"You're not making an impact if you're not pissing someone off"

Monthly Archives: January 2011

“If the new American father feels bewildered and even defeated, let him take comfort from the fact that whatever he does in any fathering situation has a fifty percent chance of being right.” - Bill Cosby

Based on Bill Cosby’s evaluation of it you might presume that no matter what people tell you about it you’re apt to be surprised none-the-less about what fatherhood actually entails. It is the experience itself, not the knowledge of it, that can never be accurately conveyed for what awaits a new dad. Here is my attempt in a humorous fashion to set your expectations.

1. Sleep Deprivation. Forget about Circadian rhythms. Normal sleep cycles are a thing of the past. No amount of money will motivate the wife to take your turn at late night feedings and diaper changes.
2. Vomit Reflex. If you thought that only heavy bingeing would extricate your previous meal, you’re in for a rude awakening.  Between my heaving and the diaper poop, my dog – who would eat his own feces – ran screaming from the house.
3. Loss of credibility. Feeling vulnerable when they discover YOU are Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.
4. Teddy-bear syndrome.   No, not the stuffed animal you put with your child as they crawled into bed but the sensation that overcame you while watching them sleep. Awwwhhhhhhhhh.
5. Unexpected elation upon putting the kids to bed. The fact that someone could be asleep and it would bring you such a feeling of rapture.
6. Sexual abstinence. Not only being unable to “fool around” (with your wife of course) right before and after the birth of your first child but seriously contemplating celibacy for yourself 6 months later.  I mean, do you really want to go through this more than once?
7. Forget that Harley and a week-long “freedom” ride. Tucking extra money away now goes to a college education fund. Maybe they’ll qualify for Pell Grants?
8. Sand-castle meister. Going to the beach is no longer about “cruising chicks” unless you count driving the family to Miami.
9. Securing the bathroom. There are actually (little) people in the house now who don’t mind “visiting” you while reading a magazine on the throne. You did burn your copies of Playboy, right?
10. Knowing you have contributed to your future security. One day, if you survive,  they will compensate you for all your sacrifices by contributing to your Social Security benefits.
Being a father takes a sense of humor. Have fun and watch with astonishment.  You don’t get any re-takes.

 


A recent piece sent to me on-line (see video & comments here)resurrected an issue I wrote on about a year ago that in part addressed an individual’s privacy in today’s high tech society.  In that article, I wrote that “Our high tech industries have devised ways to track us as we shop to make purchases and have created devices to mark our path after we have made the purchase.”  RFIDs have the “potential for privacy invasion with regards to our shopping habits raises serious civil rights issues.”

The ability of marketers of goods and services tracing consumer buying habits has been raised to a level that futuristic fiction writers H.G. Wells and Ray Bradbury would marvel over.  To achieve this ability there has to be a means to not only affect your choices (redundant radio and TV ads) but also a means to record your movements and transactions.

The technology today that aids marketers to determine what your buying habits are can also be used by criminal minds to steal your identity and damage your good credit standing for perhaps the rest of your life.  It’s referred to as radio frequency identification technology, or RFID; microscopic chips that are implanted not only  in consumer goods but on your credit cards and other ID documents you carry around with you.

According to the Association for Automatic Identification and Mobility(AIM), an international trade association representing automatic identification and mobility technology solution providers, “Radio frequency identification (RFID) is a generic term that is used to describe a system that transmits the identity (in the form of a unique serial number) of an object or person wirelessly, using radio waves.

AIM’s website says the device is used all around us today.  “If you have ever chipped your pet with an ID tag, used EZPass through a toll booth, or paid for gas using SpeedPass, you’ve used RFID. In addition, RFID is increasingly used with biometric technologies for security.  Unlike ubiquitous UPC bar-code technology, RFID technology does not require contact or line of sight for communication. RFID data can be read through the human body, clothing and non-metallic materials.”

It is this last bit of information from the association that ought to catch your eye.  As you watch the newsreel video (see link above) it becomes clear that there now exists the means for hi-tech criminals to approach you in public, unaware, and scan your purse or the wallet in your hip pocket, getting your credit card information, bank account, social security and your driver’s license numbers without you even knowing it.  According to some estimates, 140 million people are at risk of having their private information hi-jacked with this technology.

You can identify your cards and documents that have the RFID chip if you see a symbol that resembles sound waves as seen here – –  in the form of four arched lines, usually found in the upper left hand corner of credit cards.  These chips can also be attached to your passport which gives access to your date of birth and a photo which a crook could use to generate other identity material to rob you with.

A quick check of my own credit cards found no RFID chip symbols on them.  But this may be more of a concern in the near future as this technology expands in our need-to-know society.  Right now experts at the Identity Theft Resource Center told WREG-TV On Your Side Investigators, who posted this story, “that they’ve never seen a case of RFID skimming used to steal information.”   This is information however that may be discredited because being able to trace such identity theft would very difficult.

The potential for such a threat is real says University of Memphis professor Mark Gillenson after watching the WREG-TV clips showing Walt Augustinowicz using the compact technology for swiping people’s credit card numbers.  Walt’s interest in this issue is a product he devised that would protect your valuables that carry private information from being scanned.  Augustinowiucz sells his products that sleeve cards, passports and other identity documents at his website Identity Stronghold.

Professor Gillenson said the video of Augustinowicz at work on the streets of Memphis was compelling and calls the scanning capabilities that robs your identity a technology run wild.  “I think people do need to be concerned and do need to be aware and we’ll see if this becomes a major problem,” Gillenson said.


Armed with this information consumers should always be cognizant of people around them when they shop.  Anytime you are out and about with your wallet or purse, check your  credit card website daily to make sure no unauthorized purchases have been made.  It would also be wise to take only those credit cards and identity information you need to make certain purchases with you when you go to the mall or super-market.  If they do have the symbol for RFID chips, a purchase from Identity Stronghold or a similar entrepreneur may be a wise investment.



