. Throughout childhood we develop patterns of communicating and identifying with other people, which in turn become the foundation of our strategies we use for the rest of our lives. In regards to learned patterns, I would posit that children who grow up in one location will usually have more intimate, stable, and longer lasting friendships than those children who have repeatedly moved from one set of friends to another throughout their childhood. I would also argue that friendships based upon face-to-face interaction are far superior relationships to learn about one another due to the multi-sensory information that one perceives & interprets (i.e. mannerisms, intonation, facial expressions, situational context, increased likelihood of candor, etc.) All individual differences aside, the main focus during childhood is the development of interpersonal identification and communication with other people; which later becomes the basis of our future strategies we utilize in communicating with our spouse, children, co-workers, community etc.

Growing Small
A recent study published in a sociology journal (http://www.asanet.org/galleries/default-file/June06ASRFeature.pdf) says that Americans polled in 2004 indicated that they have fewer confidantes, or close friends, than Americans polled in 1985. The study also indicated that confidantes in 2004 primarily consisted of family members and spouses, as opposed to “non-kin” friends, such as from childhood, work, school, etc. which have decreased significantly since 1985. It would not be unreasonable to associate the impact of this decrease in “non-kin” friendships with increased instances of depression & stress within the family and between couples, as well as has contributing to a decreased membership in civic duty & community organizations. Also, if our confidantes have decreased to just a couple of homogeneous family members, we may have restricted the diversity of perspectives we are privileged to in problem-solving and situational advice. Variables that may have contributed to this decline include increased time spent with technology (i.e. television, internet, video games etc.), as well as time spent with the nuclear family. These research findings indicate that Americans are becoming more isolated and comes during a time period of unparalleled living standard, where Americans are living longer, have more buying power, as well as more time to devote to leisure activities.

Cultural Breeding
Perhaps, increased personal isolation and increased personal gain, is not all that surprising from a country marked by individualism and individual capital gain. We seem to have become healthier economically & physically, but less personally satisfied & socially oriented. Our quick-fix mentality drives us to prescription drugs & self-medication to avoid the discomfort of isolation and materialistic emptiness. The establishment of civic duty and community are getting lost in the banter and moot argument of religious righteousness and control. Our United States may be more of a collective of competing organizations that breed detached individuals loyal only unto themselves and their immediate family. Young generations are growing up in an age of detached electronic mediums of communicating with one another, combined with a small, yet growing trend of home schooling education; could all be leading to less face-to-face interaction, communication, and perhaps empathy towards our fellow man.

My questions to you…

Have we lost the Art of Friendship, or is this just indicative of people moving towards a tighter knit family unit? Are our close “non-kin” friends being traded for surface-level acquaintances? Have we become so busy that we’ve lost the time and patience for quality “non-kin” friendship, or is it just becoming harder to find in our culture?

If we naturally migrate towards people similar to ourselves, is it surprising that our closest friends are not all that significantly different from us? Theoretically, there may be many benefits in having a truly diverse and heterogeneous group of best friends, but is it realistic? Are our "different-from-us" friends destined to be more distant?

What is to be done to promote more people to leave homogeneity and isolation, and develop their sense of Civic Duty & Community? Must we always rely on religion to establish & manipulate us into volunteering, or can we learn to understand that it’s just a necessary and important part of developing society?

Has technology contributed to the evolution, or dilution of friendship? Is it possible for the internet to help us find quality “non-kin” friendships, or is it restricted by a predominant attitude of anonymous & expendable online acquaintances?

All right, click the "comments" link right below to read the responses of others, as well as jot down your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... simple as lighting yourself on fire with illegal fireworks!

Righting Wrongs; Wrong?

2006-06-12T08:43:00.000-04:00

Greetings Earthlings!

It's been quite a while since the last edition of The Cubicle Chronicles. The reason for this delay in publication is mainly due to the unusual amount of work I've had to deal with at work; I know, it's like I have an actual job or something! While the increased volume of work is a positive note (I've got a couple cool projects going on & may finally get an upward market-based salary adjustment), my neglect of The Cubicle Chronicles has left me disappointed. Anyway, today I'd like to address a topic that is usually misunderstood, as well as either embraced or hated by many; Affirmative Action. Some good info: (http://www.infoplease.com/spot/affirmative1.html)

The Financial Success of the USA
The USA's infrastructure and economic success is based upon utilizing the lives of minorities and immigrants to create high output gains with minimal input costs; meaning, we used a lot of people as tools and equipment based on their race to become a very rich nation. How do you think the USA became such a powerhouse of manufacturing in such a short period of time? "Yes, " we are where we are today to a great extent because of slavery and the use of immigrants in low-paying and abusive labor conditions. Aren't we the ones who are the first to go to war with countries who do what we did to get rich? Yes. hypocritical? Yes. Do more Americans know who won the last American Idol contest than know American History? Unfortunately, Yes.

Why do we have Affirmative Action?
The abolition of slavery and "sanctioned" discrimination (1863 & 1964) were among the first steps of trying to establish equal rights. Let's think about those dates: 200+ years of slavery, then 100 years of sanctioned discrimination... and we think everyone is on the same playing field 40 some years later? President Johnson didn't think so either, because in 1965 he proposed Affirmative Action.

What is Affirmative Action?
It varies on the agency. Public agencies are required to develop, implement, and track Affirmative Action Plans & Statistics. Private sector is "encouraged" to adopt Equal Employment Opportunities, but is not required unless there's a discrimination lawsuit or court order; basically, in private sector you can do whatever you want until you get caught violating a Civil Rights Law via lawsuit.

Theorectically, the racial breakdown in an organization should be reflective of the racial breakdown of the surrounding population. This is why Affirmative Action is usually found in education and employment. The goal here is NOT to establish a "quota" system, or create an atmosphere of "reverse-discrimination", but to attempt to establish a "level playing field" in light of the hundreds of years of discrimination and inopportunity. For example, if two applicants are EQUALLY QUALIFIED, the minority applicant may be allowed to be weighted to the advantage.

How long does it take to establish "a level playing field?"
Affirmative Action is a temporary fix. It was created to level the playing field and was never meant to be permanent; so the question is, "when will we know that it is no longer needed?"

I leave you with a quote:

"You do not wipe away the scars of centuries by saying: 'now, you are free to go where you want, do as you desire, and choose the leaders you please.' You do not take a man who for years has been hobbled by chains, liberate him, bring him to the starting line of a race, saying, 'you are free to compete with all the others,' and still justly believe you have been completely fair . . . This is the next and more profound stage of the battle for civil rights. We seek not just freedom but opportunity—not just legal equity but human ability—not just equality as a right and a theory, but equality as a fact and as a result."
- Lyndon B. Johnson

The questions for the minds:
Do you feel that Affirmative Action is a good solution to promote equal opportunities to those who have been discriminated against in the past? If so/not, why?

Three hundred plus years of slavery & sanctioned discrimination encompass many generations of socialized prejudice; is it possible to re-socialize people to be less "racially" prejudice?

Which do you feel is more likely to occur:
1) Affirmative Action abolished because an equal playing field has been established

2) Affirmative Action abolished because of claims of "reverse-discrimination" by majority members

All right, click the "comments" link right below to read the responses of others, as well as jot down your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... simple as falling down after drinking large quantities of tequila!

Very Superstitious!!!!!

2006-05-05T07:37:00.000-04:00

Feliz Cinco de Mayo mis Monos!

Ahh, the fifth of May is upon us yet once again! Cinco de Mayo does NOT mark Mexico's independence from Spain as some may believe; that was September 15th, 1810. May 5th 1862 was the date when the Mexican army, with a little help from the Union & Confederate armies, whooped some French ass; despite the French army being twice as large as the Mexican. I relish in celebrating the courage and determination of the Mexican army whoopin Napolean's gang of tight-wearing cheese-smelling Frenchmen back in 1862; that, and I love having an excuse to drink mass quantities of tequila and Negra Modelo...but I digress. (http://www.vivacincodemayo.org/history.htm)

The topic today is "superstition"... basically, it's everywhere! Despite science and reason, people still cling to illogical and flat-out ridiculous beliefs. We're going to take a look at some "superstitions" and try and figure out why the hell they're still around. But first, what the hell is "superstition?" (besides a really good Stevie Wonder song!)

"Superstition"
1) An irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome.
2) A belief, practice, or rite irrationally maintained by ignorance of the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance.
3) A fearful or abject state of mind resulting from such ignorance or irrationality.
4) Idolatry.

Okay, we've got a definition, but where does "superstitious belief" come from?

Psychologically, I would say that it is a result of erroneous associations that have been created to protect the ego, provide emotional stability, and/or explain misunderstood phenomena. Superstitions are perpetuated by cultural influence and exasperated with lower levels of education and understanding of the true nature of how variables interact to produce outcomes.

Erroneous Association
Back in 1947, our good behaviorist buddy, B.F. Skinner, published a paper called "'Superstition' in the Pigeon" (Skinner, 1947). Without going into too much detail, Skinner hooked up a mechanism to deliver food at regular intervals throughout the day to a group of hungry pigeons. He found that the pigeons associated different variables & behaviors with the introduction of food even though there were no such associations other than a time interval. Basically, the pigeons performed ritualistic behaviors in front of the mechanism, which they erroneously associated with triggering the mechanism to deliver them food. (Note: Modern behaviorists dispute Skinner's explanation of his pigeons' behavior, but it still serves as a interesting launching point...)

Are we any better than a damn pigeon?

Prayer. Some may associate prayer with external events when there may not be a direct linkage. Studies on the effects of prayer have shown benefits to the individual praying in terms of emotional coping and satisfaction levels ; however, there has NOT been any evidence of a direct impact of prayer on external events.
Luck. I hate the phrases "good luck" & "bad luck" Luck is only apparent in retrospect; if things turn out to your benefit, then it's "good luck" or you're "lucky"; however, if things don't turn out the way you like, they it's "bad luck" or you're "unlucky". Luck is mistakenly perceived as a sort of personal attribute that is erroneously associated with situational outcomes; while reality-based circumstances, variables, and the actual probabilities of different outcomes are ignored.
Ghosts. Sure, Ghostbusters was an awesome movie, but you don't see me checking the ectoplasmic energy levels to make sure demon spawn doesn't tear through the dimensional fabric in my closet to devour my soul while I sleep! Humans are organic material built upon a complex foundation of random sub-particle energy. It's true that this energy is re-distributed following the organic "death" of a person; however, it is UNtrue that "personality" or any other personal attribute of a person survives to haunt you after their brain stops neurochemical-electrical activity.

I believe that Stevie Wonder summed it up well:

Very superstitious....Writing on the wall
Very superstitious....Ladder's 'bout to fall
Thirteen month old baby....Broke that looking glass
Seven years of bad luck....Good things in the past
When you believe in things that you don't understand
Then you suffer....Superstition ain't the way.

Very superstitious....Wash your face and hands
Rid me of the problem....Get all that you can
Keep me in a daydream....Keep me going strong
You don't want to save me....Sad is my song
When you believe in things that you don't understand
Then you suffer....Superstition ain't the way.

Very superstitious....Nothing more to say
Very superstitious....Devil's on his way
Thirteen month old baby....Broke that looking glass
Seven years of bad luck....Good things in the past
When you believe in things that you don't understand
You will suffer....Superstition ain't the way.

The questions for y'all:

Superstitions; quaint beliefs of the past that helped people cope with the ignorance of understanding the true nature of how things work, or is it sanctioned ignorance that is perpetuated by cultural acceptance?

What are some of your own superstitions, and how do they help you?

Is this Land "Your" Land?

