From my experience, holidays bring out two conflicting yet complementary emotions in me: Joy at seeing loved ones and an overwhelming desire to be far away from said loved ones.
I love my family. I just love them from over here. At my house.
It's the same way I feel about talking on the phone. I am approximately 93000% more likely to respond to a text message or email than a voicemail. The ability to say "You know what? You can wait for 6 minutes while I do some important shit." before sending a response is one of the most liberating things that technology has ever done for me (Also, pooping is much more entertaining). Try that technique on a traditional phone call. "I'm sorry. I am at a critical moment in my research of warp drive mechanics on the Enterprise D. I'm going to need you to shut up for 4-5 minutes so I can comprehend this fake science. Thanks." See how well that goes with your grandma.
That's exactly how I feel at human gatherings.
I have something I call "Corporate Andy", formerly known as "Blockbuster Andy". This guy is just a super dude. He's all about your cat stories and helping you with your newfangled touchscreen phone. He began out of necessity while at my first job. (I bet you can't guess where it was.) Putting on the Blockbuster Andy persona allowed me to be a sociable and genuinely likable guy for nearly anyone in any demographic. It worked very well for selling frivolous things to busy people. When I changed jobs my corporate persona had to evolve. I was no longer dealing with the general public. Corporate Andy became the guy at work that would listen to you explain why that particular sweater was just perfect for your dog while fixing mundane "problems" on your "system".
This is usually the personality I adopt at social events. Lately, "social events" has turned into anything outside my home. Once you're adopting artificial personalities on a nearly daily basis one of two things can happen: 1) You can gradually become that person, even when you're alone. 2) The fabric of reality around Fake You begins to crack and the dreaded Real You emerges. I believe I am in the final stages of scenario 2.
I just don't want to play the game anymore. You know the game. Brown-nosing and sexual favors getting the same consideration as intelligence and hard work. Status quo taking precedence over progress and efficiency. Showing up to the department's Christmas party on time is more important than showing up to work on time.
This is the machine that has taken control. I know I sound like an emo teenager right now but at least they give a shit about something. When you are passionate about something you make stupid decisions in the name of that passion. When you are trying to keep your desk job you lay low and try not to get noticed. I feel like I'm in a hidden camera version of Office Space. The cover of the TPS report is more important than the content.
These emotions start to seep into my after-work moods during the holidays. The absurdity of everyday human behavior becomes much more visible. Parents and grandparents fiendishly searching for a hunk of plastic because the TV said it was the hot toy of the year. Families spending hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars trying to have a better Christmas card than anyone else. Businesses everywhere trying to be polite and non-offensive while just wanting to say "Merry Christmas", "Happy Hanukkah", "Have a great Kwanzaa", "Hope you have a fantastic Whatever-The-Fuck-It-Is-That-You-Celebrate".
We have become so conditioned that you are either happy or sad, there is no in-between. I feel like I have to turn on corporate Andy just so people won't ask me why I'm sad. I'm not sad! I'm fucking indifferent to the stupid shit coming out of your mouth! I don't want to talk about the weather, or a fake singing competition on TV, or why you don't much care for the bitch in accounting.
If you have to be fake at work, and you have to be fake around your family, when can you ever be you?
Silence.
I think that's what I crave.
If small-talk and gossip and regurgitated opinions are all there is to offer, can we please just have silence?
Monday, December 26, 2011
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Bankers and Imbeciles
I am currently in a overwhelming rage. I just read this Bloomberg article about bankers' and billionaires' opinions on their tax obligations.
These criminals use shady/borderline-illegal business practices to destroy the financial stability of this country yet it's the protester who is the "imbecile"?
One of the asshats, John A. Allison IV, says "Instead of an attack on the 1 percent, let's call it an attack on the very productive." I'm not sure of Mr. Allison's daily duties as former CEO of BB&T Corp. but I'm relatively certain it didn't produce anything other than the taste of vomit in the back of my throat. Calling the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans "very productive" is like calling pimps "investment bankers". It's nonsensical and masks the reality of the tactics involved in acquiring and maintaining those positions.