Senior moments! If you’re over 50, you’ve had your share. Standing there in front of what’s his name asking how his wife and family are, trying to gain some time and hoping some memory recall will kick in before he realizes you don’t know his name. You worked in the same department with him for years before you retired just two years ago and could even recall where he lived and a story he told you about how he spent one summer in Mexico. But something as simple as his name eludes you. What robs us of these bits of information at certain times only to pop up later when we have no real need for them?

As frightening as these moments may seem under certain circumstances, they are not unusual at all for people who become part of the AARP crowd. Add a stressful day and perhaps a poor night’s sleep and brief memory loss is inevitable on occasions. What is disturbing about them is they will increase with age and depending on their severity, may be signaling the onset of Alzheimer’s disease 

Some types of senior moments even have a name – literal paraphasia. It sounds impressive and kind of softens the blow for displaying a momentary weakness on our part. This condition occurs when we get phonemes (normal sounds) crossed up where they come out different than we intended. “I docked the wog” may come out of your mouth when you meant to say, “I walked the dog”.

There appears to be no clear answer as to what exactly creates these glitches in memory. Neurological scientists who study this phenomenon feel it’s the result of a decrease in neurotransmitters, a smaller brain caused by poor blood circulation due to aging or a combination of the two.  Recent research out of UC Irvine, offers a new possibility where advanced technology now allows neurologists to look deep into the brain and view the slow deterioration of a long-hidden part of the brain called the perforant path. According to a recent article in Science Daily it’s “believed to deteriorate gradually as part of normal aging and far more quickly due to Alzheimer’s disease.” (Distinguishing ‘Senior Moments’ from Alzheimer’s, 8/10/10)
Talk to your physician about these moments so they can determine their severity and what, if any, steps you should be taken. As we reach later years in life our brains have retained an infinite amount of knowledge and sensory overload begins to take its toll. Multi-tasking is thought by many to alleviate this problem at work but it is not all that people have claimed and often, less gets completed while creating greater stress. (Overwhelmed, Stressed Multitasking by Jerry Looper, 2/13/08

Other factors that can contribute to the memory loss aspect of senior moments are:

- Nutritional deficiency. Not enough thiamine (vitamin B1), vitamin B12 , and/or protein contributes to
memory loss.

- Depression

- Chronic disease conditions

- Oxygen deprivation resulting from a severe head trauma, surgery, strokes, or heart attacks.

- Free-radical damage to the blood-brain barrier, a membrane that separates the circulating blood
the brain.

- Daily exposure to toxic chemicals such as alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drugs.

- Low blood sugar levels

- Low estrogen levels in postmenopausal women (SOURCE)

 

New research is developing out of the Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York that has discovered a new target for Alzheimer’s and its effect on memory loss.   Free floating pieces of amyloid beta protein called oligomers appear to be attacking the brain, damaging cells and causing memory loss, says Sam Gandy, M.D. of Mount Sinai who published his findings in the Annals of Neurology this last April. The uptick on research and its findings in this area is encouraging. “Several drugs in early stages of development are aimed at oligomer production” according to a recent article in the AARP Bulletin by Elizabeth Agnvall, “but … it will be at least a year before we can expect to see results.”


Though senior moments are not necessarily a “clear and present danger” they are red flags for those who draw close to retirement age. What causes them may be beyond your control but the ability to off-set them and slow them down before they become more serious memory loss conditions are not. Stay active and exercise; not only your body but your mind as well each day to enhance the brain’s ability for recall. It could prevent another embarrassing”what’s his name” situation for you.
 

RESOURCES:

Overwhelmed, Stressed Multitasking

Heart Health Linked to How the Brain Ages


Will the former U.S. Senate staffer now turned talk show host aptly fill the shoes of the popular Countdown host?

With the news now two days old that Keith Olbermann’s Countdown program was removed from the MSNBC airwaves following Keith’s departure Friday, the studio executives have decided to fill the 8e/7c p.m. time slot with Lawrence O’Donnell’s existing 10e/9c show, “The Last Word”. The Ed Show, hosted by Ed Schultz, will move from its 6e/5c time slot to fill O’Donnel’s old time slot.  Though I would rather have seen a simple move up with Rachel Maddow’s show that always followed Countdown filling Keith’s spot and O’Donnell staying behind Maddow in the earlier hour, I think Lawrence O’Donnell will be successful in holding down this prime time period.

I have yet been able to catch O’Donnell’s nascent program on MSNBC, primarily because he airs at a time that has me struggling to stay awake and remained focus on what the program offers.  Yeah, yeah – I’m getting old but my waking hours haven’t  shortened any since I am usually up by 4am and writing material for my blog.  But I have seen O’Donnell as a guest commentator on Keith’s Countdown program and have watched him comfortably fill Olbermann’s shoes when Keith took some time off.

Lawrence isn’t as flashy and mercurial as Olbermann but he is every bit as liberal; maybe even more so.  In November of last year O’Donnell was on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” show and identified himself to visiting blogger Glenn Greenwald as a socialist.  “Unlike you, I am not a progressive” he told Greenwald.   “I am not a liberal who is so afraid of the word that I had to change my name to progressive. Liberals amuse me. I am a socialist. I live to the extreme left, the extreme left of you mere liberals, okay?”

O’Donnell’s background in politics makes him a bit more insightful on substantive policy issues within government.   He served as a key legislative aid to the late Senator from Massachusetts, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and later served as his senior advisor before filling the spot as staff director of the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works(1992-93).  Later he would become the staff director of the United States Senate Committee on Finance (1993-95).  His literary credentials with writing a book (Deadly Force,1983) and movie and television scripts enables O’Donnell to handle himself well in front of the camera while holding interviews with savvy politicos and celebrities.

 

It may be hard for some die-hard Olbermann-philes like myself to welcome O’Donnell as a Keith’s substitute but I feel certain once we all get past that we’ll recognize that few others could have come in under such circumstances and kept the ship afloat, fighting the good battle that counters right-wing messages coming out of FOX.


Looking beyond his final “good night, and good luck” send off.