2006-04-11T12:45:00.000-04:00

Good Afternoon,

Periodically, a movement surfaces and brings with it a wake of change. People become intoxicated with the emotion and idea of initiating change in the face of inequity. Many may jump on board a movement without necessarily understanding where, or what, they are moving towards. So it goes...

Dubya's immigration policy is under the gun of tens of thousand illegal and legal immigrants protesting and marching across the country. Many protesters are viewing this movement as the equivalent of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. However, I don't believe the recognition and disolution of sanctioned discrimination of a minority group that was forced to immigrate to the USA for slavery, is the same as the voluntary illegal immigration of a minority group for a better opportunity to succeed; but what do I know. Viva La Mexico!!!!

So what's it all about? What's all the hub-bub if we let people immigrate (legally or illegally) to work in the USA? Isn't the USA founded by immigrants? Today, we'll talk about this issue; the good, the bad, and the bullshit beliefs.

The Policy at Hand
11.1 million illegal immigrants came to the USA between 1980 and 2005; 40% of which arrived between 2000-2005. We have roughly 299 million people who live in this country, so that makes approximately 3.7% of our population illegal.

Dubya informed us that he would "support a comprehensive bill that would tighten border patrols, toughen the enforcement of laws outlawing employment of undocumented workers, and expand a temporary guest-worker program for both illegal immigrants and legal foreign workers seeking access to the U.S. labor market."

All the recent hub-bub is mainly because the House of Representatives just passed a bill that would make it a felony to work as an illegal immigrant, and would also contract the construction of a 698-mile wall along parts of the Mexican border. You know, you would think that in the 21st century, with all of our fancy electronic pacifiers and mind-numbing vices we could think of a better strategy than an old Chinese guy, Qin Shi Huangdi, who had a similar "Great" idea...

However, in all fairness, I do see that this initiative of "felonizing" illegal immigrants may be a precursor to pursuading them to join the programs (yet to be developed) that may let them work "legally", as well as how the great wall will help our Border Patrol set up kick-ass archers to stop the hoards of illegals from rushing the border! I'm so glad I vote!

The Economy is Falling!!!
Liberal Monkey = "Well, Mexican immigrants are the largest minority in the country and without them, the economy would collapse!"

Oh Dear Chicken Little (liberal?), you make such a intuitively intelligent argument, yet lack much foundation of actual reality!

"less than 5% of the nation's 148 million workers are illegal immigrants,
according to the Pew Hispanic Center. By one estimate, immigrants raise total
economic output by $21.5 billion Â equivalent to less than one day of extra
output each year. 'We know that the net benefit of immigration is very small,'
says George Borjas, an economist at Harvard University who specializes in the
subject."

Liberal Monkey = (rebuttal) "Oh yea? Well, what about all the tax money collected from illegal immigrants? They obviously aren't filing income tax, so the government can't complain about all that extra cash!"

Strike two my foolish friend! There isn't all that much "extra cash" just lining the pockets of the government...

"Experts dispute the cost to government of illegal immigrants. Between 55% and 65% of illegal migrants have income and Social Security taxes withheld from their pay, says Jeffrey Passel of the Pew Hispanic Center. Those who buy or rent homes also pay property taxes. In communities that impose sales taxes, they pay those, too. The Center for Immigration Studies, which seeks tighter immigration controls, says each illegal household costs the federal government $2,700 annually. But Passel says other estimates show a small net benefit to society."

The Work & The Workers
"Historically, the contributions of the Irish, Germans, Italians, Mexicans and other groups to the American edifice are essential elements of the national belief system. Immigrants labored, often under harsh conditions, in New England paper mills, Midwestern steel plants and along the transcontinental railroads."

Not suprisingly, illegal immigrants aren't "stealing" the same jobs that you and your fellow college peers are competing. However, they are heating up the competition for lower-level jobs that your run of the mill uneducated and unskilled American usually complains about working. The number of unskilled Americans in the workforce are falling as the number of immigrants in the lower-level workforce rises. The following are the industries that immigrants are finding themselves:

21% - Service
19% - Construction
15% - Production, Installation, Repair
12% - Sales, administrative support
10% - Management, business, professional
8% - Transportation, material moving
4% - Farming

Okay, so if the immigrants aren't getting these dream jobs, but obviously better than what they had before; and if the government isn't benefiting from all of the "extra cash" from illegals not filing their income taxes; and the economy isn't getting a huge boost from immigrants; then who's benefiting?

The Rich Get Richer
"Borjas estimates that workers lose $278 billion because of immigration, while employers gain $300 billion. 'There's a huge redistribution away from workers to people who use immigrants. ... That's what people are arguing about,' says Borjas, an immigration specialist."

No shit! The businesses that employ illegal immigrants for cheap labor who won't complain about less than ideal working conditions is making a killing. Yet we are building a "Great Wall of Dubya" and making illegal immigrants felons? Is this really one of the rewards of a capitalistic society?

Questions for your mind to chew on...

First of all, should we even give a shit what 3.7% of illegal immigrants have to say about USA laws or policies?
Afterall, they technically don't have many rights in this country, as they aren't even "legal" citizens! Could they have already caught the inappreciativee sense of deservingness" mentality of the fat, lazy, self-righteous American people? Quick learners, they are....

Do you feel there is any point of making illegal immigrants "felons"?
They're here "illegally" in the first place.... Aren't we pointing the finger at the wrong "evil-doer"? Shouldn't we follow breadcrumb money trail to see who is really to profit from illegal immigrants?.... that would be the "businesses that employ the illegal immigrants" for those of you with severe ADD...

Do any of you have any border security strategies that could perhaps be more effective than the "Great Wall of Dubya?"
Granted, Dubywa is looking to "tighten border patrols, toughen the enforcement of laws outlawing employment of undocumented workers, and expand a temporary guest-worker program for both illegal immigrants and legal foreign workers seeking access to the U.S. labor market." But what do you think would be most effective, as well as WORK?

You know how we do what we do...

All right, click the "comments" link right below to read the responses of others, as well as jot down your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... simple as doing the cabbage patch!

One of my sources: http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2006-04-10-immigrants-economic-impact_x.htm?csp=34

How many Hitlers does it take...

2006-04-06T07:40:00.000-04:00

Shalom!

I would not consider myself a "history buff" in the least. However, I have been fortunate/unfortunate enough in possessing the propensity for understanding the world around me; a nagging curiosity that would have otherwise killed me if I were the proverbial "cat".

With that said, let me just pre-cursor this entry with the fact that I do not have a vast knowledge of the events between WWI and WWII, and that "Adolph Hitler was an extremist obsessed with an unrealistic idealism that lacked a very good foundation of logical reasoning to support it."

However, my focus today is mainly upon one man, his message, the cultural climate that fostered his rise and fall, and the fact that his reincarnation is not only a possibility, but a likelihood.

The Climate
In the vein of Sofia from "Golden Girls"; "Picture it.. Germany, post WWI...." The country is in shambles. WWI for lack of a better term, "whooped that trick!" The German people are poor, defeated, and without hope or inspirational leadership. People are thirsting for someone who can give them an answer to their despair and provide them with light and leadership to rebuilding the future.

The Man
Adolf Hitler always fancied himself an artist. He was a painter and dabbled as an architect, but was rejected from the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna. His desire for designing fashion and aestheticism would have made him a great cast member of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"; but most likely it would have been called something else, like "Crazy Eye for killing Queer Guys", or something to that extent.

Throughout his life, Adolph was raised a Catholic (where some claim, it was the Jew that turned against Jesus...yadda yadda yadda) and anti-semitic influences from Richard Wagner (a musical composer who was idolized by Hitler), Lanz von Liebenfels, Karl Lueger among others who targeted the Jewish people as scapegoats to their own economic or societal problems. Anyway, without getting too far into the psychological profile of the man, Hitler dropped out of school at 16, lost both of his parents by 21, was rejected from his dream of attending the Vienna Academy of Art, lived the life of the starving artist, and then enlisted into the military when Germany entered WWI.

First Stab at Power:
Post WWI Adolph began to instrumentally work his way into power and became Fuhrer of the Nazi Party, otherwise known as the "National Socialist German Workers Party". Developing his oratory skills and mimicking fascist strategies of Mussolini, Hitler tried to overthrow the German government in 1923; however, some of his supporters turned against him, he was left out to dry, accused of high treason and the government "whooped that trick!"

Second Time's a charm?
After Hitler served less than 1 year of his 5 year sentence, because the courts regarded him as relatively "harmless" after listening to his influential Nationalist ramblings, he worked to re-build the Nazi Party again, but this time with a little longer of a timeline. He built a top-down dictatorship and surrounded himself with "yes men", while hounding on Nationalist ideals that denounced the previously mentioned climate of Germany. After some work and finagling, Adolph finally gained power over Germany in 1933 following the impact of the Great Depression and worked to embeded Nazi party members into every aspect of government and social influence.

The Message
In a nutshell, Hitler's agenda was to re-build a greater and more Utopian Germany. He worked to sell Germans on the ideal of creating a "hygienic society" where art, family, education, and lifestyle are "pure". He believed that man has transcended natural selection by allowing "degenerates" to live. "Degenerates" included the mentally/physically handicapped, homosexuals, and you guessed it.... the Jews!!!! He utilized a huge propaganda initiative including operas, pamphlets, movies, etc. illustrating how these "degenerates" are at the root of all of German, and the world's problems. He promoted the necessity of Euthanasia and Eugenics strategies for "cleansing" Germany, because he believed that the "idiots are taking over" and that by the 1980s (50 years later) that 1 in every 4 people would be defective.

Okay, now that I feel like I've written a short essay (granted, an abridged one), I have some questions for y'all:

What do you think is the formula between cultural conditions and personal characteristics for the incarnation of a "Hitler"?
Granted, I don't have a formula for how a "Hitler" can happen, all I know is that it does, and continues to happen. Look at the Middle East, basically throughout all of Africa, Yugoslavia, etc. How does it happen?

Is ethnic cleansing and the majority of our wars just expressions of human nature that will never go away?
Our last chronicle was on evolution of belief and talked about how people need to make sense of things... given that, have we evolved at all from the times of virgin sacrifice? Isn't it silly to believe that a particular race or belief of certain people is the root of all of our problems and by sacrificing that group, our societies will be utopian?

Do you feel that Hitler was an idealist who had a few good ideas, but just one fucked up methodology of initiating change and development? Hey, I like to throw gasoline on the fire....

All right, click the "comments" link right below to read the responses of others, as well as jot down your own responses. "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... simple as drinking water when you're really thirsty!

I'm going to grab another cup of SUMATRA!!!

Evolving Understanding

2006-03-23T07:34:00.000-05:00

Buenos Dias Mis Monos!

I've heard people say that there is "...no point in trying to understand the world around us because the complexities are beyond our comprehension." To that I would respond, "you're correct...if you don't see the point, there is none..." However, I would argue that the pursuit of understanding is innate, necessary, and is a product of millions of years of evolution.

There are as many approaches to understanding the world around us as there are people to try to understand it. People may use theism, science, philosophy, religion, spirituality, or introspection (to name just a few) to help them conceptualize and understand their world. I know what you're thinking, "oh great, here comes another anti-organized religion spiel..." Well, first of all, I'm not going to talk about religion.

Religion = An institutionalized set of beliefs, values, and practices grounded in and holding reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe or any part therein.

Religion is too big to dissect in one Cubicle Chronicle; rather, today we'll address the psychological reasons for man's eternal pursuit of understanding; particularly, I will talk about the evolutionary-psychological basis of why mankind is obsessed with understanding and making sense of things, as well as the inherent flaw in our own conceptualization and mental processes of the external world.

Cognitive Evolutionary basis:

An advantage that we have over many other species is our developed cerebral cortex, which among other things, is responsible for our problem-solving ability. A well-developed cerebral cortex evolved because it enabled us to adapt to our environments through problem-solving and developing survival solutions. Basically, the main bi-product was an inherent drive and skill in "figuring things out".

