Thoughts on Current Events in Hickersonia

Well, I have the peculiar fortune of having the coming weekend entirely to myself for only the second time in five years. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, although I must admit that I'm a little disappointed that I don't really have any money to spend (always makes passing the time easier if one has money) or someone with whom to hang out.

Of course, it isn't that I don't have money – in fact, I feel more free financially than I have in three or four years. The issue at hand here is that we have a lot of things going on and have decided to spend our money in ways that make me feel like we don't have any.

The biggest problem I'm wrapping my head around is my scheduled FMLA leave in June... 3 days off work without pay is going to wreak havoc on the budget if I don't save up the difference in overtime hours between now and then, which doesn't seem hard to do (I do work a lot of overtime anymore...) but still keeps money tied up that otherwise wouldn't be.

Of course, the FMLA leave is essential. My father has a surgery scheduled that may shed light on his cancer condition, and while I may be able to get away with only two days off, I would be surprised.

The other big thing going on is our plan to move, yet again. It isn't that our apartment is the worst place to live – I would even recommended it to people so long as a few criteria are met. The first one would have to be that the person looking at it would have to be the sort of person that doesn't care about a yard. Funny, how we have a decent sized grassy area around our complex but I don't feel that anyone can go out there because of the dog shit randomly left around and about. Yes, dog shit. Everywhere. No one cleans up after their dogs, and many of the owners don't even bother to leash them.

Next big factor for anyone wishing to live here: Live small. 800 square feet is simply not sufficient for all of our stuff. Sure, we've made the place into a cozy, if crowded, home for us, but we just never found a way to downsize to where we really fit. Clearly, size matters.

Finally, the one that has been bothering us the most in recent weeks: Smoking. Lets just say this, if you don't smoke, you probably don't want to live here. It has gotten to the point where we are occasionally smelling cigarette smoke inside the apartment even with the windows shut, and forget about opening them... From what I can tell, every neighbor on our side of the building smokes like a factory and, being we're on the top floor and heat rises, well... we get it all.

Aside from the major drawbacks here, like I said, the apartment really isn't so bad. The management does maintain things reasonably well. Not an example of perfection, but decent, and they are responsive to issues as they arise, something we could not say about our previous complex. Fact is, we simply have a much better opportunity and feel the need to take it.

Not far from our pre-bankruptcy house there is a little house on a quiet, dead end street where a whole bunch of elderly folks have made their last stand. This little house is empty and the owner seems to want to rent it to us. The house isn't huge, but it has a room that would make an ideal classroom for our son, plus a basement and garage. Fact is, even if the house is only 1,200 finished square feet, the classroom space and additional storage room alone will de-clutter our home tremendously, and lately it seems as if the constant state of disarray is the only thing that really depresses me from day to day.

So we come back to the fact that I'm home alone this weekend with little available money. If I get bored enough, my wife may return home to the clutter re-organized... *evil laugh* Netflix and Fallout 3 for three solid days sounds like enough to keep me busy, though, what do you think?

Couponing vs. Fair Pricing

Lately, as my wife has considered getting into this “couponing” fad, as it is called, it has come to my attention again just how silly some of the pricing schemes can be at most stores for most products.

Of course, this stems from what we've read and watched of “Extreme Couponing” online and on TV. Admittedly, we don't have subscription TV so mostly I'm referring to online reading, but that isn't necessarily the point.

First and foremost, I've heard of people reducing their store bills by as much as 98% on any one particular occasion, but I know that this isn't an actual “norm.” My reading suggests that avid couponers can regularly see savings of 50% or so with a reasonable investment of time and currency, and I am going to support it if my wife wants to get into it simply for that. Half off of anything is still half off. That said, I cannot understand the madness that leads to couponing in the first place.

No, I don't mean that the consumers are mad – that I do totally understand. The madness on the side of the stores and salespeople, however, I will never be able to understand or truly tolerate.

So some people are able to save money on goods and services by cutting small pieces of paper out of larger pieces of paper that magically make the value of the item their buying decrease?