I thought at first he was informing us that his “Countdown” program was going to transition into something new and different when Keith Olbermann announced last Thursday night that this was his last telecast.  I grew somewhat shocked when it became clear it was not and that he was indeed leaving MSNBC for good, with no prospects of his progressive views airing again; progressive views that helped many of us make it through the nightmare administration of George W. Bush and his curmudgeon vice-president Dick Cheney.  It also served as a counterbalance for the right wing malignancy being aired on Roger Ailes’ FOX news, what Olbermann himself referred to as “FOX noise”.

Not many of us heard of Keith when he first filled in and later remained to air what was then seen as a humorous take on top stories of the day back in 2003.  But news of him spread like wildfire when he took a hard turn in our direction on August 30, 2006 as he aired his first of many “special commentaries” that would become a mainstay for him for the next few years.  This one was a blistering attack on Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his cavalier approach to the invasion and sustained war in Iraq.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld shares a ...

Image via Wikipedia

Olbermann’s words struck at the heart of a man and an administration that had for too long got a pass from the press for sheer arrogance, thus lifting the spirit of liberals and non-liberals alike everywhere.

Within hours the blogosphere was abuzz about the man that gave new hope for sanity’s resurrection in an era when neoconservatives were pushing the limits of moral responsibility.  For me personally I hadn’t been this charged since I heard Howard Dean attack the wrong-headed policies of Bush/Cheney on Meet the Press in 2002 as he also  notified listeners about his candidacy for the 2004 Presidential nomination.

Olbermann’s “Countdown” segment quickly became a broadcast staple for liberals and turned out not to be such a bad move for a faltering MSNBC.  A recent report by the AP noted that “‘Countdown’ became MSNBC’s most popular show. Instantly, a network that had often floundered in seeking a direction molded itself after Olbermann.”       

And as it did  more of us from progressive quarters helped boost those ratings and at times challenged the popular segments of the O’Reilly Factor, Hannity and Colmes and others on FOX during that prime time period.

As his popularity grew and his voice challenged the policies and inherent failures that guided the Bush/Cheney White House, the hope that not only Democrats would regain seats in Congress in 2006 but that some of them would be like-minded liberals became like cool running water to an arid progressive landscape.  Olbermann came along and literally pulled many of us out of the doldrums that was so pervasive at the time.  Our voices were being shouted down by the more prominent right wing talking heads on FOX and radio broadcasts like Rush Limbaugh and a rising poster child for the lunatic fringe, Glenn Beck.

I don’t feel remiss at all to say that had Olberman not changed his Countdown segment with a “liberal bias” that many who would finally find the courage to challenge the Bush/Cheney White House might never have advanced as quick as they did.  Surely his  success as a broadcaster would not have reached the level it finally did.

Olberman became part of trio with the other progressives broadcasts of Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show” and Bill Maher’s “Real Time” that pushed the mainstream media into taking a closer look at the message coming from the White House and moving away from the neoconservative viewpoints of conservative commentaries  The support base that evolved from such programs ultimately fired up a grass roots drive that not only garnered wins for Democrats in 2006 but helped pushed their Party in 2008 to some of the biggest majorities in the Senate and House that had not been seen for decades.  The coup de gras was the Presidency recaptured as Barack Obama defeated a lack-luster John McCain and a then unknown, Sarah Palin.

I will miss Keith and his Countdown program.  I must confess there were a few times when I thought he made some tacky remarks but that hardly served to deflect from what was his greater contribution to the national dialogue.  However, when there was a comment that went over the line, as it did when he commented on Louisiana Senator Vitter’s wife’s attire and demeanor in a news clip that had her standing by her unfaithful husband, Olbermann came back the next day saying “there was no justification for such a segment about what a woman, a victim of her husband’s inappropriate behavior was wearing in public… so to Mrs. Vitter and to you, the viewer, I once again apologize.”

I can only count on one hand how many times this occurred with Keith over the years, the apologies that is for faux pas he had made.  Has his adversaries over at FOX made similar conciliatory gestures for many of their gaffes, their are not enough fingers to mark their sins by.

It is still not completely clear what the circumstances were that led to Olbermann’s exit from MSNBC.  There were clearly some tensions between him and management that became exposed last November when he was suspended for violating an NBC policy on campaign contributions; a policy that didn’t seem to be evenly applied to all at the network.  This air of conflict between Keith and his bosses, combined with the weight of losing his mother and father within a short period of time may have influenced his decision to call it quits.

What does appear to be clear to me at least is that his decision to leave was not some temperamental reaction but an honest assessment of who he was, where he was and what he wanted to do.  I believe him when he said that his continued presence there was more a response to the public’s “insistence” that he carry on than his desire to stay.

There were many occasions, particularly in the last 2½ years, where all that surrounded the show – but never the show itself – was just too much for me,” Olbermann said in his exit statement. “But your support and loyalty and, if I may use the word, insistence, ultimately required that I keep going. My gratitude to you is boundless.”

His exit then is more a reflection of a man being true to himself rather than currying favor with a management whose focus always has their eye on profit margins.  His absence should not be seen by those who rallied to his side in the dark days back in 2006 as an end to what he helped start.  Instead we can thank Mr. Olbermann for being there when we needed him and choose now to sustain that impetus to achieve future progressive gains.

“Good night, and good luck”


Some are not even listening when they respond to your views

The western front of the United States Capitol...

Image via Wikipedia

It is perhaps common practice  amongst elected officials to always proclaim that they share the views of the American people, yet it is not always clear which American people they refer to.  And though it is bad form on their part to publicly point out that some views of their constituents are unrealistic, most voters would give their congress person wiggle room to make decisions that afford the best overall outcome for those they represent as opposed to standing on rigid principle and wound up gaining nothing.

But that all seems to have changed with the evolution of the so-called grass-roots movement referred to as the Tea Party.  Unless their representative acts unequivocally on their guiding principles they will not be spared any and all virulent condemnation.  Thus out of fear and the strong urge to retain their seat, broad based representation once expected from your legislator, has been supplanted by a minority view presented as “the will of the American people.”

A BRFIEF ACCOUNTING OF WHAT BROUGHT US HERE

The Tea party is an amalgamation of genuinely frustrated Libertarians and others from the further extremes of conservatism who have watched their candidates lose while the government of the two dominating Parties appear to be extending the role of government in areas these people are uncomfortable with.  All factions within the Tea Party appear to be pretty much guided by the philosophical views of Libertarians that has very little need for government in our lives outside national defense and some essential infrastructure programs vital to economic growth.

