I cracked up when I watched this. Poor guy!
Big Brother is Concerned for Your Health
by MandiThe mayor of San Francisco has declared a city-wide ban on sugary drinks:
Coca-Cola is out, and soy milk is now part of San Francisco’s official city policy.
Under an executive order from Mayor Gavin Newsom, Coke, Pepsi and Fanta Orange are no longer allowed in vending machines on city property, although their diet counterparts are – up to a point.
Newsom’s directive, issued in April but whose practical impacts are starting to be felt now, bars calorically sweetened beverages from vending machines on city property.
That includes non-diet sodas, sports drinks and artificially sweetened water. Juice must be 100 percent fruit or vegetable juice with no added sweeteners. Diet sodas can be no more than 25 percent of the items offered, the directive says.
There should be “ample choices” of water, “soy milk, rice milk and other similar dairy or non dairy milk,” says the directive, which also covers fat and sugar content in vending machine snacks.
In theory, this is a good idea. I’m personally trying to cut soda out of my life in favor of water or Steaz. But this is a personal choice that I have made for myself. I don’t want or need the government dictating what I should or shouldn’t be drinking.
What do you think? Are these kinds of guidelines good or bad?
Touching is Good
by MandiI just read about a study that concluded that what we touch – its feel, texture, weight, etc. – influences how we make decisions.
That seems like a no-brainer of course. But I find it interesting how the columnist related this idea to the progress of technology and e-book readers. Especially since I keep flirting with the idea of buying a Nook.
The tactile experience of reading is also crucial to my reading pleasure. Holding a book compares to nothing short of a baby’s contact with his favorite blankie. Consistent with Ackerman’s findings, a hardback is superior to a paperback precisely because it is more solid, weightier and, therefore, more permanent, more important, better.
But might touching words on a printed page vs. reading them online also be relevant to one’s comprehension and judgment? Are words consigned to tangible and tactually rewarding paper more likely to register in our minds than those that float on hard tablets subject to the blinkering life span of a battery or extinguishable by a bolt of lightning?
This is the very core of the conflict I feel when I consider switching mediums. I love technology. LOVE. IT. I love buttons and gadgets and adore the sensation of playing with “futuristic” toys.
But at the same time, I love books. I love to feel the pages under my fingertips. New car smell has nothing on new book smell. And there’s something almost primal in the idea that the written word has been around throughout the ages. Moving from ink on paper to a purely digital format is a disconnect from our history – and from one another.
Part of the pleasure of a real, snail-mail letter isn’t only the effort involved in putting words to parchment but also the fact of the letter writer having touched the same piece of paper. The exchange isn’t only an act of communication but one of intimacy.
We are all part of this immense digital experiment and we know not where it leads. But the tactile vacuum inherent in the medium can’t be insignificant. Offhand, it seems that our technologically enhanced communications, though miraculous in speed and access, have become harder and rougher with the medium.
Reaching out and touching someone has become easier than ever, but we never really make contact. Hunkered over our keyboards, tapping and clicking messages to the vast Other, we have become a universe of lone rangers keeping the company of our own certitude.
I think perhaps I’ll pass on the Nook – for now.
Someone Gets It
by MandiThere’s been a lot of talk about how unemployment spoils folks and encourages them not to look for employment.
That’s a pile of bull poop.
NY Times Op-Ed columnist Paul Krugman gets it:
Now, I don’t have the impression that unemployed Americans are spoiled; desperate seems more like it. One doubts, however, that any amount of evidence could change Ms. Angle’s view of the world — and there are, unfortunately, a lot of people in our political class just like her.
But there are also, one hopes, at least a few political players who are honestly misinformed about what unemployment benefits do — who believe, for example, that Senator Jon Kyl, Republican of Arizona, was making sense when he declared that extending benefits would make unemployment worse, because “continuing to pay people unemployment compensation is a disincentive for them to seek new work.” So let’s talk about why that belief is dead wrong.
Do unemployment benefits reduce the incentive to seek work? Yes: workers receiving unemployment benefits aren’t quite as desperate as workers without benefits, and are likely to be slightly more choosy about accepting new jobs. The operative word here is “slightly”: recent economic research suggests that the effect of unemployment benefits on worker behavior is much weaker than was previously believed. Still, it’s a real effect when the economy is doing well.
But it’s an effect that is completely irrelevant to our current situation. When the economy is booming, and lack of sufficient willing workers is limiting growth, generous unemployment benefits may keep employment lower than it would have been otherwise. But as you may have noticed, right now the economy isn’t booming — again, there are five unemployed workers for every job opening. Cutting off benefits to the unemployed will make them even more desperate for work — but they can’t take jobs that aren’t there.