One of the first methods humans developed for the explanation of the purpose and function of things that occur in the natural world was the conceptualization of supernatural. However, with the formalization of scientific methodology, our understanding of how things work in the natural world has exponentially increased. Supernatural and scientific explanation are thus two approaches we've developed to understanding the world around us. However, not many people attribute the creation of fire or disease to that of "supernatural causes" as they once did.

Does that mean science is being deemed a more credible approach to understanding the world?

If this were true, then we would find that the level and amount of scientific knowledge and understanding of how things work would be inversely related to the frequency and pervasiveness of supernatural explanation. In simple terms, "the more you learn and understand about the natural world, the less you use supernatural explanation."

Emotional Evolutionary basis:

In order to function in daily life we require a way of dealing with our vast range of emotions. Attributing negative natural events to supernatural causes may have been an emotionally adaptive way of dealing with ambiguity, purpose, and understanding; this was adaptive because it may have helped a person deal with stress & anxiety by believing in "life after death", "a higher purpose", or "someone is watching over me" so they could overcome survival hardships with a sense of "hope" & "promise". Along with evolved cognition, self-awareness, and emotional range, the sense of "hope" may be a bi-product that helps one cope with the complex emotions of the human mind.

Dualistic Tendencies:

According to Bering (2002), children seem to separate the death of the body and the existence of experience. Bering found that the younger the child, the more likely the child to believe, although something has died, it still may "have opinions, attitudes, feelings, or experiences."

For example: ask a young child what happens when an animal dies and they'll most likely tell you it is dead and "doesn't need to eat or drink"; but ask the child if the animal "still loves its mother", and they'll most likely say "yes")

So even before the brainwashing of "life beyond death", we are naturally inclined to separate the physiological body from the psychic nature of mind. In fact it's most likely this natural tendency to separate the mind and body that is the foundation of the "life beyond death" paradigm. This "dualistic belief" that distinguishes mind from body can be found even in adults, perhaps you can catch yourself believing them...

With that said, based upon the research in areas of psychology and neuroscience, the mind is a "product" of the brain. No brain = no mind = no memories = no feeling. Granted, research is still trying figure out some of the linkages between physiological measurements and abstract phenomena like thought, so I'm not going to go on and try to explain how the brain processes sensory information, creates memories, and how the different areas of the brain the collectively work to "git er dun", because A) it would take volumes, and B) I can't explain the every intimate process because it goes beyond my knowledge in the field.

My questions to the minds...

Do you believe that a belief in the supernatural is adaptive in modern society? Why or why not?

If you take away the supernatural, what would be an alternative way of fulfilling our needs for "hope" and "stability"?

Do you believe there can ever be a balance between the emotional and cognitive aspects of our minds? And if so/not, does it even matter?

All right, click the "comments" link right below to read the responses of others, as well as jot down your own responses. Oh, and "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... simple as eating really ridiculously good looking pie!

I'm going to need coffee and then a sedative to make it through today!!!!

Your Shrinking Path of Life

2006-03-20T08:39:00.000-05:00

Good Morning Scholars!

When I was little my mommy told me I "could be whatever I want to be, as long as I work hard and go to school." I'm willing to bet that most parents utilize this same "the sky's the limit" motivational tactic. However, is it actually true? I would argue that "it depends."

"No shit." you say. "What about the quality of education, financial opportunity, individual differences in intelligence and personality, as well as social networking and values?"

Oh, your points are indeed very good, and believe me you're preaching to the choir. No my friends, my query today is much more relevant to your own adult life. You see, part of my perspective today is that time and experience are the nails hammered into the coffin of that "the sky's the limit" ideal.

Who you are today dictates your potential for tomorrow.

In our youth we dreamt of what we could do and who we could be, and we had many paths of education and opportunity yet to explore. In the formative period of our lives we are obsessed with planning who we'll be and what will happen in the future. This formative period may vary depending upon your education, work experience and various other factors so the age range could be anywhere between let's say "16 to 26".

However, as we get older our options are fewer; we choose a field of study and work, we have increased financial, relationship and familial responsibilities, our capacity to learn reduces, our physical abilities decrease, etc. In essence our options for the future decrease as we become pigeon-holed into what we have become. As a result, we transition from a "idealistic" orientation to a "reality" orientation. Young people tend to talk about the future and older people tend to talk about the past. This shift in perspective makes perfect sense since as youths we have a longer period of life yet to be lived, as opposed to when we get older, we have fewer years (unless you're immortal, then you're all set...)

"Oh Don, don't be such a fucking pessimist, isn't who we are now who we wanted to become? And besides, we could always change careers by going back to school, right?"

The better question would be "is who you are now, who you want to be?" and if not, "what can you do about it?" The future is written by what you have done and are doing right now!

What the fuck are you waiting for?

To address the second question....Well, assuming your financial and familial responsibilities are relatively low, and that you are accepted into the program of study that you're interested in (assuming education is required for your career change), bust out your degree in 2-4 years (depending how many prior credits are accepted), and then can find a job in your new field without any experience, then "sure you can do it." Not to be a dick, but my bet is that your success is unlikely unless you have nothing to lose or the transition career is not vastly different than your current career.

Anyway, here are my questions:

Who are you right now?
All this talk of "who you want to become" and "who you could be" begs the question, "What does 'you' consist of?" In your eyes; are you a profession, belief system, a collective of personality traits, that mythical creation of the "soul"? What are your perceptions of who you believe you are, or do you believe you are nothing more than a collective of matter and experience?

Regardless of who you are, isn't the point of life the actual journey?
Whether or not you are happy with where you are in life, isn't the true value found in experiencing the challenging journey towards your dreams, no matter where or what direction they lead you?

Anyone with a desire, or in the process of changing careers?
What are you doing to transition? When do you expect to complete that transition? What do you hope to gain from the career change for yourself?

All right, click the "comments" link right below to read the responses of others, as well as jot down your own responses. Oh, and "NO" you don't have to be a member of Blogger to put in your $0.02; Just select "Other" for your identity, type in your name, and post your comments... that's it.... simple as eating really ridiculously good looking pie!

I'm going back for more Lemon Zinger!

The Origins of "The Cube"...

2006-03-10T09:36:00.000-05:00

Top of the Morning to you!

Are you plugged in? Are you just another component of the electrical circuitry of industry? Slouched in an ergonomic office chair, hands lain upon the keyboard alter, your eyes staring at the electrically stimulated liquid crystal display that transfers images of your input... A complete circuit leading from thought, to keyboard input, to a flat-screen monitor, and back to you for interpretation and response; some mutant human-computer hybrid circuit from 9am to 5pm.

Ahhh, the joys and fulfillment of being apart of the professional world...

Perhaps the greatest poster-child of the monotonous routine imprisonment of the information age is the "cubicle".

But where did it come from? Was the cubicle discovered by anthropologists studying our ancestors that tirelessly sat upon linearly-arranged stumps while they skinned animals and prepared meat for 8 hours a day under the mission statement of their Alpha Male? Perhaps Area 51 had something to do with the discovery of such an efficient solution for the modern day office?

Today we're talking about the origins of the cubicle in the workplace, its current impact, and the future of our fabric-walled holding cells.

A Brief History of the Cubicle: (http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/09/magazines/fortune/cubicle_howiwork_fortune/index.htm?cnn=yes)

In the late 60's Robert Propst, who at the time was the Director of Research for Herman Miller (cool furniture), had an idea to create a workspace that he felt would revolutionize productivity; he simply called it the "Action Office"
The Action Office "included plenty of work surfaces and display shelves; partitions were a part of it, intended to provide privacy and places to pin up works in process. It even included varying desk levels to enable employees to work part of the time standing up, thereby encouraging blood flow and staving off exhaustion."
Economic factors in the late 60's such as rising real estate and building reconfiguration costs, as well as depreciation rates of office furniture, shifted demand towards "a cheap way to pack workers in"
As a result, Bob Propst's innovative idea of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the worker was traded for the efficiency of packing workers into a limited space.
The Action Office continually was twiddled down to basic space-conscious "systems furniture", or furniture that was basic, connectable, interchangeable, and space efficient; the birth of "The Cube"!
Since 1970, there have been challengers to the mighty Cubicle, but none that have been as economically viable and spatially frugal.

Will the Cube continue its reign as the dominating super-power of office space furniture solutions?

Congressman Frank Wolf (much to my "shit my pants" surprise is a "Republican") is on a mission to dissolve the power held by the mighty Cube and has made telecommuting his pet project.

"'There is nothing magic in strapping ourselves into a metal box every day only to drive to an office where we sit behind a desk working on a computer,' he told a congressional committee. Wolf sees telecommuting as a way to decrease traffic, reduce air pollution, increase productivity, and frustrate terrorists. In 2004 he launched a campaign to penalize government agencies by docking funds if they
fail to support telecommuting. Now the SEC, the State Department, the Department of Justice, and four other big agencies are required to offer every eligible worker the opportunity to telecommute."

Let's take a look at some Pros & Cons to the reduction or elimination of the "Cube":

Pros:

Lower real estate costs for organizations
Lower expenses of commuting for employees
Potential for better "life/work" balance for employees
More autonomy and perhaps job satisfaction for employees

Cons:

Less observable supervision of employees
Higher opportunity for loafing
Information security risk of mobile workstations & wireless internet
Less interpersonal contact with co-workers (technically, could be a pro or con, depending whether you love or hate your co-workers; but we'll consider it impediment to communication & information exchange, unless Instant Messenger software is used)

I ask you all, cube dwellers and free birds alike, the following:

What are your thoughts on the evolution of the solutions to Office Space? Will the Cube be replaced, or will mobile work stations only be a viable solution for certain industries, positions, and persons? What other possibilities could be used in the workplace as alternatives?

What are some factors that we need to take into consideration when asked "to Cube" or "Not to Cube"? Will fewer face-to-face interpersonal interactions impact the way we relate to each other and our work? Will it further our isolation as the internet and computer have already influenced our society? What are some other Pros & Cons?

Would you be willing or able to switch to the mobile workstation solution in your current position? Why or why not?

Okay, click on the comments below, read, think, and spit some opinions...

This chimp is out!

Science in Scientology?

2006-03-01T11:05:00.000-05:00

Good-Day Mates!

I live in Ybor City. A couple blocks away from my humble home is "Centro Ybor", an entertainment complex that houses fashionable clothing stores, a selection of restaurants and bars, a movie complex, as well as many other little "entertaining" venues. One inconspicuous neighbor of the complex is the "Scientology Workshop". The employees of this little workshop can be seen gallivanting around the streets of Ybor offering free personality tests if you but follow them back to their burrow of knowledge. Being a person trained in psychology and measurement, I will not address the validity or integrity of these "personality tests" that these individuals are dispensing because I intend to continue to be in a sociable mood today. However, I believe the better inquiry would be, "what is Scientology?" and "what does it have to do with science and religion?"

Scientology Roots
Before Tom Cruise and the other morons of the entertainment industry began touting the miracles of Scientology, the movement began in 1950 with a man named L. Ron Hubbard and his book "Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health" . From the information that I've gathered (http://www.lronhubbardprofile.org/index.htm), (http://www.scientology.org/), & (http://www.scientologytoday.org) it seems as though Mr. Hubbard was a good-intentioned, intelligent, insightful and influential man; however, he is not the subject of evaluation today.

Scientology Beliefs

"Scientology is the study and handling of the spirit in
relationship to itself, others and all of life. The Scientology religion
comprises a body of knowledge extending from certain fundamental truths. Prime among these:

Man is an immortal, spiritual being. His experience extends well beyond a single lifetime. His capabilities are unlimited, even if not presently realized — and those capabilities can be realized. He is able to not only solve his own problems, accomplish his goals and gain lasting happiness, but also achieve new, higher states of awareness and ability."