No one is upset that thesecriminals individuals have been successful. We are upset because many of them destroyed millions of lives in the process and then are given absurd tax incentives and loopholes to ensure they stay wealthy. In a very basic sense, an extra 2% tax on income over $1,000,000 would be an additional $20,000 and, depending on how this income was acquired, result in a tax rate of 37%. This would still leave the individual with $630,000. Meanwhile (again, in a very basic sense not including tax credits or deductions) the single mom paying 15% on her $30,000 salary is left with $25,500. Tax credits and deductions aside, food, shelter, transportation, and general quality of life become much more uncertain for the individual bringing home $2000/month than the individual bringing home $30,000/month.
This whole scenario is assuming any of the wealthy individual's income was actually considered income. Capital gains on long-term investments, and several other forms of income, aren't technically counted as income. The Long-Term Capital Gains tax is currently set at 15% which coincidentally is also the same tax rate the single mom in the previous example, working and earning $8,500-$34,500, is responsible for. Yeah, that makes sense.
So to insinuate that the lowly hourly workers are just jealous and looking for a handout is arrogant and offensive.
According to a report from the IRS, average household income increased 62% from 1979 through 2007. I won't list every year's inflation rate but the inflation rates during 1979-1981 were 11.22%, 13.58%, and 10.35%. respectively. And as anyone with a credit card can tell you, calculating percentages of percentages is messy business. This is significantly skewed by the fact that income for the top 1% "more than tripled" during this time making the actual number for the remaining 99% a bit lower than the reported 62%. Factor in inflation, and the old adage of "The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer" doesn't sound too far from the truth.
(Quick math timeout to illustrate the previous comment:
Lets say all of your monthly bills cost you $1000 (if only, right?). A 10.35% annual inflation rate means that the next year those same bills will cost you $1103.50. That hurts already. Most people won't be getting a raise worth $100 extra every month to cover that increase in expenses. However, if that 10.35% increase came after previous annual increases of 11.22% and 13.58% your bills would have increased from $1000 to $1393.98 in just three years.
Using $1000 in 1979 as a base, and calculating each year's inflation rate on top of the previous year's rate, we see that in 2007 the same bills would cost roughly $3181.84. An increase of 318%. And, as stated previously, average household income (even including the top 1%) increased just 62% over this same time period while income for the top 1% alone "more than tripled". Regardless of the actual number, roughly tripling income would account for the roughly tripling expenses.)
I'll leave you with a few quotes from the unjustly vilified patriots interviewed for the Bloomberg piece.
-When asked about willingness to pay higher tax rates Blackstone Group LP CEO Stephen Schwarzman instead chose to complain about low-income families who pay no income tax saying "...we should all be part of the system". Classy.
-Robert Rosenkranz, CEO of Delphi Financial Group Inc., claims the 1% should be getting thanks instead of persecution. He says "It's simply a fact that pretty much all the private-sector jobs in America are created by the decisions of 'the 1 percent' to hire and invest". So the next time you see a new small business open in your town make sure to thank Robert Rosenkranz.
(No word as of yet on how Mr. Guildenstern feels about the U.S. tax code.)
-CEO of Euro Pacific Capital Inc. Peter Schiff claims his taxes are "more than a medieval lord would have taken from a serf".
Billionaire CEOs: modern-day serfs.
These criminals use shady/borderline-illegal business practices to destroy the financial stability of this country yet it's the protester who is the "imbecile"?
One of the asshats, John A. Allison IV, says "Instead of an attack on the 1 percent, let's call it an attack on the very productive." I'm not sure of Mr. Allison's daily duties as former CEO of BB&T Corp. but I'm relatively certain it didn't produce anything other than the taste of vomit in the back of my throat. Calling the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans "very productive" is like calling pimps "investment bankers". It's nonsensical and masks the reality of the tactics involved in acquiring and maintaining those positions.
No one is upset that these
This whole scenario is assuming any of the wealthy individual's income was actually considered income. Capital gains on long-term investments, and several other forms of income, aren't technically counted as income. The Long-Term Capital Gains tax is currently set at 15% which coincidentally is also the same tax rate the single mom in the previous example, working and earning $8,500-$34,500, is responsible for. Yeah, that makes sense.
So to insinuate that the lowly hourly workers are just jealous and looking for a handout is arrogant and offensive.
