A Selection of Past Posts

FART
 It is very difficult to get published or to even get an agent to glance at your work. Furthermore, it is not clear that what gets published and read is better than what gets turned down or ignored. This is enough to make one cry. So I propose a support group for failed authors called Failed Authors, Rejected and Turned Down (FART) Let's create a blog, a web site, a national network. Local support groups (chapters) will meet regularly. The potential membership is huge, because everyone is now trying to write books, especially autobiographies.We will meet every week and commiserate. We will model ourselves after AA and Alanon.We get on the wagon, i.e. we quit wasting our resources and ruining our health trying to peddle our writing to agents and to publishers. We are addicts, just like gamblers and alcoholics.A typical confessional at one such meeting might go like this: "I have been on the wagon for three months. I talk to my spouse and to my children again. I exercise again and I return my friends' e-mails and telephone calls.Or conversely, "I thought I had kicked my addiction to sending out queries. However, I fell off the wagon last week: I Sent out another query letter to an agent I found in the Writers’ Market."


$12,000 a day to take care of one prisoner?
$370,000 Per Month to Take Care of One PrisonerOn July 16, the Sacramento Bee printed an article about Susan Atkins - a member of the Charles Manson family who had participated in the horrendous mass murder 40 years ago. Atkins has spent the past 40 years in prison. She is now sixty, and she is dying of cancer. The article was basically about the fact that she had just once again been denied "compassionate" parole by the parole board, even though she is expected to die within a few months. In view of her crime - slashing her victims dozens of times, carving out a baby from Sharon Tate’s belly, drinking the victims’ blood, etc. - the denial is okay by me. That’s not what I want to talk about.What I want to focus on is a detail in the article which struck me as indicative of our society’s descent into madness: Since March 18, i.e. in four months, the State of California has spent $1.461,724 to treat and guard this inmate. That’s right: nearly a million and a half dollars. This is not a typo, not a decimal error by the Bee proofreader. The figure is quite accurate. In fact, it’s $1.461,724.17. Don’t forget that last 17 cents!Think about this for a moment: That’s $12,284 per day. $370,000 per month. Maybe the value of my house (yes - the subprime crisis has devalued my house a lot) every month.What is the State doing with our money? What can possibly cost 1.4 million in four months?Medical treatment? Surgery, Chemotherapy? Rehabilitation? Social and Psychological services? Security? (Atkins has been treated at an "outside" hospital).I had cancer surgery a couple of years ago. They used the expensive new-fangled Da Vincimethod. It probably cost over $100,000. But Susan Atkins cost the State, the Insurance Company, whoever, fourteen times more than I did.If this is what one high-profile inmate costs the State, we can expect that it is multiplied manifold, because the State houses two hundred thousand inmates, many of whom are also very expensive.But what on earth does the money pay for? The answer is, first and foremost: (1) salaries/fees paid to individuals and (2) fees paid to institutions. This means (1) paychecks of hundreds of thousands of dollars to physicians, anesthesiologists, surgeons, psychiatrists and lawyers, and (2) hundreds of thousands spent in fees to hospitals, labs and other firms. Thus, one inmate such as Susan Atkins drives a significant portion of the California economy. She is single-handedly responsible for sustaining the opulent lifestyle of dozens of upper-middle-class professionals who live lives of comfort in California’s suburbs.Now don’t misunderstand me: I am not singling out the public sector for being scandalously frivolous in its spending practices. I am sure that private corporations are just as bad. The current failures of dozens of banks, airlines and other companies attest to this.But my general point is this: the reason why our society and its economy are going to hell in a handbasket is that we have totally and absolutely lost track of accountability. Our bureaucratized social structure has become so large and so complex that nobody as any idea of what’s going on.As a result, the economy is hemorrhaging and, when it comes to services, there is no inkling of the meaning of the word productivity. That is, concepts such cost-benefit and "bang for your buck" are utterly alien to agencies which see no problem in spending $12,000 per day to maintain one sick prison inmate.Meanwhile, the little guy is still in touch with reality. Even the millions of Americans who are losing their homes due to imprudent borrowing, and the dozens of millions who are deeply indebted on their credit cards and otherwise - they know what’s happening: They know that they are broke and that they are in trouble.But the leadership, the bureaucrats, the CEO’s, they have lost touch with reality. Maybe we shouldn’t blame them either. Maybe the problem is systemic. Maybe the outflow of money is uncontrollable - whether in the California Department of Corrections, at the Pentagon or at General Motors.Is there a better way to run a railroad? And does anyone know what that is? I am not sure. Sometimes a newcomer thinks he can fix things, but he, too, fails miserably. Look at Schwartzenegger.So what’s the answer? Well, if the social system’s failure is an organic phenomenon that is not amenable to any individual’s intervention, then it follows that the recovery will be likewise: Things will straighten themselves out not because of wonderful new laws and policies, but just because the collapse will lead to a natural turn-around (or not).The moral, then? Let things take their course. After a while, there wont be any money left, and people will simply have to walk away from the counter, empty-handed. There’ll be pain, but most people will manage, somehow.