But as is pretty much the norm for broad based views of constituent groups, the devil is in the details.  Outcast neoconservatives have wormed their way into the small army of Ron Paul loyalists who were an inspired core constituency of conservatives and moderates from both major Parties.  Their voices could often be heard from the edges of the political campaigning but not loud enough to garner any pluralities to win seats.

Republican Primary Results.

Image via Wikipedia

But once the 2008  elections gave Republicans their biggest loss in decades, this small band of “Constitutionalists” found the attention of people like former GOP House Majority leader Dick Armey and Industrialist tycoons David and Charles Koch.

With the political savvy of Armey and his insider Washington connections along with the vast wealth of petroleum magnates like the Kochs and Exxon/Mobil, the small unsophisticated Tea Party organization grew exponentially as all elements on the right found a base to promote their anti-government, anti-liberal and anti Democrat views.

Libertarians are not really reflective of many of the views that these factions bring with them.  In some respects Libertarians represent the values of progressives by insisting that no wars should be waged without the consent of the Congress and are opposed to policies that seek to eliminate the separation of the church and state doctrine; a doctrine that is soundly embedded in the Constitution’s  “establishment” clause of the 1st amendment and Article VI that says “”no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

ENTER THE GOP OPERATIVES AS TEA PARTY LOOK-ALIKES

The GOP has associated themselves with original Tea Partiers to form an allegiance to  advantage them, having lost much of the political capital they gained in the early days of the Bush/Cheney administration.  The angry voices often displayed at Tea Party rallies came to be defined by the forces of Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks as the so-called “voices of the American people”.  It was an idea that cleverly portrayed the anger of common mainstream Americans who saw their wages and benefits being lowered and their jobs disappearing shortly after the Bush administration first and then the Obama administration acquiesced to large bailouts for defaulting financial institutions and some auto manufacturers.

The notion by the Tea Party that government was too far reaching fell easily into a public mindset that has felt betrayed by government.  But what was being hidden from them was that those very forces that created the economic havoc that impacted their lives were pulling the puppet strings of GOP candidates to make it look like they were just one of them.  This behind-the-scenes control of the message has enabled powerful corporate interests to attack legislation that actually benefits mainstream Americans; all along really benefitting the profit margins of large corporate interests.

Health Care reform is a classic example.  For decades now the cost of health care has risen to a level that many can no longer afford it.  Unless you are gainfully employed with a company that provides insurance benefits the out-of-pocket expense for families is close to 25% of their take home pay.  This growth has been achieved by corporate-friendly Republicans who have successfully fought off attempts by progressive groups to remedy the disparity between health insurers and their powerless consumers; attempts that were finally overcome when the the 111th Congress passed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in March, 2010.

Republican operatives, especially those neoconservatives like Dick Armey from the spend and borrow days of the Bush era, successfully associated this legislation as one more piece of government intervention into the hapless lives of citizens already being crushed  by the weight of the recession.  Many bogus interpretations developed through right-wing, corporate funded bloggers and conservative talking heads that went after people’s emotions rather than their common sense.   Absurdities like “death panels”, free medical services to illegal aliens and government control of who you use as a doctor were all put out there to detract from the factual components of the bill that were the total opposite of what Tea Party representatives and conservative radio talking heads were conveying.

THE POINT OF DISCONNECT COMES INTO FOCUS

However this may be starting to turn on the perpetrators of deceit as polls are reflecting views of people who have had time to take a closer look at the ACA.  In fact recent polls taken just before the new GOP House majority ran a bill through to repeal the health care reform legislation, showed that 55% either wanted the bill to remain intact or were unsure of the need to repeal it.  That figure grew to 60% a week later.

And yet many in the GOP still want us to think that “the American people reject” the ACA.  There still trying to convey that the voices of a minority reflect the true will of the people.  My own Congressman, Texas District 26’s Michael Burgess, the seat vacated by Dick Armey in 2000,  just responded to a protest of mine asking him NOT to vote to repeal the ACA.  It is clear he either ignored my pleas or simply rejected them out right.

I made one phone call to his D.C. office they day before the vote and sent two early morning e-mails to his website the day of the vote.  In it I told Dr. Burgess that If you’re really serious about serving your constituents, all the people in your district that is, you will not vote to repeal the health care reform bill, the Affordable Care Act (ACA).  There is too much the bill has of value for you to outright reject it without offering something of substance to supplant it.  Your belief that free-market practices will lower health care costs has been proven to be naive.”

The next day I receive an official letter from his office via e-mail that starts with Thank you for contacting me regarding you support for repealing the Democrat’s health care law. I appreciate hearing from you on this subject”. What part of “don’t vote to repeal the health care reform bill” would an attentive individual define as “support” for it?  Clearly the delusion that corporate talking points assimilated into right-wing outlets is being touted as the view of “all Americans” in the mind of Dr. Burgess as well as others in the GOP; an imaginary “mandate” from the electorate.  Everything else has been programmed out.

I was assured by congressman Burgess that he and other members of his Party would “be more focused, targeted, and deliberate in our efforts, specifically addressing each of the different health care issues individually, in order of priority.” This is congress-speak for “we will drag our feet on this important issue until they are nothing more than nubs below our ankles.” Why would anyone with half a brain believe that Republicans who have and continue to cater to the interests of the health care industry and who have a history of blocking most efforts to lower overall health care cost, will automatically change to someone who is more focused, targeted, and deliberate in their efforts to do the opposite?

Next time you have an opportunity to talk to your representative at a town hall meeting, look closely into their eyes.  If you see that the pupils are dilated and glazed over – run.  They’ve been converted to zombies and will ignore you with extreme prejudice if you have arguments counter to ways they have been programmed to by monied interests posing as “friends of the people”.