According to a report from the IRS, average household income increased 62% from 1979 through 2007. I won't list every year's inflation rate but the inflation rates during 1979-1981 were 11.22%, 13.58%, and 10.35%. respectively. And as anyone with a credit card can tell you, calculating percentages of percentages is messy business. This is significantly skewed by the fact that income for the top 1% "more than tripled" during this time making the actual number for the remaining 99% a bit lower than the reported 62%. Factor in inflation, and the old adage of "The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer" doesn't sound too far from the truth.
(Quick math timeout to illustrate the previous comment:
Lets say all of your monthly bills cost you $1000 (if only, right?). A 10.35% annual inflation rate means that the next year those same bills will cost you $1103.50. That hurts already. Most people won't be getting a raise worth $100 extra every month to cover that increase in expenses. However, if that 10.35% increase came after previous annual increases of 11.22% and 13.58% your bills would have increased from $1000 to $1393.98 in just three years.
Using $1000 in 1979 as a base, and calculating each year's inflation rate on top of the previous year's rate, we see that in 2007 the same bills would cost roughly $3181.84. An increase of 318%. And, as stated previously, average household income (even including the top 1%) increased just 62% over this same time period while income for the top 1% alone "more than tripled". Regardless of the actual number, roughly tripling income would account for the roughly tripling expenses.)
I'll leave you with a few quotes from the unjustly vilified patriots interviewed for the Bloomberg piece.
-When asked about willingness to pay higher tax rates Blackstone Group LP CEO Stephen Schwarzman instead chose to complain about low-income families who pay no income tax saying "...we should all be part of the system". Classy.
-Robert Rosenkranz, CEO of Delphi Financial Group Inc., claims the 1% should be getting thanks instead of persecution. He says "It's simply a fact that pretty much all the private-sector jobs in America are created by the decisions of 'the 1 percent' to hire and invest". So the next time you see a new small business open in your town make sure to thank Robert Rosenkranz.
(No word as of yet on how Mr. Guildenstern feels about the U.S. tax code.)
-CEO of Euro Pacific Capital Inc. Peter Schiff claims his taxes are "more than a medieval lord would have taken from a serf".
Billionaire CEOs: modern-day serfs.
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Occupy ALL the Things
I have been silent for quite a while on here. I've been teaching myself web design (HTML, CSS, Javascript). The first two went quite well. The third is more complex and will take a bit more to fully grasp, and then eons more to master.
But I return to my ranting forum for one purpose: the Occupy movement. (I capitalize out of respect)
I have had many political, fiscal, and generational discussions in my life but I don't think I've ever come across a topic that is misunderstood in such a unique way. The Occupy movement is an outcry from Americans disgusted with their ultra-partisan, auction-block of a government being allowed to bully their citizens (and citizens of other countries as well) and then expect thanks for it.
Many revelations have come to light in the 2+ months since Occupy began. We see that Congress and the White House still don't seem to take it seriously. Employees of the banks themselves have nothing but taunts. ("Get a job." seems to be the most prevalent and misinformed comment.) We see that police departments are allowed to use any force necessary to move people where they want them. We have seen 25 year old punk cops use excessive force, and on many occasions pepper spray and tear gas, against war veterans. Just yesterday I saw a photo of an 84 year old woman who was pepper sprayed in Seattle. With all due respect, I can't imagine she was much of a physical threat.
But the most disturbing part is that many Americans can't be bothered enough to look past the flashy headlines and see what is actually happening.
If I got all of my information from official police department quotes and the evening news I would think that Occupy was made up entirely of unemployed, slacker college hippies smoking weed and looking for a handout. This could not be further from the truth. The Occupy movement is incredibly transparent in their makeup and motives. People of all ages and backgrounds are part of Occupy. Jesus, Pete Seeger and Arlo Guthrie showed up in support. (Combined age: 156. Or 2167 depending on how you read the previous sentence.) Occupy Wall Street had organized a library of an estimated 4000 books. These books were electronically logged and searchable. I use the past tense because Billionaire Bloomberg had most of these books, along with any possessions left behind when fleeing officers in riot gear, destroyed while forcing people out of Zuccotti Park.
I find it difficult to focus my thoughts on writing coherent sentences on this subject. I am so incredibly disgusted by the hypocrisy and uncaring nature of nearly anyone in power in my government. President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton had nothing but praise for protests in Egypt, as well as other countries involved in the so-called "Arab Spring". But when our citizens attempt to use identical forms of protest (and much more peacefully might I add) that support is conspicuously absent.