Awwwww, isn't that sweet, warm and fuzzy? It gets better.... There are "8 Dynamics (urge, drive, or impulse)":

8th Dynamic: Infinity - also commonly called "God", the supreme being or creator.
7th Dynamic: Spiritual - anything spiritual with or without identity, life source
6th Dynamic: Physical Universe - with its four components of matter, energy, space and time.
5th Dynamic: Life Forms - Including all plant and animal life.
4th Dynamic: Mankind - as a species
3rd Dynamic: Group Survival - whether friends, a club, company, nation or race.
2nd Dynamic: Family and children and all other creativity.
1st Dynamic: Self - the individual, including his body, mind and immediate possessions.

"Through Scientology, a person realizes that his life and influence extend far beyond himself. By understanding each of these dynamics and their relationship, one to the other, he is able to do so, and thus increase survival on all of these dynamics."

The "pseudo-Science" of Scientology
They go on to talk about their creation of the "Tone Scale" which basically is a linear scale from 0 to 40, where 0 is "Body Death" and 40 is "Serenity of Beingness". The scale is in no apparent interval, nor are the points in any particular type of measurement (i.e. behaviors, feelings, classifications, perceptions, etc. are all on the scale; For those unaware of metrics, when something is a linear scale, the points on the scale should be indicative of degrees of different intensity or amount of a common variable, not a bargain bin full of different varibles on one scale).

Following their insightful "Tone Scale", they go on to explain how they frown upon the use of drugs and that those who use them must go through "The Purification Rundown". You see, according to these experts, the residue of drugs are stored in the fatty tissues of the body (some, but not all drug residue is stored in fat cells; but what does science know), and that exercise,vitamins, and sweating should be used to "purify" the body of all its toxins.

The "E-Meter", or "Electropsychometer", claims to "measure the mental state or change of state of a person, helping the auditor (idiot listening & reflecting in the psuedo "patient-counselor" session) locate areas of spiritual distress or travail so they can be addressed and handled in a session.

Conclusion
Scientology can be summed up by the flaky unrealistic nature of their aim:

"A civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights, are the aims of Scientology."

My questions to you:

Do you think our Scientologist friends are trying to bait people in with the illusion of "scientific credibility" to their obvious "spiritual" guide to living?

What is your perspective on Scientology in comparison to other religions? Do you see Scientology as part of a religious evolution from "sun gods" to more of a "personal spirituality"?

Where the fuck is the science that supports some of their "assumptions" and ideas such as the "8 Dynamics", "Tone Scale" and "E-Meter"?

For those not in the "know" click the comments link right below to read and share your perspectives on this; I really hope Tom Cruise logs in and explains why he freaked out on Oprah, as well as how he bagged Katie Holmes!!!

Intelligence? What's that?

2006-02-23T11:46:00.000-05:00

Nanoo-Nanoo!

I'm willing to bet that you've met somebody who's "intelligent"; hell, you probably consider yourself at least of average intelligence. But, what is it about them or yourself that you perceive as "intelligent"? To kick it up a notch, what the hell is "intelligence"?

Is it knowledge of facts or concepts? Isn't that just exposure, memorization, and regurgitation?
Is it their analytical ability in dissecting concepts? Isn't that learned through training, particularly in higher education and science?
Is it their ability to think "outside the box"? Isn't that someone who may conceptualize things differently than the majority of people?
Is it an Intelligent Quotient Score (IQ)? Isn't that just based upon cultural norms of verbal, analytical and quantitative skills relative to a persons age group?

I would argue that one's intelligence potential is beyond the bag of genes you're given, which in themselves vary person to person, but also includes environment and experience into the complicated equation. I concede that perhaps, biological and genetic factors may "lower the ceiling" of possibilities (i.e. being mentally disabled, pre-birth nutritional & chemical factors etc.); however, I would maintain that environmental and experiential factors play a significant role in developing a person's intelligence.

Don's (current) Conceptualization of Intelligence:

Intellectual Capital (foundation of logic/reason/creativity)- this is a complicated equation of cognitive processing factors; including the potential speed & capability with which one processes different types of information, as well as assimilates and accommodates that information into their knowledge-base. This is not only a capacity to "intake" information, but also to "process" and "utilize" that information. Factors that may impact the potential of this capital: may be pre and post birth nutrition & chemical exposure, parental genetics in regards to rate of cognitive development, socialized value of intellectual stimulation, and environmental stimulation level and opportunity to expand and further intellectual development.

Do you believe in such a thing as "intelligence", and if so, what is your conceptualization of "intelligence"?

Is intelligence something that is static, or is it something that may evolve over time?

Does intelligence really matter? What's the value?

And the magical question, "Can Intelligence be measured?"

You know how we kick it; hit us with your mad wisdom mon!

Democracy or hypocrisy?

2006-02-14T09:53:00.000-05:00

Monin'!

The U.S. government never ceases to amaze me with how far they're willing to go to make the world hate them; well, at least the "non-Christian" world.

Well, just to give you a brief history since WWII (World War Two, for the extremely stupid), I will require the assistance of those fancy yellow bullets Dan loves so much:

WWII ends. Britain controls the area that is now known as "Israel" & "Palestine". The British promised both the Israelis and the Palestinians their own country. Obviously this area holds significant religious history and value for both groups. As a result, the British give the Israelis about 60% of the land and 40% to the Palestinians (Gaza & the West Bank, two smaller areas separated by Israeli land); Bethlehem & Jerusalem are considered "International Territory" for the two kids to play nice in.
However, there was disagreement by Palestinians as to the division and borders. Since no one gave a shit (Israel & Britain), they decided to revolt. Some countries, who I won't name or mention that they are red, white, and blue, funded and supported the Israelis and gave them the weaponry & training to build one best armies in the world.
The Palestinian revolt ended up with them being slaughtered by the Israelis in a day or so. Not only did they get their asses beat, but the Israelis decided to take some of the Palestinian land and literally, uprooted and forced Palestinians to move to concentration camps (not quite as bad as those camps that Hitler forced Jews to go to in WWII; just think really poor gated-off ghetto). Israel at this point is up to about 75% of the land in the area and uses its military to govern the roadways to and from Palestinian areas; performing "at will" searches of anyone who is Palestinian.
In the 90's, the other Arabic brothers such as Iran, Syria, etc., said "Hey, why you being so messed up to the Palestinian people, they're our Arabic brothers! Stop or we're going to beat you up!"
Israel beat their asses pretty easily once again (and once again with some western Christian help). This furthered the shitty conditions for the Palestinians, which helped fuel the sales pitch by extremists to hate the Jews and Christian countries like the Britain and the U.S. More terrorist attacks against Israelis occur as a result & continual attempts at negotiation end in frustration.
Recently, as a result of negotiations to re-establish a Palestinian state, the Israeli army has withdrawn its troops, as well as uprooted Israeli immigrants from Palestinian land. Also, Palestine was allowed to have its first Democratic election!
However, the party that the Palestinian people elected is Hamas; a group that has publicly stated that it hates Israel & the mentioned Christian countries. (I wonder how someone could win with that platform given the history?)

And here we are today; "U.S. and Israelis Are Said to Talk of Hamas Ouster" ( http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/14/international/middleeast/14cnd-mideast.html?hp&ex=1139979600&en=72330403b4aa5c56&ei=5094&partner=homepage )

WHAT THE FUCK?

Let me get this straight, a country is allowed to have a free election, but if the outcome isn't what we like, we're going to cut them off from trade and economically starve the citizens of the country until they start to hate who they've elected?

Okay, Hamas hates the U.S. and Israel, and will probably grow a militia to defend itself and potentially invade Israel; but isn't that the "normal way" that nations are made?

Also, "yes", the U.S. has the right to withdraw any trade or backing to a country that may be a potential enemy; but by doing so, aren't we alienating the people who we supposedly say we're trying to help within the country?

I think this is a difficult situation:

On one side of things, we don't want to fund a developing country where the elected politicians dislike us and potentially will use our resources that we provide them against us.
On the other, by alienating the citizens of the country, we re-enforce the sales pitch by those extremists that we do not want the Muslims to succeed; furthering the potential for low-budget extremist measures (i.e. TERRORISM!)

There are ethical & ideological issues here.

Do we help the citizens of a developing country, who we have helped dick over in the past, develop the education and economic stability to evolve beyond the past?
Also, aren't we unraveling the ideological threads of democracy by condemning and discrediting the results of a free-election because our "favored" political party did not win? Isn't the point of the election process so that the people can elect a party that represents the opinion of the people; even though that opinion may be that the U.S. & Israel are bastards?

What do yall think about this issue?

If you were president (unlikely unless you were a "C" student at an Ivy league school), what would you do?

Put your thinking caps on and hit us with some mad enlightenment!

Church of the Union Address

2006-02-01T10:06:00.000-05:00

Good Morning Fellow Americans!

Last night I was witness to the State of the Union Address by our President. Having been subjected to the psychological scarring of going to Catholic School until the 5th grade, I'm quite familiar with the rituals of Church; you sit, stand, kneel, sit, pray, kneel, stand, eat a wafer, drink some grape juice, stand, kneel, sit, etc. It's sort of the calisthenics for the big delusion in the sky!

Last night's speech reminded me a lot of church in that there was talk about good & evil, answers to the world's problems, some generic truths, and of course let us not forget; lot's of bullshit....

In a nutshell, this is what the President talked about (Bush paraphrased by yours truly):

I. National Security

Who cares that we entered Iraq with inaccurate information, ulterior motives, and without much global support; we need to just suck it up and support the troops who are risking their lives to establish our democratic colony in Iraq; there's no use crying over my old hasty decisions, let's move forward with unity!
Hey Iran, don't use efficient power sources such as Nuclear power or we're going to blow your ass away after we're done with Iraq! Try me bitches!
I've taken my executive powers and established the Terrorist Telephone Watch; we will monitor any US international phone calls that are to suspected Al Queda members or associates. So all you ARABS, don't phone home!
I'm encouraging congress to extend the Patriot Act; pretty please?

II. Taxes/Economy/Energy

I will save yall money by continuing tax cuts, eliminating 140 programs that aren't working (how many did Bush create?), increase grants/funding for alternative energy research by 22%, as well as paying for the war in Iraq (and soon to be, Iran). I'll do all this and cut the deficit in half by 2009; and if you buy now, I've got some prime vacation land out in Death Valley that I'd like to sell you too!
I'm also going to increase education monies for science & mathematics; we want creativity in the form of technological innovation... fuck education in art, philosophy, and anything that does not contribute to the GNP; I mean, that ethical & emotional crap is what religion is for, right?
We want more research in alternative fuels & technology such as solar, wind, and nuclear (Iran can't git nun?), so that we replace 75% of our oil imports by 2025. (While we're at it, why come we don't dig up some of that good ole oil up in Alaska, I mean, it's just a stupid environmental preserve? Hey, wait a minute, that wouldn't count as "imported" oil would it?)

III. Healthcare

I'm going to pressure insurance companies to compete, as well as promote Health Savings Plans that you can take with you from low-paying job to low-paying job.
I believe in all life as having an equal right to liberty and living (sure....yea...), I believe every life is special and should be protected (uh huh....where are we going here?).....So I'm asking congress to ban ALL cloning and embryonic research in all forms (ahh, there it is! Fucker...)
I am re-instated the Ryan White Act to end the medication wait for AIDS patients (more money to pharmaceutical companies? see "economy" spending section above...do the math... cut the deficit in half by 2009? Was accounting required at Yale?)

Now, it is only fair that I evaluate the Democratic Response that followed the President's sermon....