I find intense anger with the entire concept that a simple, consistent, fair price cannot be established on items sold at the store. If it costs X to make, advertise, stock, distribute, and sell a particular item, why is the sale price not as simple as X + profit? Why does the profit variable change from day to day or week to week due to “sale pricing” and “reduced for quick sale” situations? Why can I go to one store and buy an item for $1.09 but at another store across the street the same thing is $2.29 or $1.89?

And – yes this all boils down to inconveniencing me – why the hell should I have to be bothered with all of the bullshit in order to find the actual fair price of the item I want?

All of this leads into discussion of the websites like Groupon. Yes, I know there are others, but they are the only one I can think of by title. I won't visit these sites anyway because they tend to require JavaScript to operate, which means the likelihood of annoying advertising being displayed increases ten-fold. That aside, these sites claim too-good-to-be-true offers can be had, like a $500 professional photo-shoot for $65 or a $300 boot camp program for $59, and I've always been taught that if it looks too-good-to-be-true, it probably is. Regardless, my anger again directs itself at the provider of these services: If you can truly afford to offer these things to consumers at these supposedly reduced prices, you are massively ripping off customers at the regular prices

In other words, if I see the coupons, I'm not more likely to buy the item, I'm LESS likely simply because I decide that their regular price is a huge rip-off.

Fact is, I'd love to see a wave of outraged consumers run amok at a Wal-Mart or Meijer store because of this sort of crap, because I think this is riot-worthy. If you can sell it to me fair and square at a lower price, but are CHOOSING to rip me off, yes, that makes me extremely angry. I believe this sort of thing should infuriate Americans across the country, but I know better.

So yeah, I write about how I feel about it on my blog, but I know better than to think I can change it...

...unless someone has a mob at their disposal that is ready for a random grocery store riot.  Ha!

In Hickersonia: Dog Loves Peanut Butter

Our dog apparently really likes peanut butter and I decided to get a short video of her licking the jar clean.  Looked like some sort of addict getting her fix if you ask me.  I wasn't sure she'd want anything to do with it, but I really should have figured -- she'll eat a dirty tissue if you drop it on the floor by accident.

Just thought I'd share.

Time Travel

Or maybe more of a drive down memory lane?

In any event, I knew I'd eventually come across some interesting photography if I explored google's "Street View" feature long enough, and today I've found one that I felt I had to share.

From late 2006 to mid 2007, we lived at a particular apartment complex that I decided I would "drive" through on the street view, and I found a piece of my past sitting in the parking lot.

click for larger view

Yep, some people might remember it:  The 78 Caprice, or "Iron Bastage" as I called it.  Haven't owned it for a couple years now but randomly just happened to find it online parked right where I left it once-upon-a-time.

Also ran across another one (I didn't screen-capture it, though) of my current car sitting in it's former owner's driveway.

Yes, time travel, at least via the internet, is indeed possible.

Sometimes I Have to Remember...

Just a small blurb tonight...

I get caught up in things sometimes to the point where I forget the most important thing in life:

My self.

And no, I don't mean it the way you might initially think...

I have this problem of thinking of myself in terms of what I do, particularly as it pertains to how I obtain money so that I can be, well... me. This leads me to find constant frustration in the things that I do for a living, sometimes being angry at one or more of my supervisors or other coworkers in general. Sometimes my frustration is with them – and other times my anger is more directed at their job function than it is themselves personally, a distinction that can get very fuzzy when in the moment.

What I'm getting at is... in all the hustle of work I sometimes forget that, while I must perform the duties assigned to me, I do not have to be the job. I am not an equipment operator or an inventory control person just because those may be my job titles. Just in as much as a supervisor that makes a decision I disagree with is not suddenly a bad person by the sole virtue of their title, I have no less worth as a result of any failing (real or imaginary) I may occasionally have in my job.

So what am I? I'm not so sure about that either, but I think refusing to identify myself as my job is the first step towards being it in truthfulness to myself.

Take the Time to Re-Read

The idea came to me recently to read through certain points of the United States Constitution, particularly as it pertains to treaties that the United States has entered into, and their implications in law. This was, of course, in an attempt to refute certain concepts of international law on the basis of their Constitutionality, but it would seem that I may have to revise my earlier understanding.