I don't hate money or corporations. In fact, I quite enjoy the former and have several corporations that I fully support. But neither should be allowed to influence the votes of our lawmakers. When debating tougher regulations on investments, environmental issues, even school lunches, the interests of the citizens of this country should ALWAYS come before the interests of the companies involved.
(Warning: From here on out is political and semi-obscenity-laced.)
Can we please stop verbally blowing Ronald Reagan? His trickle-down plan was horseshit from the start. If you want to help poor Americans you have two options: 1) Stop taking so much of their money. Or 2) Give them more money. I'm not big on handing out money so I particularly like option 1. Notice how neither of those approaches are "Give money to banks, corporations, and the wealthy and they will fix it for us by creating jobs and doing what's best for everyone" because that is ridiculous. It didn't work then but apparently we are too fucking stupid to learn from the past. (re: two gulf wars)
Bailing out the banks was exactly the same approach as Reagan's trickle-down bullshit. If you have banks failing and people losing their homes because they can't make their payments you, once again, have two approaches. (I'm not mentioning that the banks created the problem on their own while government oversight was so feigned that the practices were almost endorsed.) 1) Give money to the banks to ensure they don't fail. Hope they use this money to pay off some of their own domestic debts and then ease the crunch on their homeowners. 2) Give money to the homeowners themselves. Have stipulations and restrictions that the money can only be used for mortgage payments. Give them the option to use that money to make their normal monthly payments or use one lump sum to lower their overall mortgage amount. People who wanted to keep their homes would probably choose the monthly payment route to ease their monthly financial burden. People who wanted to sell their homes would probably use the lump sum amount so that the total amount of their mortgage would more closely resemble the actual value of the house, therefore dropping the asking price and making the home more attractive.
Both of the above options end with our government's money in the banking institution's pocket. But the first way bypasses any regard for the homeowner. It is completely reliant on the bank making the "right decision" and helping the homeowners they already showed they were willing to screw. In fact, a good deal of this money went to pay for bonuses for executives and outstanding debts the bank had, many from over-seas lenders. Meaning, the money that was meant to help homeowners actually went to executives and over-seas lenders. Meanwhile, our government couldn't even be tasked with tracking where the money actually went.
You're telling me that no one in the entire fucking United States government thought that the banks would look out for themselves rather than the homeowners? I don't know whether I hope Congress was so inept that they didn't see that possibility or that they allowed it because they were corrupt. I honestly can't decide which is worse.
Option 2 in the above scenario allows homeowners to keep or sell their houses while easing their entire financial burden. Having help paying your mortgage means you don't have to feed your kids $.89 hamburgers from McDonald's. In one move you have helped the money crunch and potentially helped with peripheral issues such as childhood nutrition. Freeing up money in the household is good for the homeowner and businesses alike. If all your money is going to your mortgage then you don't have money to spend anywhere else. And is this scenario the "bailout" money STILL makes its way to the banks for them to use on bonuses and their own debts.
Why was option 2 not an actual option? Why have the banks not been held accountable for their illegal business practices that brought the entire country to the brink of financial ruin? Why has Congress not been held accountable for their actions enabling the practices and then cleaning up the mess afterward? Why are these banks and corporations allowed to manipulate the tax code to minimize, or even eliminate, the need to pay taxes while the average American has no such loopholes?
These questions along with many others including healthcare (How can a government force a citizen to buy a product? Why does Congress get better healthcare for free than their constituents can purchase?), foreign aid/wars (How can we shovel cash at dictators who openly commit acts of violence on their own citizens, and then turn on them and take them down when they show a weakness?), and corporate influence on Washington (see above) are what Occupy is all about. You can't boil it down to one point that can be bastardized into a Red or Blue argument. And that really pisses off the opponents of change and the defenders of the status quo.
I'm not talking about the individuals that make up Occupy. If you go to each person and ask them to name their top three issues they want addressed you will get a myriad of answers spanning every conceivable topic. Because Occupy is NOT about banding together to occupy Wall Street, or Boston, or any specific thing. It's about pissed off Americans banding together and telling the U.S. government that the status quo is no longer acceptable. Occupy doesn't expect Congressmen and businessmen to have epiphanies of the soul and suddenly find the goodness in their heart. Occupy's success will not be anchored by how many politicians and celebrities join the movement. Occupy is about having an informed public, conscious of its governments' actions, that is willing to hold elected officials and businesses accountable for their actions.