FreedomWorks – http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=FreedomWorks

recent polls – http://www.pollingreport.com/health.htm


Reading Ronni Bennet’s excellent blog on aging recently, Times Goes By, I recalled a piece I wrote last summer, prior to the 2010 election on the strength of the Social Security System.  I did so because, as is the custom of conservative politicians during political campaigns, they are driven to disparage one of the most effective social programs this country has produced.  As many times as the evidence has concluded that Social Security is relatively sound and will be solvent for decades to come, those pandering to the financial interests in this country begin their henny penny shrieks about how it is doomed and will become a tax burden to us all.

Sadly the GOP was able to win back the majority in the House and their clamoring for “fixing” Social Security will be elevated to new heights.  This concern has brought many of  us who have retired and rely on social security to stay on our toes and watch for any sign that the bonds that hold this safety net in place are not untethered by the monied interests seeking to advance their vast fortunes even further at our expense.

Seeking to work with the new majority in the House, President Obama has indicated he may be willing to negotiate away some of our benefits that are already weakened by a tough economy and a stock market that’s as volatile and uncertain as ever.  This goes against everything that he promised us during his campaign; promises that led many of us to throw our support behind this political new comer over more seasoned candidates like Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and Christopher Dodd.

I sincerely hope that this is only a head-jerk motion on the part of the President to see if he can expose some Republicans to their constituents back home who depend upon these benefits to literally survive.  But we mustn’t assume that Mr. Obama will not fall into the political trappings that all well-intentioned politicians inevitably do – breaking campaign promises.

U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont

Image via Wikipedia

Bernie Sanders, Independent Senator from Vermont, has sent the President a letter (read it here) to not only remind the President of his promises but educate him about its true solvency and its beneficial contribution to people whose life-long income never allowed them to stow sufficient amounts away for their retirement  years.

Sanders’ letter essentially speaks to much of what my writing on this did 5 months ago.  It’s good to know that my efforts parallel that of a man whose expertise on this subject is of the highest caliber.  What follows then are my comments from last summer on a subject that most Americans, especially those over 50, should be knowledgable about and concerned to the point that they adamantly make their congressional representative aware of it.

*********************************************************************************

 

Like the misinformed premature rumors of Mark Twain’s death a century ago, the demise of Social Security is greatly exaggerated. Depending on who you listen to, Social Security is already bankrupt or will be in less than 10 years. This uninformed rumor has reared its ugly head nearly every election cycle over the last 30 years. The truth is not so negative and not as complicated as many whose wishful thinking for this Great Depression era program to end would hope.

Social Security: Public Health nursing made av...

Image via Wikipedia

The economic collapse of 1929 wreaked havoc on American fortunes across the board. 1 in 4 people lost their jobs and savings accounts were wiped out. Especially hard hit were the elderly whose limited resources disappeared as over 10,000 banks went into failure, robbing them of what little they had set aside for their late years in life. It has been estimated that in 1934 over half of the elderly in America lacked sufficient income to be self-supporting.

Social Security in its early days was set up as a hedge against the inadequacies of an economic system that failed to provide a living wage and allow many workers to set enough aside to provide for their needs as they became removed from the work force. As our more urban and industrial society moved away from an agrarian economy, the extended family that took care of their aging parents started to disappear as children moved away from home to seek independent lives. Many elderly became renters rather than owners and relied on the services of strangers to provide the resources they had been able to provide for themselves on their small farms and ranches.

As the ability to fall back on assistance from family and a close-knit community disappeared, the elderly had no real resources to generate the revenue it required to buy the food, clothing, housing and heating fuel they needed. Many European countries had already been addressing the needs of the poor, especially the elderly. Theodore Roosevelt was an early champion of a system in this country that would fend off the “crushable elements at the base of our present industrial structure” that robs the elderly from “the human wreckage due to its wear and tear, and the hazards of sickness, accident, invalidism, involuntary unemployment, and old age”.

Roosevelt Signs The Social Security Act: Presi...

Image via Wikipedia

But it was not until Teddy’s cousin Franklin came along and made The Social Security Act of 1935 part of his New deal agenda did this serious issue finally get the attention it needed.

It’s a self-sustaining program that over the years has collected over $13 trillion while paying out $10.6 trillion in benefits. During lean years when revenues shrank due to high unemployment the surpluses that Social Security has acquired and earned interests on covered not only a growing number of recipients but was able to provide cost of living increases over the years. According to an Op-Ed piece by Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman, “Social Security has been running surpluses for the last quarter-century, banking those surpluses in a special account, the so-called trust fund. The program won’t have to turn to Congress for help or cut benefits until or unless the trust fund is exhausted, which the program’s actuaries don’t expect to happen until 2037 — and there’s a significant chance, according to their estimates, that that day will never come.” (Attacking Social Security, by Paul Krugman, NYTimes, 8/15/10)

So where does the notion come from that Social Security is failing? In part it is due to the misunderstanding about how the social security funds collected from our payroll checks affect the larger U.S. economy. Social Security, along with Medicare and Medicaid make up the largest share of the government’s total outlays. But as a stand-alone entity SS outlays are no bigger than current Defense Dept. outlays. According to the CBO Social Security is considered to be an “off-budget” Treasury account. It is the rising health care costs in this nation that affect Medicare and Medicaid, impacting future deficits and by default dragging the SS program into the fray.

The anti-tax crowd within conservative ranks wants to eliminate this program as a part of their overall campaign to keep “big government” out of our private lives. Yet as an insurance program, the plan pays for itself much like it would in the private sector. The benefit for a federally insured program though is that costs are kept low and benefits high because overhead expenses are minimal and there is no profit motive to eat away at the premiums workers pay into this program.

Social Security will face some rough times in the coming years because a large segment of society known as the port WWII baby boomers are retiring and the demand for benefits will increase. Also, in these tough economic times older people are being laid off or forced to retire due to a shrinking economy, creating an even greater burden on SS benefits as many of these people choose to opt-in to the system early. The impact of this though as Paul Krugman points out is that it will only “cause the cost of paying Social Security benefits to rise from its current 4.8 percent of G.D.P. to about 6 percent of G.D.P.” – over the next 20 years. This is less than what the rise in defense spending has been since 2001 and yet there has been no hue and cry from conservatives about cutting defense spending to get the deficit under control.