I found several mentions of treaties in the document, but three stood out. I have truncated them for brevity (within reason), but I believe the meaning of the text is undamaged:

• Article 2, Section 2:
  “The President shall... ...have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur...”

• Article 3, Section 2:
  “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority”

• Article 6:
  This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The preceding segments plainly state that treaties entered into via the Constitutionally defined process are, in fact, equal to the Constitution for the purposes of the judiciary process. While I think this is dangerous, it is stated in the document twice.

Bear in mind that the Constitution does defend itself, but the text does not specifically declare that treaties cannot be held above it in such conflicts – only “laws” of “any state.” Even if we mean to define the word “State” to include foreign “States,” treaties and laws aren't the same thing. This certainly brings into question the original founders' meaning, but I'm stuck on a logical failure in that I don't feel like we can be truly certain of what they meant at the time – the only thing we have to go on is what the text of the document literally reads.

The above supports the Supreme Court's ruling in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006) that declared that the Geneva Conventions had to apply to “enemy combatants,” which to me really means foreign terrorists. I argued at the time that the Supreme Court had no business even ruling on the basis of the Geneva Conventions, and it would seem that I was probably in error in that.

Frustrating, but inevitable from time to time.

So our own Constitution, when relating to treaties with other nations, is on parity with authorities granted by those treaties, effectively forcing me to re-evaluate the entire relationship with the United Nations. I don't have to like the U.N., mind you, but I feel compelled to try to understand the organization a little better.

So here is what I intend to do: I've selected a few key documents that I intend to read (some of which I have read before, but I feel like I should read again in this context) and I will try to expand my understanding of them. I'm sure I'll come across other materials to read, at which point I'll surely share them if they are relevent.

Key Documents of Interest:

• The Constitution of the United States
  http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
• The Charter of the United Nations
  http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/index.shtml
• Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_the_Permanent_Court_of_International_Justice
  (Considered an “integral part” of the U.N. Charter, but for some reason not included in the Charter's actual text).
• Text of the Geneva Conventions:
  http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/CONVPRES?OpenView

I don't have to like the concept of our sovereignty being subject to international interests, but if I'm going to argue against the current way of the world, I might as well find ways to do so within the context of it rather than trying to argue it away entirely – because it won't be changing anytime soon. Call it the New World Order, or blame the Freemasons, or whatever, it doesn't change the fact that the system that exists today will be built on more and more over the coming years until it either cannot be sustained economically or is destroyed through war.

I wish I believed that human-kind was smarter than that, but I truly don't.

Respected in Death but Supposedly Shunned in Life?

I have just a quick flame to extinguish tonight. I have read a little about the fact that Osama bin Laden (however the hell it is spelled) was killed and apparently buried at sea. What the hell is “buried at sea” anyway? But more importantly, and somewhat humorously, was the reason given for having done so: “Osama bin Laden was buried at sea from the deck of a U.S. aircraft carrier because there was no alternative to bury him on land within the 24 hours required by Islamic law”

What business does the U.S. government have concerning itself with Islamic burial rites, or burial rites in general? What is most critical here is asserting the sovereignty of the United States.

I'm not suggesting that we should have “wrapped him in bacon” or some other such nonsense (as I heard more than once at work today), but I think Muslims, especially those who claim that Osama bin Laden did not speak for them, should be outraged at the simplest thought of venerating the man as if he were a righteous individual.

No, I think that it would be warranted that he be disgraced, especially by the religion with which he claimed to affiliate. A religion he sullied irreparably by that affiliation in the eyes of many Americans.

I'm not going to sugar coat this. Seeing Muslims openly shun Osama bin Laden in his death would have gone a long way towards helping Americans see just how much they supposedly shunned his actions in life. Instead, no such reparation shall be made, and Americans will simply see this as another reason to hate Muslims and those who they think support them.

I'm glad Osama is dead (it is not often I can say that), but, now that I've had the chance to think about it a bit, I do not think anything good will come of it. The cycle of anger and hatred will continue unabated, and this unfortunate fact will lead to more lives lost on both “sides” of this nonsensical conflict.