An ignorant public is an easily manipulated public. Occupation does not destroy its target. In its current incarnation, to Occupy something means to observe, illuminate, and become knowledgeable about it. And knowledge is power.
So, regardless of your financial, political, sexual, generational, or any other affiliation, I say: Don't Occupy one thing. Occupy ALL the things.
(image source: http://nycfaultline.com/2011/10/08/occupy-all-the-things/)
But I return to my ranting forum for one purpose: the Occupy movement. (I capitalize out of respect)
I have had many political, fiscal, and generational discussions in my life but I don't think I've ever come across a topic that is misunderstood in such a unique way. The Occupy movement is an outcry from Americans disgusted with their ultra-partisan, auction-block of a government being allowed to bully their citizens (and citizens of other countries as well) and then expect thanks for it.
Many revelations have come to light in the 2+ months since Occupy began. We see that Congress and the White House still don't seem to take it seriously. Employees of the banks themselves have nothing but taunts. ("Get a job." seems to be the most prevalent and misinformed comment.) We see that police departments are allowed to use any force necessary to move people where they want them. We have seen 25 year old punk cops use excessive force, and on many occasions pepper spray and tear gas, against war veterans. Just yesterday I saw a photo of an 84 year old woman who was pepper sprayed in Seattle. With all due respect, I can't imagine she was much of a physical threat.
But the most disturbing part is that many Americans can't be bothered enough to look past the flashy headlines and see what is actually happening.
If I got all of my information from official police department quotes and the evening news I would think that Occupy was made up entirely of unemployed, slacker college hippies smoking weed and looking for a handout. This could not be further from the truth. The Occupy movement is incredibly transparent in their makeup and motives. People of all ages and backgrounds are part of Occupy. Jesus, Pete Seeger and Arlo Guthrie showed up in support. (Combined age: 156. Or 2167 depending on how you read the previous sentence.) Occupy Wall Street had organized a library of an estimated 4000 books. These books were electronically logged and searchable. I use the past tense because Billionaire Bloomberg had most of these books, along with any possessions left behind when fleeing officers in riot gear, destroyed while forcing people out of Zuccotti Park.
I find it difficult to focus my thoughts on writing coherent sentences on this subject. I am so incredibly disgusted by the hypocrisy and uncaring nature of nearly anyone in power in my government. President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton had nothing but praise for protests in Egypt, as well as other countries involved in the so-called "Arab Spring". But when our citizens attempt to use identical forms of protest (and much more peacefully might I add) that support is conspicuously absent.
I don't hate money or corporations. In fact, I quite enjoy the former and have several corporations that I fully support. But neither should be allowed to influence the votes of our lawmakers. When debating tougher regulations on investments, environmental issues, even school lunches, the interests of the citizens of this country should ALWAYS come before the interests of the companies involved.
(Warning: From here on out is political and semi-obscenity-laced.)
Can we please stop verbally blowing Ronald Reagan? His trickle-down plan was horseshit from the start. If you want to help poor Americans you have two options: 1) Stop taking so much of their money. Or 2) Give them more money. I'm not big on handing out money so I particularly like option 1. Notice how neither of those approaches are "Give money to banks, corporations, and the wealthy and they will fix it for us by creating jobs and doing what's best for everyone" because that is ridiculous. It didn't work then but apparently we are too fucking stupid to learn from the past. (re: two gulf wars)
Bailing out the banks was exactly the same approach as Reagan's trickle-down bullshit. If you have banks failing and people losing their homes because they can't make their payments you, once again, have two approaches. (I'm not mentioning that the banks created the problem on their own while government oversight was so feigned that the practices were almost endorsed.) 1) Give money to the banks to ensure they don't fail. Hope they use this money to pay off some of their own domestic debts and then ease the crunch on their homeowners. 2) Give money to the homeowners themselves. Have stipulations and restrictions that the money can only be used for mortgage payments. Give them the option to use that money to make their normal monthly payments or use one lump sum to lower their overall mortgage amount. People who wanted to keep their homes would probably choose the monthly payment route to ease their monthly financial burden. People who wanted to sell their homes would probably use the lump sum amount so that the total amount of their mortgage would more closely resemble the actual value of the house, therefore dropping the asking price and making the home more attractive.