Tim Kane gave the democrats' response (a democrat who was elected senator in the highly republican state of Virginia. How you ask? Oh, he ran on the platform that he was a minister and believed in family values and God. DAMN! So that's how you convince a bunch of gun-toting, redneck, born-again Christian morons that you're on their side!)

Transcripts from Don's Living Room:

Tim Kane: "There's a better way..."

Don: "Oh yea?"

Tim Kane: "There is a better way..."

Don: "Uh huh...."

Tim Kane: "There's a better way...."

Don: "Hit me with it Timmy!"

Tim Kane: "There is absolutely a better way..."

Don: "What is it man?! What is the better way?!"

Tim Kane: "As politicians, we need to be service-oriented, be accountable for our results, and continue to light the way of liberty!"

Don: "You're a fucking moron...."

So, in a nutshell, that's what happened.

If you saw the Church of the Union Address, what are your thoughts on the sermons?

If you didn't see it, you're a shitty American, but share your thoughts anyway!

Do it!

Home-Le$$-Ness

2006-01-20T08:59:00.000-05:00

Good Morning Fortunate Ones!

If you're reading this, you're probably pretty fortunate...

Think about it. You're educated enough to read, you have access to a computer, and better yet, the internet....and I'm willing to bet you even have a place to live and perhaps a job.... (well, except Leslie...jk) I guess we may sometimes forget, or blatantly don't give a shit, that we are more fortunate than others.

If you live near or in a city, you've probably been introduced to the homeless. Homeless people are a diverse bunch, that for one dozen reasons or another, can't afford a place to live, don't have a source of income other than pan-handling, and usually have a strange pungent odor.

Two major factors that I think contribute to homelessness:

1. Mental Illness - ever wonder why that homeless guy down the street is mumbling to himself, twitches, and has emotional outbursts followed by periods of silently staring into space? Well, one of the largest contributors to homelessness is the closing of mental facilities or releasing of patients due to budgetary reasons; FYI: most released/kicked out mentally ill patients don't get their engineering or MBA degrees and then contribute to the corporate infrastructure, nor have they developed the skills to adapt to that environment; thus business people who have the money to help, don't give a shit about them.

2. Poor Shitty Family: Perhaps homeless Tom grew up in poverty. Mommy & daddy were stupid losers, which further explained why they would give birth to a child given their financial & social situation, as well as not providing that child the stability and education they needed to adapt to the outside world. The child grew up with the wrong crowd without education or guidance, and then found that they could not make it in the workplace because of emotional, disciplinary, or education-related reasons.

It seems as though people have a problem with homelessness and choose to ignore it or just feed a bum some change when they are bothered. Out of sight, out of mind; just don't bother me while I'm drinking my caramel non-fat Machiato...

As a capitalistic society, we pretty much say "tough luck, get a job, and fuck off". However, this contradicts our silly "Christian-based" and socialist inspired "everyone should be happy" ideals. Should we give a shit? Should we give help? Should we give money?

I believe that you are a selfish prick if you give a homeless person ANY money.

You're not helping; you're just buying your way out of an uncomfortable situation and/or guilt, in efforts to feel like you're Mother Theresa. If you really wanted to make an impact, you'd give him an education.... you'd give him clothing... you'd give him something to eat or nourishment.... you'd give him a job... or you'd give the money to somebody who could provide him with those things...

Now I'm not saying there's an answer for homelessness, because there isn't an answer. But we can change our actions and perceptions of what is "help" to a homeless person.

By giving money to the homeless are we really helping them, or are we helping ourselves to feel better about their homelessness?

Do you think a society-wide attitudinal change could spur the fortunate to help those in need through education, training, and opportunity, or at least donate money to people who would be able to organize such an edeavor?

Give us your thoughts....

Don's thoughts right now: "I love coffee....."

Objective Aynd Randy...

2006-01-06T07:42:00.000-05:00

Happy New Year!

I hope that everyone who reads this has taken time to reflect upon the events of the past year and has unearthed the comfort that comes with feeling pride from a year without regret. If there have been obstacles or trials in your past year, let them be stepping stones to a higher ground of enlightenment.

Speaking of individualistic empowerment and reasoning to happiness, I watched a spectacular documentary last night called "Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life"; I highly recommend it to anyone. For those not in the know, Ayn Rand was a Russian writer who wrote about Individualism to such a powerful degree that she could be considered a great philosopher in her own right.

Ayn Rand labeled her school of thought as "Objectivism", where the main posit is that there is an objective and concrete reality. Man's responsibility to himself, is to objectively interpret reality with his mind through logic and reason. She viewed science as one method of interpretation of reality, however has inherit limitations in its research and methodology. She viewed religion, god, communism, socialism, altruism (in the sense of sacrificing ones' self for the group), and selflessness as all evil!

The main tenants of her philosophy are that the individual is to be held above all else, idealists are stronger than conformists, logic and reason are essential for happiness, one must weave their dreams into reality, and that capitalism is the only government system that may allow an individual to truly be happy.

My questions to the intellectuals are the following:

It appears that Ayn Rand preached of "Individual Intellectualism", where in order to attain true happiness, the individual must approach his/her life with logic and reason.

With that said, is it really true that "ignorance is bliss", or is it wasted life?

Ayn Rand questioned, "people intuitively want to find out why things exist and how they have come to be, and some attribute it to god...but why are people so fearful to question where god came from and why they naturally feel they must make sense of things." (paraphrased) Ayn Rand attributed the belief in god to intellectual laziness and the inability to conceive of an infinite reality.

Is belief in god as a creator intellectual laziness? Is reality infinite? Which do you think is more probable?

Discuss. I need to go take a deuce.....

Eternal Youth!!

2005-12-29T07:58:00.000-05:00

Happy Holidays!

Yes that's right, I said "Happy Holidays". I guess according to the media that makes me a soldier in the "War on Christmas". Actually, that's why I haven't been posting blogs for the past couple of weeks; I've been on the front lines of the war targeting and eliminating lawn Santas and Nativity scenes! First of all, the point of saying "Happy Holidays" isn't to degrade any celebrated holiday in particular, it's actually the opposite; to wish everyone, no matter what holiday they celebrate, a positive merry ole gay time! (except in Hillsborough County; they don't believe in a "gay lifestyle")

Anyway, the topic of today is this country's Obsession with Youth. From anorexic Calvin Klein models and plastic surgery, to the value placed upon the productivity potential and marketing focus on youthfulness, I would posit that this phenomenon is rooted in two veins;

1. Fear of Death; which in essence is what happens upon the culmination of your body’s' progressive deterioration, or what is commonly known as "aging".

and

2. It's all about the Benjamins; good ole' capitalistic focus keeps our eyes on the prize, and face it; looking older isn’t as profitable as looking younger.

The first one is a no brainer; nobody wants to die. Aging is the pre-cursor to death. Boom. If I go to Dr. Youthenstein, or take these stupid pills and rub this cream on my ass and face I can avoid the Big Chunky Charlie; or at least reduce the visual cues of aging. Wrinkles, age spots, hair removal, hair restoration, the list goes on and on. Does reducing or increasing any of these really impact when you're going to die? No. Does it give you a false sense of youth? Yes.

The second one is so obvious, if you don't get it or see it for yourself, you might as well believe that some omnipotent dude who lives outside of the space continuum created the universe and gets angry when you masturbate!

I've got a great business idea. How about I take something that all people are afraid of, like "death" and its precursor "aging", and I create a bunch of shit to sell people that will cover up, remove, restore, implant, extract, laser away, firm up, and tighten up a more "youthful" appearance! People will love looking younger because it will give them the delusion that since they don't look older, they may not be closer to death! The younger you look, the further from death you are!

What? It's already been done? Well, fuck..... All I have left is this stupid eternal life and Heaven or Hell idea to control and convince the masses that there's something better than the life they are living.....But I don't think that would ever sell.....

What do yall think about this obsession with youth?

Are we just victims of ingenious marketing?

Drink the caffeine goodness, slap yourself in the face, and get us learnt!

Freedom of Whose Speech!!!

2005-12-09T08:21:00.000-05:00

Good Morning Primates!

I know it has been a while since my last post from the cube, but I've actually been busy with some video production for a work holiday party. Ahh yes, to get paid to do something completely irrelevant to my job description; oh well, at least I get to do something creative and learn some new video editing software!

To begin, "Free Speech" is a fucking cliche. People cry that they embrace free speech, but then later complain about someone who should be censored because they don't have an "acceptable" perspective. The slippery slope with free speech is whether or not all speech is free.

If you say you "want to kill the president", it's against the law. If you make "inappropriate jokes" at the airport, you'll be quickly taken away to the "anus exploration room". If you are trying to organize a group to overthrow the government, you'll soon be arrested. ..

If our nation is to claim the first amendment in the constitution to provide "freedom of speech and expression", everyone must be able to exercise this freedom; whether certain groups agree with them or not. However, there appears to be a loophole in the amount of "freedom" we are given. You are not allowed to say anything that threatens the well-being of the government or the safety of others.

Perhaps, next we'll see a couple of high school kids suspended for writing offensive material in their "private journals" for their own amusement because their english teacher required daily entries that she said she "would not read".
(http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/02/student.threats.ap/?section=cnn_law)

Perhaps a few cops create a little video for comic relief from their stressful job that is for their own entertainment, somehow it gets online and then they are suspended from their jobs; and a private video made in a comedic context is shown nationally to the press...

(http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/09/national/09cops.html)

Perhaps our own government will pay Iraqi reporters to publish articles and propaganda in Iraqi papers to try to convince the Iraqi people that their independence is going well, even though the government and international journalistic code prohibits government involvement in the press...
(http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-infowar30nov30,0,5638790.story?coll=la-home-headlines)

My question to the minds is where should the line of protected speech and expression be drawn?

If everyone in the U.S. is given the freedom of speech and expression, that means people will be exposed to radicals, terrorists, and racists with the same freedoms.

Just a reminder:

Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

- United States Bill of Rights

Policing the Police!

2005-11-30T10:08:00.000-05:00

Good Morning Citizens!

Nothing is more valuable to people than their own safety. In fact people are so obsessed with safety, they're willing to give up quite a bit of freedom just to feel as though they are safe from all the "bad things" and "evil doers" of the world. The government creates laws to increase the level of safety of its citizens and empowers police officers to enforce those laws. Unfortunately, with great power comes great responsibility... and sometimes an enhanced sense of ego and self-worth. Often times, those in power are brainwashed into thinking that they are more important than other citizens and that they are above the laws they enforce.

For example:

"When any law enforcement officer tells you to do something or not to do something, you do exactly what you're told," Rolon said. "If you do something different, you're in violation. ... I'm not one of your kids. I'm not one of your homies. I'm not one of your friends. I am not afraid of any one of you or all of you put together. And if you want to play with me I will play back...And law enforcement officers always win." - Officer Rolon of the St. Petersburg PD, lecturing a school bus full of kids ( http://www.sptimes.com/2005/11/30/Tampabay/Handcuffs_on_13_year_.shtml )

Today's topic raises the question of "Who's policing the police?"

From beating Rodney King's ass to little kindergarteners being thrown in cuffs, when is enough, enough? What kind of shitty psych evaluations are these departments using, and furthermore what kind of "tough guy, bully" culture is living in the law enforcement agencies of our country?

My main questions are:

What percentage of law enforcement are ex-military? And, if a large percentage (my assumption), is the "military" mindset really appropriate when dealing with civilians? children? Granted all police officers must receive police academy training, however, does the "yahoo cowboy" military culture still pervade the culture of law enforcement?

Are the issues of police corruption, abuse of power, and militancy something that we should be concerned with? Or, is it only a handful of bad seeds within random departments that the media sensationalizes just to sell stories? I guess if it is the latter, then how many bad seeds are acceptable in a occupation whose purpose is to "serve and protect the people", not themselves?