Even though there will be a higher proportion of retirees vs. work force over the next decade or so, past SS surpluses that were set aside should help to adjust for this for at least until 2037. After this, until some corrections are made, the system will still be able to pay out about 75% of previous benefits for another 20-30 years. Had the previous Bush administration not taken such a cavalier approach towards deficits by cutting taxes for the wealthiest 2% or engaged in an unnecessary war in Iraq funded by loans from China and others, the budget surplus that existed prior to 2001 would have been enough to offset the strain on a system caused by a large increase of retirees.

However, if current CBO projections for reducing the deficit are correct from savings we can gain from reducing health care costs as a result of the recently passed health care legislation, there is a good likelihood that there will be adequate funds for retirees well into the future. An additional $300 million in savings will begin March 1st, 2011 as paperless payments are initiated – direct deposits into your checking account or through a government Direct Express Debit MasterCard. Further deficit reductions can could have occur occurred too if the Congress had been wise enough to allow the deficit-raising Bush tax cuts to expire at the end of this year, especially for the wealthiest 2%.

We can make some simple adjustments to make sure that future generations are not going to be rejected when their time comes to cash in on what they have been contributing to all their working life. As life expectancy increases and the technology we develop keeps older people healthier and living longer, it may be necessary to increase retirement ages for collecting SS benefits. It may also be necessary that as wealthier retirees enter into the system that their benefits be reduced at a rate commensurate to private retirement benefits they have been able to set aside. A report released in May this year by the Senate Special Committee on Aging found “that relatively minor tweaks could put the trust fund back on sound financial ground” through 2085.(“Ten Things You Should Know About Social Security” by the U.S. News & World Report)

The economic hardship for many families to help their aging parents is reduced significantly by the benefits paid out to our senior citizens through the social security system. The benefits have prevented many people from living in squalor and dying earlier deaths had they not had this safety net in place. These government secured benefits are literal life-lines for a segment of society that are at the tail end of an economic system where being able to save for the future is extremely difficult. People need to feel secure in their old age that after working hard all of their lives there is a safety net out there they’ve contributed to and will not disappear as a result of insecure risky investments in a volatile free market.

The program serves as a stick in eye for the anti-government crowd that insists that “the government is not the solution to the problem, it is the problem”. It’s a program that is alive and well and has been for 75 years. Its trust fund must be safeguarded to insure it is not raided for self-serving purposes that take the dedicated contributions to it and spend it on corporate wish list items, widening even further an income gap between the haves and the have-nots.

RESOURCES:

Ten Things You Should Know About Social Security

Historical Background and Development of Social Security

CBO

Originally published at Associated Content for Yahoo! by LB Woodgate


“Mental health has been hidden behind a curtain of stigma and discrimination for too long. It is time to bring it out into the open. The magnitude, suffering and burden in terms of disability and costs for individuals, families and societies are staggering.”  – Lee Jong-wook with the Department of Mental Health and Substance Dependence, Noncommunicable Diseases and Mental Health, World Health Organization, Geneva.

As the events unfold surrounding the attack of an apparently mentally ill young man on a small gathering in a shopping center in Tucson Arizona, killing six and wounding 13 others, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, questions have been raised about what appears to be the absence of adequate care with our mentally ill.

There has always been stress on the health system to accommodate those individuals of moderate and low means who can’t afford timely and prolonged treatment for their mental diseases, like schizophrenia.  But the stress becomes amplified in economic hard times much like what we are experiencing today.  State budgets are struggling to pay their bills and keep from sinking deeper into debt.  As has always been our tendency in this country, social services are usually the first to feel the knife when it comes to finding ways to balance budgets.

Funding for behavioral health treatment in Arizona was cut by as much as 50% last year according to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, denying mental health service to nearly 28,000 Arizona residents.  What are the repercussions of this and how might it have effected the outcome of Jared Loughner’s deadly actions.

According to Dr. H. Clark Romans with the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), the recent budget cuts in Arizona beginning in January 2010 have expelled some 2800 former mental health patients from the system because their mental health status was not diagnosed as serious.  Beginning in July 2010 those who did have a serious diagnosis lost “virtually every service they were getting except generic medications” because they weren’t deemed not poor enough by state officials to qualify for the state’s run Medicaid program called ACCESS.  This meant these people could no longer have access “to their doctor, case manager, support groups, out patient services, transportations subsidies and eventually housing subsidies” according to Dr. Romans.

The PhD representative with NAMI pointed out in an interview Monday that Arizona has laws in place that will allow some involuntary commitment for those who clearly need help.  When the Pima County Community College administrators recognized Loughner’s erratic and strange behavior they could have used these options to have him committed, as could the Sheriff’s Department that had been aware also of Loughner’s spells of abnormal behavior.  Romans says “it is not an arbitrary process, it’s a thoughtful process, it’s a tool that can be used” to help those like Loughner, who supposedly did not indicate an apparent danger to himself or others by these two institutions prior to his rampage on January 8th.

Will not only Arizona’s budget cuts but similar budget cuts in other states create a condition that may allow another unstable person to wreak havoc on society if not detected beforehand?  It’s possible according to Dr. Romans.  “The fact that people who are making more, at least for the moment, more than 100% of the poverty level, are now in a category that they have virtually no access to services, the public mental health services, so I think we have raised the barrier considerably higher than it used to be, so people who, you know, could be unstable are at risk.”

Dr. Romans further points out that “the fact is that most people who do have serious mental illnesses go through their life, undiagnosed and untreated.  So any of those people could at any time be in a situation where the stress precipitates their symptoms, and the services are moving further away from that”.

An Intratec TEC-DC9 with 32-round magazine; a ...

Image via Wikipedia

In studying this issue we should consider some of the other cases where people who were mentally unstable and wound up killing others as a result of their disease that went undetected?

Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter was diagnosed as early as the 8th grade for selective mutism, a psychological mental disorder … which a person, most often a child, who is normally capable of speech is unable to speak in given situations, or to specific people.”  It can co-exist with severe forms of social anxiety. Cho was supposed to be treating his symptoms with medications and therapy and had been placed in special education classes under an “emotional disturbance” classification.  After his junior year in high school he rejected any further treatment.

Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the Columbine High School killers, were not, as first portrayed as part of some “trench coat mafia outcasts”.  They both suffered from mental instabilities.  Diebold, the hothead, was depressive and suicidal.  Harris, the kid everyone thought was “sweet-faced and well-spoken” was later diagnosed as a psychopath.

Dr. Robert Hare, who authored Without Conscience, considered the authoritative work on psychopathic behavior and was one of the psychologists consulted by the FBI about Columbine, says “Unlike psychotic individuals, psychopaths are rational and aware of what they are doing and why. Their behavior is the result of choice, freely exercised.”

It appears their illnesses had not manifested themselves to a level that those close to them saw it as a potential threat. No one, not even their parents seem to pick up on these symptoms because as David Cullen points out in his Slate magazine article on these findings five years after the 1999 incident, “Both killers feigned regret” to a previous robbery and avoided prosecution for the robbery by engaging what Cullen says “was  a ‘diversion program’ that involved counseling and community service.”  Perpetual deceitfulness is a classic symptom of the psychopath.

Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, seems to fit Dr. Robert Hare’s description of a psychopath.  He was a product of parents that underwent a painful divorce when he was 10. There are no records of his mental condition leading up to the bombing of the Murrah Building bombing but clearly he developed a neurosis that is typical of someone who was raised by a unaffectionate father, was bullied in school, read anti-government literature (McVeigh read William Pierce’s neo-nazi tract, The Turner Diaries), couldn’t hold a steady job and was never able to develop a stable relationship with women he dated.

He served in military combat but no record exists that shows he suffered PTSD.  After showing a keen interest in the United States Army Special Forces he later became discouraged after entering the program and soon left, with a military psychological profile that catergorized him as very unsuitable for SF.  A 1995 Washington Post article cited that “McVeigh complained that the Army had implanted him with a microchip into his buttocks so that the government could keep track of him.” McVeigh, unlike the others who killed innocent victims from some mental imbalance, was never around others long enough to diagnose his building schizophrenia.

Does society pay a higher price in monetary terms and human suffering when they fail to address mental health issues early?

As I indicated above, the costs to assist those in our communities who suffer debilitating mental illnesses are high.  Most people who need the services are those least likely to afford them or encouraged to seek out what is made available through state and federal funding.  What are the social costs when treatment is delayed?

According to NIMH “Suicide is a major, preventable public health problem. In 2007, it was the tenth leading cause of death in the U.S., accounting for 34,598 deaths. The overall rate was 11.3 suicide deaths per 100,000 people. An estimated 11 attempted suicides occur per every suicide death.”  Globally we rank 40th out of 106 nations studied that have suicide rates per 100,000 people per year.

One in four families has at least one member with a mental disorder, with other family members often serving as the primary caregivers, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).  Out of pocket expenses are often not revealed in statistics on mental health care coverage.  Also not revealed is the human toll that victims of mental illness suffer , including family members, in the form of “human rights violations, stigma and discrimination, both inside and outside psychiatric institutions.”(WHO)

In their study on the issue, WHO has estimated that “The cost of mental health problems in developed countries is estimated to be between 3% and 4% of GNP. However, mental disorders cost national economies several billion dollars, both in terms of expenditures incurred and loss of productivity. The average annual costs, including medical, pharmaceutical and disability costs, for employees with depression may be 4.2 times higher than those incurred by a typical beneficiary. However, the cost of treatment is often completely offset by a reduction in the number of days of absenteeism and productivity lost while at work.

Clearly their is a need to address our growing dilemma with dysfunctional members of society.  When they fail to get the help they need with their disorders, they become a deadly threat to themselves and others in their community.  The Affordable Care Act, that was repealed by the House Republican majority in Congress yesterday, attempts to mollify this crisis by preventing insurers to regard substance abuse or mental illness as a condition to deny coverage as a “pre-existing condition”; nor will they be able to use those conditions to raise premiums.  Furthermore, “mental health and substance use disorder services will be part of the essential benefits package, a set of health care service categories that must be covered by certain plans, including all insurance policies that will be offered through the Exchanges, and Medicaid.” (The Affordable Care Act & Mental Health: An Update)

The tragedy in Tucson should not become a missed opportunity to get all of us involved at a level that could hopefully prevent any similar reoccurrence.  Next time it may be our own communities that experiences the public apathy that in part allows this to happen.

Related Articles:

Jared Loughner And The Sorry State Of Mental Health Care

How the mental health system failed Jared Loughner


Remember how much more you used to care how you looked to others? We fussed over the littlest things; a hair out a place, a pimple too big or skin not tanned enough. If we didn’t reflect the latest fashion fad by current celebrities we would worry ourselves silly. The need to be noticed when you’re an adolescent and a young adult is perhaps as strong as it ever was. So when do such concerns tend to evaporate?

Two adolescent couples at the 2009 Western Ida...

Image via Wikipedia

Even as we get into middle-age we want to maintain a certain physical appeal with our peers. The drive is so compelling researchers have found that we will spend a large percentage of our budget to enhance our appearance through cosmetics, clothes, or diet and exercise programs. And then you age.

One of the many gratifying aspects of age is that our egos and vanity become diminished.  Nature has altered our appearance enough to where all the cosmetic products on the market are not going to make enough of an impact to fool anyone. Once we have that settled within our self-consciousness, we begin to feel at ease with who we really are at long last.

Assorted cosmetics and tools

Image via Wikipedia

We may have pain in joints, thinning hair and excess body fat but we no longer have to be slaves to fashion and cosmetology. I realize that a segment of the geriatric crowd will dispute this and we’ll see them going out kicking and screaming when confronted with this reality. But for those who accept it, there is a peace that only comes when worry no longer clutches at your humanity.

Time is weighing in on us but what time remains can now be used more productively.  Instead of spending precious time, energy and money on maintaining the appearance of beauty and youth, we can focus on more meaningful endeavors that will hopefully leave a legacy for us with our children and grandchildren. We are now more free to give of ourselves as much as we can that helps future generations so that they may gain from our experiences; whether it be volunteering to assist with community needs or simply passing on how best to by-pass the foibles and roadblocks that are commonly shared by each generation.