Wait: there’s more. One main reason there aren’t enough jobs right now is weak consumer demand. Helping the unemployed, by putting money in the pockets of people who badly need it, helps support consumer spending. That’s why the Congressional Budget Office rates aid to the unemployed as a highly cost-effective form of economic stimulus. And unlike, say, large infrastructure projects, aid to the unemployed creates jobs quickly — while allowing that aid to lapse, which is what is happening right now, is a recipe for even weaker job growth, not in the distant future but over the next few months.
But won’t extending unemployment benefits worsen the budget deficit? Yes, slightly — but as I and others have been arguing at length, penny-pinching in the midst of a severely depressed economy is no way to deal with our long-run budget problems. And penny-pinching at the expense of the unemployed is cruel as well as misguided.
It really bugs me when people say that those currently receiving unemployment benefits are abusing the system. Perhaps that is true when the economy is flourishing and jobs are abundant. But right now, today?
People receiving unemployment benefits are trying to survive.
Someone else who gets it is Eugene Robinson, op-ed columnist for WaPo:
The good news is that unemployment has fallen to “only” 9.5 percent. The bad news is that the jobless rate is down only because so many people have given up hope of finding work. Perversely, the jobless who aren’t actively looking for jobs are not counted as “unemployed.” Perhaps there should be a new category: “mired in existential despair.” If anyone in Washington wants to know why people in the hinterlands are angry, one simple answer is that our political leaders seem to be so calculating and unmoved about the parlous state of the economy.
…
The employment numbers aren’t just a monthly set of partisan talking points. They represent actual lives. They represent mortgages that might not be paid and college educations that have to be deferred; they tally mental health crises and broken marriages. Those sterile, emotionless figures speak of pain and anxiety. They mock our faith in the American dream.
Let me put it in terms that Washington understands: The party that begins to treat the unemployment crisis with the hair-on-fire urgency that it deserves is the party that will do well in November.
…
Republicans block an extension of unemployment benefits, rail about the deficit and complain that Democrats don’t understand that economic renewal will come when the private sector is unleashed. The problem is that since Republicans are in the minority, they have to work with the Democrats to get anything done. I suspect that their strategy — standing on the sidelines and yelling, “The Democrats are doing it all wrong!” — will not win as much favor from voters as the GOP hopes.
Democrats, on the other hand, do have the power to enact an agenda. But individual members of Congress act as if they are more concerned about their own electoral prospects than about bringing those unemployment numbers down. If a second economic stimulus is the answer, then that’s what Democrats should do. If the answer is something else, fine. But they should know that whether they call themselves progressives or Blue Dogs or whatever, voters see them as one party and will hold them accountable.
Would you like fries with that?
by MandiI have to share this exchange between myself and a McDonald’s employee this afternoon:
Me: Are fries the only side that you can get with the combos?
Employee: Well, you can get large fries with any of our combos!
Me:*facepalm*
Kissing Nerds
by MandiThis Makes NO Sense…
by MandiWe all know that we’ve been caught in the middle of a recession. Unemployment rates have sky-rocketed. And more than a million unemployed workers are going to be losing their benefits this month because the Senate filibustered the latest extension bill.
So why is there an article in the NY Times that says factories can’t find skilled workers?
Because they fired everybody and installed more sophisticated machinery. Now, the lower-skilled workers who were employed by these companies can’t perform the job functions required.
So we have unemployed workers and job openings. But these workers can’t perform the job as required.
Was this perhaps the most boneheaded thing these factories could have done?
Would it not have made more sense to lay off their workers with the intention of hiring those same workers back when the economy improved? Instead, these companies have screwed themselves and the people who want to work for them for the sake of “progress.”
How much progress can you make when you can’t manufacture anything with your fancy new machines because you have no one to run them?
*As an aside, I was fortunate enough to find a job 4 weeks before my unemployment ran out. I fully understand the plight of the unemployed.
Mario on Violin
by MandiI think this is pretty dang neat.
One Step Closer…
by MandiLegislation is being sponsored that would make it a felony to take a girl out of the United States to have her genitals mutilated.
Female genital mutilation involves partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. This heinous practice is common in parts of Africa, the Middle East, and Asia because of various religious and cultural ideals.
The practice makes me ill to think about. These poor girls – children, as young as toddlers – are basically tortured by these procedures. And parents allow it to happen because “they’re supposed to.”
Kudos to Representatives Joseph Crowley of New York and Mary Bono Mack of California for sponsoring this bill that would punish violators with fines and a five-year prison term.
Hopefully this will be a step closer to giving women the strength and courage to use their voice to defend themselves with.