I turn it over to the minds that be....

Priests; "gay", or just glad to see you?

2005-11-29T09:33:00.000-05:00

Good Morning Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Taoists, Jews, Buddhists, and all you other monkeys!

I had a wonderful visit back to the Mitt for Thanksgiving, and would like to thank all of those who joined me in killing braincells and giving our livers a good Irish workout!

So everyone has heard the joke about the priest who asks the alterboy to sit on his lap and the boy asks the priest what's poking his bottom, and the priest says it's but the hand of God? Oh, maybe I read that in the paper or something...

Anyway, today I read the following article ( http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-pope-gays.html ) which talks about the Vatican banning all homosexuals and those with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" from entering priesthood.

However, in keeping consistent with good ole' Catholistic hypocrisy, the church says

``Such persons must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. They are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter,''

All of this is based upon the flack the church has been getting from news reports and scandals of priests playing "pin the priest on the alterboy".

Where to begin, where to begin....

#1. Is there a difference between child-molesting perverts and homosexuality?

According to the research found in psychology there is a huge difference....but then again what do those stupid researchers know?! I mean, they're just as silly as those scientists that said that the world is round and say that we're evolved from apes! HA!

#2. "Seminaries have a serious duty to see to it that candidates for the priesthood do not `present disturbances of a sexual nature which are incompatible with the priesthood.'''

Isn't there something "disturbing" about a group of people who believe there's some magical omnipotent being that says "having sex is sin" and you should feel guilty about it? Furthermore, all those entering the elite "priesthood" should never have sex again; Isn't that considered a little off-kilter, or rather, a "disturbance of a sexual nature?"

#3. Is the Vatican passing the buck of sexual dysfunction from their own screwed-up "anti-sex" ideology to the naturally-occurring phenomenon of homosexuality?

Many studies of other species have noted the presence of the homosexual phenomenon, but I can't think of one species that "purposefully" avoids sexual contact or breeding. Which "lifestyle" is more natural?

#4. (In reference to homosexuals) ``Such persons must be accepted with respect and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. They are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter,''

I'll just let you run with this one....if you can't see the blatant hypocrisy, "may god have mercy upon your logical reasoning!"

Hit us with your skills and get us learnt!

DNA's double helix blade...

2005-11-23T08:31:00.000-05:00

Happy pre-Thanksgiving!

Tonight as you consume mass quantities of distilled pleasure during the busiest bar night of the year, think about all of the crimes that you could commit during your drunken stupor! With a reduced capacity for self-control and inhibition, you could find yourself thinking that humping a police cruiser in front of a group of overly testosterone-pumped officers a "good idea!"

Or perhaps, you'll wake up Thanksgiving morning with a pounding headache, and a couple of officers pounding on your front door to arrest you for a crime you know you didn't commit...but then again, aren't real sure due to the mass slaughter of braincells the night before.

Next thing you know, you're in court for sexual assault charges and there's a victim pointing at your mug as the perpetrator! You spend 18 years in the county jail for sexual assault, until one day an activist group that pushes for legislature requiring DNA testing be used to free falsely convicted individuals comes along. They want to help you, and convince "The Man" to run a DNA test on a pubic hair that they found on the victim.

*Ding*

Not only does the pube NOT match your DNA, but it matches some other guy who lived in the same area as the victim and is currently spending time in the pokey for none other than "sexual assault". You become the activist groups' poster child! They tour you around showing you off, have you speak at events, and help you put together a multi-million dollar lawsuit for wrongful imprisonment.

And then...you're arrested for murder and dis-membering a corpse because they find some photographer chopped up in her car in your backyard. Here's the rub: the same technique of analyzing DNA evidence that was used to free you is used to arrest you when they find both your blood and her blood in the vehicle. DAMN!

Well, for the most part, that's this guy's story: ( http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/23/national/23exonerate.html?pagewanted=1&amp;ei=5094&en=5e315958c202e720&hp&ex=1132808400&partner=homepage )

There are two issues here:

1. The Man
2. The Cause

1. The Man: A real piece of work. Prior convictions of animal abuse and robbery, and then he spends 18 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit. But now, he's back in prison for murder! When the monkey was released from his 18 year stint in the clink, he had lost his wife, family, and 18 years of his life. He obviously isn't an exemplary "upstanding citizen", but he did spend 18 years in prison for something he didn't do.

2. The Cause: The activist group, the "Wisconsin Innocence Project", is taking a lot of heat for their poster child getting himself charged with murder after his release; people are even touting that "a girl would still be alive if they hadn't freed him!" Although the activist group helped him before, now they are reluctant to have anything to do with him. The media is eating it up; the irony. The perception by the mass public is that this weakens their case, whether or not it is relevant or not.

This leads me to the following inquiries:

The issue:
What are your opinions on the DNA testing of current prisoners who may be wrongly imprisoned in efforts to know 99.9% whether or not they should be there or not?

Is monkey boy's situation relevant to the legislation, where, even if wrongfully imprisoned, some people are better left in prison?

The man:
Do you think that the 18 years Monkey Boy spent in prison may have influenced whether or not he would have committed this murder (under the assumption he's guilty)? Basically, do you think prison had a negative impact and contributed to his actions following his release? Or was he bound to return to the clink anyway based upon his prior convictions?

DO IT!

Oh-Be-Cities; "phat" or just "fat"?

2005-11-21T08:00:00.000-05:00

Top of the morning to you all!

I'm no Calvin Klein model, nor would I want to be. However, just for my own amusement, I do occasionally strut down the hallway of my residence in nothing but my boxer briefs with my arms swinging, head bobbing, and enter my bedroom with a dashing left turn, pause, and stare at my "awe-struck" dresser with my best Blue Steal pose. To the relief of my neighbors, I try to keep the blinds at least 3/4 drawn.

History for developed countries, and current times in struggling "3rd world" countries depicts the thin body types of society to be indicative of the lower income, physical labor-oriented, and the presumingly "low socio-economic", poor end of the social ladder who are thinner because they cannot afford an excess, or even enough for that matter of food and sustenance. On the "high socio-economic" end of the ladder, the wealthy are depicted with increased size in terms of fat percentage and overall health, presumingly because the wealthy can afford enough, and even excess amounts of food to sustain themselves. La-Di-Da, Da-Da......

However, as one of the wealthiest countries in the world, we need to wake the fuck up because obesity has "weighed-in" the costs:

Obesity costs the U.S. $117 billion a year indirectly
Obesity costs more than 39 million lost work days each year
Three-fourths of the $1.4 trillion the U.S. spends on health care is to treat chronic illnesses, many of which are tied to obesity and overweight (United Health Foundation, 2004)

Walmart has been ridiculed lately in the news for sending a memo to hire healthier employees to try to reduce their health care costs associated with the above; but, should they be ridiculed?

Or is it us as a society that should be ridiculed for allowing over 31% of our population to become obese?

You want a cure for obesity? Here, I won't even charge you $19.99:

Stop eating fast food; they'll get the hint and start making their menu healthy when the public won't eat their shit.
Get off your fat-ass and exercise; 20 minutes, 3 times a week...you've got time jack-ass!
Stop making excuses; "oh, it's my genetics"...."oh, I'm large and in charge"..."oh, I like myself the way I am"... We've spent too much time coddling the weak minded and the weak willed, why should tax payers pay for your fat ass to get health care for your self-inflicted obesity?

The topic today; "Obesity", is it okay, or should we as a society start lighting a fire under some fat asses?

What right do obese people have complaining that seats on airplanes and school desks are not "ergonomically" correct? Shouldn't we be asking the obese person why they're not ergonomically correct?

What do yall think? And just for yucks here are the top ten fattest cities in the country:

- The Top 10 Fattest Cities -

Houston
Philadelphia - "Too many Philly Cheese-Steak Hoagies"
Detroit - "Too much winter!"
Memphis - "Too much BBQ"
Chicago - "Too much Deep Dish"
Dallas
New Orleans - "Too much Etoufee"
New York - "Too many big slices"
Las Vegas - "Too much greed"
San Antonio

I guess everything in Texas is bigger!

The Silence of Science?

2005-11-17T16:12:00.000-05:00

Good Morning!!

Skipping the usual 1-2 sentences of foreplay, we go forth into the fray:

Science:
1. a) the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
b) such activities restricted to a class of natural phenomena.
c) such activities applied to an object of inquiry or study.
2. Methodological activity, discipline, or study
3. An activity that appears to require study and method.
(Dictionary.com)

"Science is a systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observations, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena... Scientific explanations are guilt on observations, hypotheses, and theories. A 'hypothesis' is a testable statement about the natural world that can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations. A 'theory' is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate observations, inferences, and tested hypotheses"
(Kansas Science Education Standards, 2005)

If you haven't heard, the state of Kansas education board has adopted a definition of science that excludes the traditional "natural explanations" component in the definition of science. Meaning, one could theoretically posit hypotheses & theories that involve 'supernatural explanations', that is, if they are testable statements. (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/science/sciencespecial2/15evol.html)

The reasoning that some of the retarded, psuedo-scientist, right-winged morons give for this is based upon a handful of scientists who have criticisms and supposedly have found flaws in the evolution theory, among other philosophical and political perspectives.

Am I just a paranoid anti-religion fanatic, or can this be interpreted as a "back door" approach of setting up an educational system to discredit the evolution theory in efforts to create more support for creationism or "intelligent design"?

Science, in essence, is one particular branch of philosophy that attempts to explain phenomena based upon hypothesis testing and experimentation rather than purely with logical reasoning. Converging physical or experimental evidence is required for a theory to be accepted, then it is the nature of science to test and re-test that theory until it is proven wrong.

No theory can ever be proven 100% truth, only disproved or discredited. There will always be error in experimentation, and scientists must establish acceptable levels of error to evaluate probability or likelihood of a phenomena occurring. Evolution will never be proven, it can only be disproved. Doubt, does not equal disproval, and the Evolutionary theory is by far the most "probable" of "scientific" theories posited thus far.

However, most of the monkeys that inhabit this country don't understand science, or the scientific method. In our over-simplified advertising and marketing world, we want simple answers that don't involve variability, complexity, or uncertainty.

What are your views on science? Should science be open to embracing "supernatural" phenomena that cannot be tested?

Is "doubt" or "criticism" in this case, being used to justify including creationism, intelligent design, and other products of philosophy and religious belief into the realm of science?

Afterall, these students who are being educated in this system are going to grow up to be our future citizens, politicians, scientists, and educators...

Do it for the queen....or your "god" for that matter, and share with us your insights....

Everyday's a Holiday!!!

2005-11-15T22:26:00.000-05:00

Good morning my blog-reading minions!

I'm sure everyone remembers when they were in high school and would count down the school days until the next break and/or holiday. Ahh, the taste of freedom from the 7 periods of brain-washing that pre-cursored our collegiate or "drifting" years following our 4 year terms of adolescent angst truly was sweet! No matter what the holiday, we were pleased to meet its acquaintance.

Recently, there has been national attention drawn to little ole' Hillsborough County in light of a decision made by the school board indicating that they will no longer close schools on traditional Judeo-Christian holidays such as "Good Friday", "Easter" and "Yom Kippur". The school board's decision was partly based upon requests by Muslims to add their holidays to the the list of days of school closure. Alah forbid, rather than canceling even more days of school to accommodate other religious holidays, the school board decided to allow students to take a certain number of "floating holidays" without penalty; however, schools would still remain in session. Certain holidays that naturally fall on a school break (i.e. Christmas, Chanukah, New Years, etc.) are coincidently during semester breaks and wouldn't have been effected.