America Needs more Realism, less Dreaming
This is something I wrote in response to two syndicated columns that appeared in the Sacramento Bee on July 15, one by Kathryn Lopez titled "Limbaugh Sets a Good Example," the other by Jonathan Last under the title "The Oil Toll: It Didn’t have to be This Way."On July 15, Jonathan Last documents the hemorrhaging of American resources and our speedy descent into poverty, while countries that are awash in oil build rotating skyscrapers and artificial indoor ski resorts in the desert at our expense.At the same time, Kathryn Lopez harps on the American dream, American exceptionalism, and she puts Rush Limbaugh - who just signed a $400 million contract - up as a realistic role model for Americans. People such as Lopez make two errors:1) There is no American exceptionalism. Upward mobility and the freedom to achieve wealth are not uniquely American. There are dozens of other countries where these things happen as much as here.2) Americans delude themselves if they believe that they can emulate people like Rush Limbaugh. Optimism and belief in hard work are commendable. However, the tired talk about "the American Dream" has made Americans insufficiently realistic about their chances of hitting the jackpot - which are practically nil. We need to return to old-fashioned social policies, more government regulation, stronger unions and an equitable distribution of wealth - yes, through more progressive taxes.As long as Americans dream rather than face reality, there will be growing inequality and poverty in this country.


Is Bicycle Racing a True Sport?
Just jotting this down, even though it happened a couple of years ago (It’s hitting me now, again, because I am watching the Tour de France every day):A few years ago, I was surfing through various sports channels and I happened to catch a few minutes of something on one of the ESPN channels: There was the usual panel of sports commentators, discussing some major American sport (football, basketball or baseball, I forget), the current season, or whatever. The panelists were the usual assortment of ex-athletes, recruited from the ranks of retired NFL or NBA stars - you know people like Cris Collinsworth, the former Cincinnati star wide receiver, Charles Barkley, the former Phoenix power forward, etc.These panels of expert sportscasters are disproportionately African-American. That’s fine, in and of itself. It merely reflects the fact that blacks overwhelmingly dominate many sports. I don’t have a problem with either of these two numerical realities. Most of these national TV sports analysts - black or white - are excellent.However.However, a few of them are annoying, almost obnoxious. And sometimes there is an occasional racist episode. This is what I am talking about today: Take Charles Barkley, and some of what I saw on national television on this occasion.First of all, let me say that I have always found "Sir Charles" somewhat of an oaf. He is always grouchy. He always looks and talks angry. He seems to exude contempt for whomever he talks to, and for whatever topic he happens to be discussing. Smart and sometimes funny, yes, that he can be. But simpatico? Not to me.And so on this occasion, you know what he and his two or three acolytes at the desk in the TV studio were discussing? Well, one of them (I believe it was Barkley) proposed to set up a seminar, a panel discussion, with speakers arguing both the pros and the cons of the question, and you know what the topic would be? This:IS BICYCLING (.E.G. THE TOUR DE FRANCE) A SPORT OR NOT?Now this really infuriated me - even if these four or five American sports commentators were speaking in jest. Because here are some aspects of bicycle racing which are relevant to what they were doing on that day, and to my anger about it:(1) Bicycle racing is one of the most grueling, excruciating, and skillful sports on the planet.(2) The Tour de France is the longest and most demanding athletic event in the world, watched by the largest live audience on earth. It is a 2500 mile race, in which 200 athletes cover 100 to 200 miles EVERY day, for nearly a month. Have you ever ridden 100 or 200 miles on your bike without stopping? I bet you can’t. Well, these guys do this - every day, 25 days in a row. They are in the saddle for five to six hours EVERY DAY. And they AVERAGE speeds of 30 or more miles per hour, for the entire day. In the mountains, there are uphill climbs that go on for 10 to 20 miles at a 15% angle, with no flat or downhill interrupting the endless climbs.I sometimes take a bike ride in the foothills of the California Sierra. I do a 60-mile loop, with a couple of two-mile climbs. At my best, I can average 15 miles per hour for the whole ride, and thatnearly kills me.The Superbowl, the World Series and the NBA finals are picnics compared to the Tour de France.(3) the great bicycle champions - Indurain, Armstrong, etc. - are genetic freaks. Their heart rate at rest is in the 20s. They don’t feel the pain of lactic acid when it accumulates in their muscles. Etc.(4) At the same time, professional bike racers tend be thin little men, weighing 120 to 150 pounds, they wear tight outfits that show bulging testicles, etc. So to idiots like Charles Barkley and some of my redneck American friends, they are figures of fun.(5) Bicycle racing has not been a patriotic all-American sport, like football, basketball, baseball or boxing. To stupid people, then, it is not MANLY. It is "faggy."(6) Finally, there are practically no black bicycle racers. The last one I can remember is the North-African Zaff, in the 1950s.Thus, a sport that is practically all white and practiced almost entirely by funny-looking little Europeans is easy prey to the ridicule of American bigots, including black American bigots.In reality, the sport is arguably far more demanding than the major American sports, yet this group of ESPN sportscasters had the gall to suggest a panel discussion to determine once and for all whether the Tour de France should qualify as an athletic event.Here is my retort: let’s determine whether the World Series, the Superbowl and the NBA finals are true sports events. They are probably all fixed by crooked referees, and no more real than World Federation Wrestling.