I realize that in today’s modern society, “looks” tip the scales of social acceptance in one’s direction and age is a take-away. How we perceive ourselves however is more important and sustaining than how others do. That was true when we were hormonal adolescents but culture being what it is, especially in this country and most western civilizations, made us blind to such truths at that age. People, I think, are more receptive to genuineness than they are to those who put on airs about themselves.

We may not turn heads as we did when our youth was at full bloom but then our self-esteem is no longer shattered as it was then because we have accepted what time inevitably does to everyone – and that is a relief for many in subtle ways. Now, if only memory will not rob us of this solace our remaining years can be spent enjoying the many things we over-looked in our youth wasted on vanity.   


reprinted by the gracious permission of my friend Donna Cavanaugh

As I headed to my car in the grocery store parking lot, I noticed a bit of a commotion. Two police cars had blocked off the aisle where I was parked, and there was a woman screaming and crying. Leaning against my front bumper was a well-dressed, elderly man. He was just staring at the mayhem, so he didn’t notice me loading my bags into my tailgate. When I came around to the driver’s side, he stood up and apologized for sitting on my car.

“Don’t worry about it,” I told him. “What is going on?”

“A minor accident- and I guess I might be the cause. See the screaming maniac over there?” he asked as he pointed to a distraught woman. “I backed into her car. I don’t understand what her problem is. It’s a little bump. I can’t even see much damage, but she started yelling that she was in pain and that she wanted an ambulance. I am guessing she is getting ready to sue me.”

“She is probably just upset and when she calms down, she will realize she only had minor damage to her car. What lawyer would take a case like this? “

“I would,” he responded. “I convince people to sue for less than this.”

I have to admit I was shocked, and I felt the hair on the back of my neck spring up when he said those words, and for a split second, I wished I had a crucifix to stick in front of this guy’s face, but all I could manage to do was smile and say,

“I guess what goes around comes around?”

Do you believe the old lawyer didn’t see the humor in my comment? Anyway, even though this incident and impending lawsuit was happening to someone who might have deserved it, I was saddened by the woman’s reaction to this fender bender. Despite her dramatic hysteria, she knew that if she worked this accident just right, she might hit a small — or maybe, a big lottery payoff.

As I drove home from this scene, I started to think how much kinder the world would be if we all ended our fender benders on a nicer note as I did a few years back. Allow me to reminisce. I was stopped at a red light in Northeast Philadelphia. Apparently, the guy behind me didn’t see the red light because he didn’t slow down until it was too late. He hit me pretty hard, and I knew there would be damage. At first, I was a tad miffed, but as we started to talk, I felt badly for the guy. He had just picked up his new Thunderbird from the dealership and was driving it home for the first time when he rammed my rear bumper. His front had a great deal of damage, and I think he started to cry.

After we exchanged information, he asked if he could pay me cash for the damage. I said I didn’t care as long as he covered the bill completely. During that week,one auto body shop gave me an estimate of $2,300. I thought that was really high, and so did my car accident partner. I went for another estimate, and this one turned out to be $1,300.

My car accident friend was thrilled with the new estimate; and he sent me a check immediately for the damage. A few days later he called to make sure everything was okay, and we chatted for a few minutes. Then, I got a dozen roses and a card that said, “Thanks for understanding, and it was a pleasure bumping into you!”

Now, that is a way to have an accident, but I know that these mishaps don’t always turn out so well. Sometimes, the threat of a lawsuit is the only way to get results. Picture it: my husband and I are making our weekly pilgrimage to Home Depot when this woman veers into our lane and sideswipes my van. My husband pulls over to get information, but the woman panics and takes off. Yep, she guns the accelerator and flees. Now, being the calm-headed one in my marriage, I scream,

“Go get her! Let’s make her sorry she woke up this morning!”

Okay, I got a little animated, but my adrenaline was flowing. We followed her for miles and when she turned into a shopping center, my husband cut her off. When she finally came to a stop, I jumped out of my car and pounced on her hood and shouted,

“You are toast!”

Of course, while I was trying to physically corral this woman, my husband took the more logical route and called the police who arrived on the scene within minutes. Let me just say that the police were a lot angrier at her than I was. The two officers wanted to arrest her right then and there. I would have gone along with the bust had I not noticed her son in the backseat of the car. I don’t think even the hardest of hearts would have wanted that little kid to see his mother get hauled off to the big house in cuffs over a vehicular mishap.

While I was feeling sorry for the kid, the moronic mother was calling her husband, the attorney. When he got to the scene of the crime, he tried to argue to the officers that the entire accident was my husband’s fault. That is when I turned to the cop and said,

“Go ahead, take her in! Give her the chair!”

The police explained that she could get jail time for fleeing the scene of an accident, but the death penalty was off the table — at least in the state of Pennsylvania. Now that I look back on the entire ordeal, I guess it’s a good thing that there is no capital punishment for fender benders. The one officer did make a point of telling my husband and me in front of this couple that if they tried to blame this accident on us in any way, he would encourage us to sue them and he would gladly testify on our behalf. He also informed them that he had time to press charges against the wife, and he would be happy to do so if they did not cooperate with us completely.

The threat of the lawsuit seemed to squash the attorney husband’s argumentative attitude pretty quickly. I think the idea of losing money was more disturbing to him than his wife getting sent to prison, but hey, it’s not my place to judge.

The point of these vehicular tales is this (yes, I have a point – long winded, but valid): Accidents happen. You can either be an understanding person or you can be a schmuck. And while being a schmuck may make you richer, it does not necessarily make your life better. So, if you must have an fender bender experience, make it as pleasant as it can be.


Donna Cavanaugh’s “Erma Bombeck” style of writing can be found on her
Yahoo AC list. Among many of her distinguishments, Donna has published a humor book entitled “Life on the Off Ramp” and a poetry book, “Poems for a Positive Day II” that were named award-winning finalists of the Best Books 2010 Awards, sponsored by USA Book News.



Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 81 other followers