Well, two members of the Board of Cunty Assministers.....I'm sorry, "The Board of County Commissioners" decided to get involved, (even though it is beyond their scope of responsibility), and raise a stink because the school board was "attempting to further erode the Judeo-Christian tradition that this country was founded upon." (Commissioner Brian Blair; oh you might remember him from the World Wrestling Federation tag-team, "The Killer Bees")

Anyway, at the last school board meeting, the school board pussies.... I mean, school board members, reinstated the previously observed religious holidays, excluding the Muslim holidays, of course...

It's true that this country has a majority of Judeo-Christian beliefs which imbed themselves in our laws and traditions, but weren't the pilgrims escaping religious persecution and control when they came to this land and raped it from the Indians? Furthermore, shouldn't there be a separation of church and state as stated in the constitution?

Just for reference, public schools are funded by tax payer money. For those slow-minded (CUNTY board members), those are public funds going to give those teachers paid time off on those Judeo-Christian holidays, as well as cheating those students who are not celebrating those holidays of an education during that time off. Let me reiterate that the original decision by the school board allowed students to take holidays of their choosing off without penalty, but still hold classes for those students who do not celebrate those holidays so they still have an opportunity to learn.

The issue:

Should the religious holidays of the majority be imposed onto all students? and is it fair to other religions and students to cancel classes on Judeo-Christian holidays?

Is it fair to cancel publicly funded school sessions for religious holidays? Was the school board being fair in their original decision?

I know this topic gets my nipples hard, so let's hear what you've got to say!

This Blog's for you...

2005-11-14T17:17:00.000-05:00

Past song lyrics that foretold the second coming of the blog:

"My Blog is back, and there's gonna be a party.. Hey naaaa, hey naaa, my blog is back!"
- The Angels

"It's my blog, and I can write if I want to! You would write too, if it belonged to you!"
- Lesley Gore

"Blog-Blog Blog-Bloooog. Blog-Blog Blog-Bloooog"
- Ludwig Van Beethoven, 9th Symphony

Ladies & Gentlemen, I have mixed news to report:

Bad News: The Nazis in charge of the IT department will not return my e-mails, nor have they lifted the ban on the www.blogger.com site, so I would like to publicly say, ”FUCK YOU!”

Good News: I will begin to publish new topics that will be continue to be written in the cubicle, however, will not make it out onto the web until I return home at the end of the day. This unfortunately means I won’t be able to read or respond to comments during working (or “hardly working”) hours, but I trust yall will push forwards with the online discussions.

Those fans of The Cubicle Chronicles may thank Mr. Ben-Meir for his encouraging and inspirational words, as well as the assistance of his federally issued firearm that he gently pressed to my forehead, persuading me to continue my entries despite the IT fuckheads that believe they are doing their job.

So, keep posted scholars, for The Cubicle Chronicles shall continue forth on its mission to help you intellectually masturbate and solve the world’s problems from the safety of your personal/workplace computers!

One last song lyric to take us home!

”I decided long ago
Never to walk in anyone's shadows
If I fail, If I succeed
At least I lived as I believed
No matter what they take from me
They can't take away my blog you see!

Chorus:
Because the greatest blog of all is written by me
I've found the greatest blog of all inside of me
The greatest blog of all is easy to achieve
Learning to blog yourself, it is the greatest blog of
all…”
- Whitney “Nose Candy” Houston

Bad Will Hunting!

2005-10-31T09:50:00.000-05:00

Happy Halloween!

Ahhh, the day where begging is rewarded with candy. Perhaps the homeless of our country are ex-Trick or Treaters who just wanted to go pro? I don't know...

For the past few hundred million years, Earth has been inhabited by human beings. Unless you're a Creationist or Intelligent Design advocate (a.k.a. dellusional or anti-science), evolution is the theory that has been most probable thus far. During man's time he's hunted and eaten other animals, and in recent generations has created a sport just for hunting.

Has evolution become ethical justification for the murder of other species?

Let me reiterate that I'm focusing mainly upon the sport of hunting rather than hunting for food & survival. Hunting for survival coincides with the natural selection, survival and maintaining of species population. The sport of hunting usually involves stupid white guys going out to the woods with weapons and shooting animals to see how big of an animal they can kill.

How can hunting be considered a sport when the supposed opponent isn't even aware of the game going on?

For example:

Deer's Perspective: Thirsty....need water Hungry.....need food Noise.....is it danger? Nasty smell......Oh, it's just Bambi's ass; too many berries (proof that all animals are amused by flatulence!) Noise....... Pain in my side.......what's going on....I'm dying....uh.....oh.......urghhhhhhhhh

Hunter's Perspective: Wife.......need to shoot deer Job....need to shoot deer Kids....need to shoot deer Pabst Blue Ribbon.....need to shoot deer Deer....AIM & FIRE!

Our topic today:

Is the sport of hunting ethical?

And for The Moose; is hunting even a "sport"? ;o)

My opinion, since I rarely have one, is that I think there should be ethical standards set for the treatment of animals, not necessarily the ones PETA sets up, but at least the acknowledgement that other species have the right to life as well, and just because we are at the top of the evolutionary hierarchy so far, doesn't give us right to enslave and murder all other species below us.

Personally, I would like to promote that all sport hunters should unknowingly be exterminated on the street just for fun; afterall, it wouldn't be any different than what they believe is sport!

And in reference to whether or not hunting is a sport, I would argue that it is NOT A SPORT. I would contend that a sport involves a game with willing participants who abide by rules and play competitively. Clearly, the animal being hunted is not willing to play, doesn't know the rules, and above all, isn't even aware that a game is being played!

What do yall think?

Superior Supervision

2005-10-27T07:46:00.000-04:00

Ahhh, Tuesday's discussion made my nipples hard!

But I digress...or is it "regress"? Perhaps both......anyway, onwards!

Most of you probably have had a job before. Whether it was tossing chicken at Popeye's or designing poly-carbon ashtrays for NASA, most likely you've had supervisors seeing over your past positions. Of course if you have always been self-employed from high school on, congratulations and fuck off, this won't apply to you!

My question today is: "What do you think makes a great supervisor?"

Throughout my work history I've had a one or two pretty good supervisors, a whole lot of mediocre supervisors, and a few shitty supervisors (thank you restaurant industry for hiring so many retards to run your business). My main criteria when I sub-consciously evaluate my supervisor is the following:

Mental Ability: my supervisors must be rational thinkers, highly intelligent, and flexible. They must be good problem-solvers who evaluate the situation thoroughly by the facts, while taking emotional/political factors into consideration. They must be progressive learners that encourage continual development and learning for themselves and their employees. When I mentioned "flexible", I wasn't insinuating that the supervisor must have yoga or gymnastics experience. Mental flexibility is pretty much the opposite of Mental Rigidity; which is when a person is unable to mentally adapt or assimilate information that is inconsistent with their own conceptualization of things.
Sets, Monitors Progress, and Rewards Goals: I think that supervisors that encourage their employees to set goals and encourages them to achieve them are not only benefiting the organization, but the employees themselves.
Organization: my supervisor must not be scatter-brained or a dis-organized mess; this is automatically associated to incompetence.
Professional Attitude: a good supervisor must have a professional attitude that is polite, friendly, and encouraging as well as slightly distanced. A mild temperament goes along with a professional attitude because a good supervisor shouldn't transfer negative emotions to his/her employees. By "slightly distanced" I'm referring to that separation of supervisor and employee type of feeling; I don't want my supervisor to be my "best friend", he's my evil pig of a boss.
Encourage Involvement & Delegation: I appreciate it when a supervisor realizes that I'm not a complete moron (just inconsistently one), and encourages suggestions or my opinions on projects. Also, a good delegator is a positive attribute of a supervisor. I like a supervisor who gives me an opportunity to prove my incompetence before they just assume I'm incompetent.
Personality: for the psychology nerds reading this; in reference to Costa & McCrae(pick a year), I would like a supervisor who is Low-Neuroticism, Moderate to High-Extraversion, Moderate to High-Openess, Moderate-Agreeableness, and High-Conscientiousness.

I would love to place an order at "Boss' R' Us" for one of the models that I just illustrated, but I haven't been able to find a dealer online...I'll keep looking and let you know what I come up with...

Anyway, I'd like you to think about your past supervisors and figure out who you think was the best and why?

What would you say are the most important things to you that your supervisor must possess or do?

My caffeine levels are dangerously low and I might shut-down, so I must go grab some of that high quality cubeland Folgers.

Hit me!

The Ultimate Sport!

2005-10-25T08:41:00.000-04:00

Good Morning Ladies, Gents, and degenerates!

Last night I had an epiphany, and "no" it wasn't that I realized that all of the local Tampa Bay newscasters are morons who struggled to create sensationalized 24-hour coverage about "Wilma's wrath" and the donning of Florida as a "Disaster Area!" No....this was something a little less obvious....

I have discovered the existence of the ultimate sport!! As self-appointed "Sports Authority", I will share my reasoning with you, and then you may argue, agree, and/or practice your reasoning skills in the comments section.

Ladies, gents and degenerates, the Ultimate Sport is....none other than our northern past-time of: HOCKEY!

Let's see what Hockey is all "aboot"...

A Hockey player requires very high cardio-vascular endurance for skating three 20 minute periods, because unlike American Football, there are no little breaks where guys pat each other on the ass and gossip in a little circle.
A Hockey player requires very high abilities of balance and agility to maneuver not only him/herself, but to do it upon ice skates while wielding a Hockey stick in efforts to control a hard rubber puck, because unlike many other sports played on normal surface conditions, hockey is played upon the slippery, rock-like surface of ice (with the exception of Curling, Ice Skating, Bobsledding, etc.)
A Hockey player requires a high level of full-body muscular strength to both accompany maneuverability and to take the beatings against the ice, boards, and other players, because unlike other team sports like Basketball and Football (the only real Football) physical strength is not equally important amongst all muscle groups.
FIGHTING! A Hockey player gets to beat the shit out of other Hockey players! Come on, how many pansy little smack talk sessions can you take? In Hockey, you may settle things with the gloves off! That in itself is sweet! The only other sports you're allowed to do this in are in the martial arts and boxing, and even then, you're not on ice skates!
A Hockey player uses instruments without sacrificing physical demands. They use Hockey skates to maneuver on the ice and a Hockey stick to manipulate the puck, this requires physical exertion, technique and skill development. As opposed to other uses of tools in Polo, Baseball, Cricket and Nascar where the physical demands go down while technique goes up.
There are no naturally occuring physical advantages. It just requires an overall capacity of physical ability enhanced by years of training the cardio-vascular, strength, and skill development of the athlete. In Basketball and Horse Racing height is a naturally occuring factor and may eliminate certain athletes from fairly competing.
Hockey is a true "team sport". When a Hockey player is penalized for being bad, he not only is penalized, but his team is penalized as well for the 2 minutes when he is not allowed to play. This is opposed to a foul in Basketball, where the individual, not the team, is penalized while the other team is rewarded free throws.

I'm pretty sure I could think of more reasons to support why HOCKEY is the ultimate sport, but these are a start.

I challenge you all to find a sport that is overall more demanding than Hockey and give your reasoning here in this forum!

WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE ULTIMATE SPORT?

Armed & Full of Fear!

2005-10-20T08:25:00.000-04:00

Shalom my fellow chimps!

Let me just jump right into it:

Tampa Tribune, Tuesday October 18th, 2005:

"...Florida has more concealed weapons license holders than Texas, and the Tampa Bay region alone has more than the entire state of California... According to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, there are 354,552 concealed weapons licenses in the state. That means one out of every 49 Floridians has a permit to pack heat.... Women make up 14 percent of concealed weapons license holders in Florida, according to the most recent statistics. Almost 39 percent of license holders are older than 50... 'I love having my gun with me,' said Nash, a widow. 'When I go to Tampa at night, I'm coming back late. It's a necessity. Here alone at night, it's a big comfort.'"