Is America Number One?
In which Areas - Good or Bad - is America still Number One?Some thoughts about one of my favorite topics: How does the US stack up in the world, comparatively?This is well worth asking again at this time, since America seems to be going through a rough patch - to say the least. Pessimists might argue that the US is reaching a stage of permanent decline. I don’t necessarily agree with this. But there is also still a lot of the opposite imbecility: Conservatives, business elites, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and the dumb gullible red necks who have been brainwashed by them, still mouth off about “the greatest country in the world,” “the only super power,” “America only has to unleash its tremendous productivity,” “we still have the richest untapped mineral resources in the world,” “we are way ahead of Europe,”“China will never overtake us,” and other such nonsense.America Number One? In what respect? I am a statistics freak. I like comparative international statistics, especially those that deal with demographics, economics, quality of life indicators, things like that. Let’s look at a few areas - randomly:What is the “we’re number one” cliché based on?1) The most important ranking which yields an unequivocal first place for the USA is aggregate GNP. I am sure that’s what most people have in mind when they mouth off the tired “we’re number one” cliché.2) A second way in which we are also unquestionably number one is military power. This is the measure for that other tired expression “America, the only superpower.”I’m sure that there are other areas in which America still tops the world, at least if we compare countries in terms of their aggregate numbers, and not on a per capita basis. The American population is large (Although not the largest) and it is fairly developed (but not the most developed). As a result of the combination of these two facts, America often manages to produce the largest total number of “things” in a given area. For example:3) Total number of Nobel prizes4) Total number of Olympic Medals (Since the Communist governments of the USSR and East Germany stopped their massive cheating).Unfortunately, there are also bad things in which we are number one.5) I bet you that we are the most obese people in the world (probably...maybe I overlooked Samoans or some other small country...)6) That our national health is so mediocre compared to the rest of the civilized world is sad, because we are at the same time also Number One in per capita medical expenditures.7) We are by far the most indebted nation in the world. Our debt to the rest of the world is probably approaching 100 trillion, and it is growing by nearly one trillion a year.But now, what about all the many other ways in which we are not number one? Here are a few:1) We are not the largest country (Russia is)2) We are not the most populous country (China is)3) We are not the richest country: We are number #24 - right behind Malta. And I fear that we are going to slide further down in the next few years.4) we don’t live the longest, we don’t have the best national health. Many countries outpace us in this regard, including Japan, Canada, many European countries, Australia, New Zealand, etc.5) We don’t garner the most Olympic medals per capita. In Athens in 2004, we came in 39th. Some very small countries like Barbados and the Baltic States topped the list, and Australia and others were also ahead of us.6) We do not have the greatest industrial production. Our industry was once the wonder of the world, but it no longer is.There are also areas where we are often unjustly blamed for leading the pack, because these are bad things, and because there is a worldwide disease called anti-Americanism. But we are not number one in these areas either:7) We re not Number One in per capita energy consumption: Several countries are ahead of us, including Canada, Kuwait, Dubai and others.8) We are not the Number One Polluter in the world: China is.I am sure you can add to my lists. Table One is a schematic way to classify this information:Table I: In which Good and Bad Things


Inauguration of my New Blog, May 2008

CLICHES:

April 15, 2008Today, I want to be creative and to try to entertain readers with some product of my mind.I am an organized fellow. I divide all my issues into separate files. This is proper, and it is functional. In other words, it is good (a moral concept) and it works (a pragmatic concept). See, here I go again: I sub-divide an idea into two parts. Organization.So is this what I am - organization man? Is this why others respond so little to me?Nobody likes an organization man. Where are beauty, humor, love, excitement, adventure? Organization is dull.You want beauty, humor, love, excitement, adventure? Okay: number one, beauty: Mozart. Number two: humor: Bill Murray in Groundhog Day. Number three, love: I love Leah. Here I go again, I make a list. I am the organization man.Let me try again:Beauty: Quadrupedante putrem sonitu quatit ungala campumWell, not the greatest, but the only thing that came readily to mind - some Latin verse I learned in high school. I believe it’s iambic pentameter, and it says, “with four-footed sound, the nailed hoof thunders across the field.”Maybe I can be better at humor... Let’s see...What’s funny?! The Hungarian word anus means “mother,” I believe. Vulgar, not funny.! The French invented the word ordinateur for computer, because if they had kept calling it a computer, in phonetic French this becomes con-pute-heur, meaning “cunt,” “whore” and “hour.” Vulgar and (a little bit) funny.* * * * *But I cannot entertain readers with products of my mind without a theme. There cannot be a stream of consciousness without a topic. How about the topic of cliches, and starting out with one specific cliche?Yes, this is a good topic. It can include humor, wisdom, intelligence, it can benefit readers, it can be interesting.Examples of Cliches:! #1.: “Most cliches are true.” This is a cliche, but is it true?! #2.: “Absence makes the heart grow fonder,”! ...or the opposite: #3: “Out of sight, out of mind.”Both true. I miss a friend very much now. I want to move on, though, precisely because of my impotence in this regard, so I must invalidate cliche #2 and achieve cliche #3, i.e. reduce my love for my friend! #4.: “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” True. But we just saw that acliche (e.g. #2, above) and its opposite (#3) can both be true. Now what about a cliche and its “mirror image” - can they also both be true? Cliche #4 means that we should not have good intentions. Should we therefore have bad intentions? ! Cliche #5: The road to heaven is paved with bad intentions.Such logic would make Aristotle cringe, but let’s think about it for a moment, as if the nature of our intentions (good or bad) were both a sufficient and a necessary condition to end up either in hell or in heaven. Let us assume that cliche #4 also renders its mirror image - cliche #5 - true.It follows that if I plan to steal, cheat, lie and hurt others, I will end up in heaven. Hmm...Maybe this is where I could have done a lot better in my life - as could many others: What if early in your life - say when you are ten years old - you plan to become a criminal, you plan not to go to college, not to have a good job, not to raise and support a family and children, but instead you plan to just use and sell drugs, be lazy, exploit others, etc. Of course, you also plan to do these things smartly, getting away with them and avoiding punishment. These are your intentions, your plans.So let’s say that now, it’s ten years later. You are twenty. Okay, you have achieved some of your goals, you have done some bad things, but many of your plans have not materialized, because that’s the nature of most plans - they mostly don’t materialize. So you have taken and sold some drugs, you have hurt people (your parents, your friends, etc.) you have stolen here and there, etc. But you haven’t really succeeded.So you scale down your ambitions. Maybe you will get your high school degree after all. You might even get a job (just for a while, because it’s against your principles).What about ten years later? Now you are thirty. Well, you have slipped even more: After fucking everything in sight for many years, you met Susie, and you tried to abuse her like you abused all your previous girlfriends, you wanted to dump her after you used her sexually and took her money, but somehow you couldn’t quite do it. You kept backsliding and going back to her. In fact, you even moved in with her. Now, even the M-word (marriage) has begun to surface, God forbid.And then, you turn forty: Now, you are married to Susie and you have three children. You went back to college, got your MS in Computer Science, and you have been working for a software company for four years. You own a fine home and your children are about to go to college, with you paying for their higher education.By the time you turn fifty, you have joined the volunteer organization Habitat and donated three months of every summer to go down to South America to build homes for the homeless.Also, Susie’s brother, who was on kidney dialysis, needed a new kidney or else he would die, and you gave him one of yours.By the time you are sixty, the value of your total estate is about five million dollars, including your house, your summer home in Hawaii and everything else you own.Susie, alas, has had an affair with your boss, and she wants to divorce you and marry him. You totally understand, and you hold no grudge against either of them. You facilitate the situation as follows: You liquidate your entire estate. You make provisions that Susie and your children automatically receive the first two million. The remaining three million dollars, you give to the International Children’s Fund, stipulating that it all be spent to rescue some of the millions of children orphaned by AIDS in Africa. Then, you move to a region in rural India still plagued by leprosy, and you dedicate the rest of your life to the leper colony which you found there.