( http://www.tampatrib.com/MGBCB6LMXEE.html ) If you'd like to read the article

One simple phrase... "WHAT THE FUCK!?"

I'm no Michael Moore, but have we gone crazy? Is our society's mantra now "I bolster my self esteem with fake boobs, and I holster my Gloc to fight off the crude?"

Yes, when you go out there is a possibility that you'll be a victim of crime, and yes, women are more susceptible, and yes, old people are easy marks... but should we arm little old ladies with pistols?

Hypothetically, let's say our society figured out the way to control the masses is to create fear; fear of a god's wrath, fear of imprisonment, fear of death, fear of not being accepted, fear of crime, etc. Basically when people are scared, they look outward for direction and help, and what we give them is a pacifier of answers, like I don't know, "consuming a bunch of commercial talismen!"

I don't know about you, but statistics tell me that if there are more guns in the hands of the common American Idiot, I have a higher probability of taking a stray bullet or getting shot accidentally because soccer mom Jane decides to play crime stopper or I was walking to closely to some little old lady. Does that make me feel safer? No it does not. It's one thing if you've got a shotgun in your home, but carrying a concealed weapon is a completely different arena of responsibility.

How safe do yall feel knowing that little old ladies out there are packing a heater in their granny sacks? According to that article there are around 138,275 average Joes over 50 packin in Florida alone; and yes folks, that's 19,358 ladies over the age of 50 possibly carrying a Nina in their fanny pack! I don't trust these people driving their cars, much less having responsibility over a piece. You are trusting the decision making and physical capacities of people who are too paranoid and weak to defend themselves or to avoid suspicious situations, and you're giving them permission to carry concealed firearms! Recipe for disaster?

I think it's important to reiterate, these are "concealed permit weapons", not just your good ole' boy .22 rifle or shotgun for hunting permits; concealed weapon permits are for firearms that are ONLY meant for killing another human being and making granny feel safe.

It boils down to this:

"Is arming America with concealed weapons really the right answer to our obsession with fear?"

Musicians, Movie Stars, & Morons? Oh My!

2005-10-18T08:03:00.000-04:00

Ahhh, good morning!

Remember those days when you could walk to your local amphitheatre and listen to a philosopher or politician (real ones from back in the day, not the retired actors, "C" students from Yale or ex-professional wrestlers that we see as politicians today!) talk about a topic that would evoke contemplation, thought and enlightenment from the crowd that made their way out of their humble homes to listen?

OF COURSE YOU DON'T!

Those folks back in Greece were the "rockstars" and "movie stars" of those times. Now we have fricken Britney Spears who forgets to use a condom, gets pregnant, has offspring, and people act like she's split the fucking atom!

Yes, "Musicians, Movie Stars, and the Morons who worship them", that is topic of the day. I will grant you, throughout time, those with the power and money have been looked to for an example for the masses, but have we created a monster? We've placed so much value on rock stars and movie stars, have we given the money and power to the dancing monkeys of society; the entertainers?

What do you think about the worshiping of musicians and movie stars? Is it healthy for society to take social cues, fashion and political/social opinions from people who have been deemed by corporate executives as a "marketable product"? Whatever happened to icons like Einstein & Ghandi? Is the media responsible for spoonfeeding us what is important news?

Next time you have an ethical dilemma, think to yourself; "WWJD" (What Would Ja Rule Do?)

Next time you're just stuck with nothing in your closet that fits your mood, crack open your "People" magazine and see what a star wore out on the town.

Looking for an opinion about the war in Iraq? Hey, who knows better than the Dixie Chicks!

My point is this, why do we insist on worshiping the morons we already spent $16 on their CD, or paid $8 to see their latest movie? Are rockstars and movie stars more informed, or a better source of judgment for us in regards what to wear, drive, put in our homes, and our political/social perspectives?

Hit me!

Something different... Thoughts? Interpretations?

2005-10-14T05:20:00.000-04:00

They must have burnt this coffee.

It's supposed to be "French Vanilla", but tastes more like hot water with a hint of week-old coffee grounds. And why is everything served in Styrofoam?

I guess that’s why I come here; to drink shitty coffee in a Styrofoam cup and breathe carcinogen-fused air, in efforts to taste the sweetness of inspiration while inhaling the purity of creativity. I guess that, and to listen to the heavy Greek accent of the owner's old wife peddling her falafel as the "best you'll ever taste my dear..."

I'm here to sit amongst the yokel-locals who have resorted to bringing their own coffee mugs and whatever time-consuming coffeehouse entertainment they decided to tote with them that day.

I'm here to watch the cops stroll in and take it upon themselves to maneuver their way around the counter to help themselves to some watered down burnt coffee when the high school drop-out working behind the counter with the green hair and bastard child becomes overwhelmed by the five patrons lined up at the register. Those cops love themselves some shitty coffee.

Perhaps there’s just something disturbingly alluring about aged walnut tables and scarred café chairs that no longer recognize those faint memories of better days.

Maybe I’m really sitting in this shitty coffeehouse to see if I can score any of those angst-driven indy girls; you know, the ones that have a handful of cliché existentialist ideas and tattoos that illustrate to the world their individuality? Girls who are so certain they have a purpose, but aren’t sure what it is yet. So, in the meantime, they’re “saving up money to go back to school”, or “going to school part-time” at the local community college, while working at some coffee shop or music store; just sitting on the burner. “Would you like to try a scone with that? It’s the best you’ll ever taste!”

I remember the days when the future was a vast horizon of possibility, and desire was the only requirement to fabricate one’s destiny. We stare into the beautiful horizon and become hypnotized by the thoughts of reaching our dreams without respect for the reality of the journey. Nevertheless, time, is a thief, and desire leads to starvation without action.

To tell the truth, I have no idea why I’m here. Maybe it’s because I do enjoy drinking shitty coffee, breathing toxic air, and allowing myself to get poked in the ass by café chair springs at this walnut table.

All I know for certain is that I’ll never let myself sit here for too long, for life must be served fresh so that it is the “best you’ll ever taste my dear…”

Is "freedom" fiction?

2005-10-12T08:03:00.000-04:00

Ahh, thank you for tuning in for yet another cortex neuro-electric storm, fueled by one of the only socially acceptable and legal drugs of current times; "coffee"!

::Disclaimer: at current moment it is not illegal to consume coffee in public or in the privacy of your own home....perhaps in the future, the Christian Coalition will deem caffeine a deadly threat to the malleable minds of its youth and have one of their "Angels of Ignorance" or "Preachers of Pestilence" elected into office to ban said caffeine...::

So it goes...

"The Land of the Free", "Free Will", "Free Spirit", "Free Parking"... I believe in only one of these, because I can show you where to park your Civic for free if you're ever in Ybor City, "Land of the Parking Meter & $10 lot".

"Don, what are you saying?! We live in the wonderful utopian land of the United States of America, the 'land of the frickin free'. Hey, if you don't like it, get the fuck out!"

Now, now, John Q. American... I'm not saying that I think the U.S. sucks, I probably wouldn't want to live anywhere else in the world (but then again, I've never lived in another country; however, Canada and Australia don't seem that bad...hmmm).

Perhaps we're going back to Philosophy 101 when I ask:

"What the fuck is freedom anyway?"

When we say we are "free", what is it that we are free from? and to throw an M-80 on the fire...
Do people even want to be free, or even more provocative, SHOULD people be free? Or, is it just some idealistic mental illusion?

Do you think people only want freedom within parameters of control?

For example, you can put a baby in a crib and let the baby be free to do what he/she wills; however, the little snot can only do it in the confines of the crib. Adults in the world have a similar crib and it's made out of "laws" and "social/political pressure".

Are we any more free than the baby in the crib?

Okay, I've got to get some coffee because I need to get "regular".

To where "Art" can go?

2005-10-10T00:00:00.000-04:00

Since the dawn of man there has been art.

Hell, some may argue that man is art.

From the moment man tried to communicate with his fellow men he's been trying to satisfy that instinctual drive to express himself.

What is "art" anyway?

According to Dictionary.com, "Art" is:

The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.
High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value.
A field or category of art, such as music, ballet, or literature.
A nonscientific branch of learning; one of the liberal arts.
Skill that is attained by study, practice, or observation: the art of the baker; the blacksmith's art.

In a nutshell, the "Art" I’m addressing today is that of a conscious production or arrangement of stimulus relating to our five natural senses, and is ascribed by those who perceive it as having an "innovative/creative" value and/or aesthetic quality.

(Granted, we could argue all day over "what" and "who" decides what art is, but that's not the issue I'm looking to explore.)

Rather, I'm interested in finding out where you think art is going in terms of the quality of modern artists, the mediums that artists will be using in the future, as well as if you feel art is evolving, and if so, into what?

Throughout time there has been music, food, dance, writing, painting, photography, sculpture, to list just a very few mediums of creative expression.

The point is they all stimulate one or more senses. What may be the next medium in "art"?

Are we, like some critics say "on the dusk of the renaissance"? Is "art" dead?
Have we done all there is to do with it?

Does the world even appreciate art anymore, or is it just archaic entertainment surpassed by the stimulus of television and the electronic age?

Get some coffee and then hit us with the mad wisdom!

Will the hunger for "power" ever be satiated?

2005-10-06T15:59:00.000-04:00

Greetings Human Beings,

I watched an interesting documentary last night called "Amandla".

It was about Apartheid in South Africa and the role that music played in the revolution. For those not familiar with "apartheid", it was where segregation was made law; blacks (who were themajority I might add) were thrown out of all of the prospering areas in South Africa and forced to live separate in poor government established ghettos. Whites and blacks in South Africa were given "passes" that allowed them to only stay in their respective areas; however, the whites lived in all of the good areas, and the blacks were forced into the shit areas.

In a nutshell, this was a phenomena that has repeatedly taken place throughout history from Asia, the middleeast, europe to even here in America...

My question is this, what is the origin of man's appetite for power and do you think it can ever be satiated?

Cognitive psychology has shared with us that our brains have evolved to be "classification machines",making sense out of the world in order to survive; is there ever hope that we may "socially" evolve to unite and appreciate differences without infringing upon the rights of others?

Perhaps the evolution of "self-consciousness" coupled with a greater range and complexity of "emotion" is adouble-edged knife slitting our abilities to truly "evolve"?

Disclaimer: I'm not talking about the true"evolution" which is not about a choice of adaptation, but rather the mutation of a species that, "coincidentally", is best suited for the nature of the environment in which it lives. We are talking about "social evolution": the ability to further the effectiveness and functioning of our society through conscious influence, decision, and development.

I'm going to get some coffee, talk amongst yourselves.

Another "BLOG" on the fire!!!!

2005-10-06T15:00:00.000-04:00

Greetings Scholars, Cube Dwellers, Coffee House Philosophers, and Primates...

If knowledge is power, then it is communication & language that create the muscle that yields such power. The foundation of any successful society is based upon the exchange and development of ideas, as well as the focus upon the micro, meso, and macro levels of societal analysis. This modest little blog is my attempt of creating an online forum where information and opinions can be shared on a variety of social & philosophical topics.

I invite you all to frequently visit this blog and share it with anyone that you feel would be interested in reading and participating in its discussions. I will try to post topics and discussions as often as I am able, and encourage any of you to suggest future topics for discussion.

I strongly believe that the development and sharing of ideas and information greatly benefits both the individual and the greater society if it is carried out cooperatively through discussion with the intention of inquiry and discovery.

Thank you for reading, and welcome to my blog, which from here on out will be known as "The Cubicle Chronicles".

Sincerely,

Don

A.K.A. - "The Head Chimp"