Both of the above options end with our government's money in the banking institution's pocket. But the first way bypasses any regard for the homeowner. It is completely reliant on the bank making the "right decision" and helping the homeowners they already showed they were willing to screw. In fact, a good deal of this money went to pay for bonuses for executives and outstanding debts the bank had, many from over-seas lenders. Meaning, the money that was meant to help homeowners actually went to executives and over-seas lenders. Meanwhile, our government couldn't even be tasked with tracking where the money actually went.
You're telling me that no one in the entire fucking United States government thought that the banks would look out for themselves rather than the homeowners? I don't know whether I hope Congress was so inept that they didn't see that possibility or that they allowed it because they were corrupt. I honestly can't decide which is worse.
Option 2 in the above scenario allows homeowners to keep or sell their houses while easing their entire financial burden. Having help paying your mortgage means you don't have to feed your kids $.89 hamburgers from McDonald's. In one move you have helped the money crunch and potentially helped with peripheral issues such as childhood nutrition. Freeing up money in the household is good for the homeowner and businesses alike. If all your money is going to your mortgage then you don't have money to spend anywhere else. And is this scenario the "bailout" money STILL makes its way to the banks for them to use on bonuses and their own debts.
Why was option 2 not an actual option? Why have the banks not been held accountable for their illegal business practices that brought the entire country to the brink of financial ruin? Why has Congress not been held accountable for their actions enabling the practices and then cleaning up the mess afterward? Why are these banks and corporations allowed to manipulate the tax code to minimize, or even eliminate, the need to pay taxes while the average American has no such loopholes?
These questions along with many others including healthcare (How can a government force a citizen to buy a product? Why does Congress get better healthcare for free than their constituents can purchase?), foreign aid/wars (How can we shovel cash at dictators who openly commit acts of violence on their own citizens, and then turn on them and take them down when they show a weakness?), and corporate influence on Washington (see above) are what Occupy is all about. You can't boil it down to one point that can be bastardized into a Red or Blue argument. And that really pisses off the opponents of change and the defenders of the status quo.
I'm not talking about the individuals that make up Occupy. If you go to each person and ask them to name their top three issues they want addressed you will get a myriad of answers spanning every conceivable topic. Because Occupy is NOT about banding together to occupy Wall Street, or Boston, or any specific thing. It's about pissed off Americans banding together and telling the U.S. government that the status quo is no longer acceptable. Occupy doesn't expect Congressmen and businessmen to have epiphanies of the soul and suddenly find the goodness in their heart. Occupy's success will not be anchored by how many politicians and celebrities join the movement. Occupy is about having an informed public, conscious of its governments' actions, that is willing to hold elected officials and businesses accountable for their actions.
An ignorant public is an easily manipulated public. Occupation does not destroy its target. In its current incarnation, to Occupy something means to observe, illuminate, and become knowledgeable about it. And knowledge is power.
So, regardless of your financial, political, sexual, generational, or any other affiliation, I say: Don't Occupy one thing. Occupy ALL the things.
(image source: http://nycfaultline.com/2011/10/08/occupy-all-the-things/)
Friday, August 5, 2011
American Debt
The United States of America is a country that is head-over-heels in love with debt.
Governmental, business, and personal debt are necessary for nearly everything. The government borrows money from other countries to uphold fiscal promises it has made to businesses and citizens. Businesses borrow money from banks and the government (sometimes it's hard to tell the difference, and sometimes there's not one) to purchase product so they can continue to operate. Citizens borrow money from anyone who will listen for every imaginable expense.
Think of a "middle class" (quotes are necessary because the middle class doesn't actually exist) high-school student looking at his future. His parents don't make enough money to pay for college but they make too much for him to qualify for grant money. His grades are okay but not stellar. He starts looking at the cost of schools and sees that he really only has four options.
1) Go to college using a mix of government and personal loans. (Side note: Personal "student loans" are legalized loan sharking)
2) Join the military. Once he's done spreading democracy/doing Big Brother's dirty work/occupying countries that haven't seen conflict in 70 years/protecting his country (You can pick which one of those you like best. It's fun. It's your very own Choose Your Adventure) he can let Uncle Sam pay for his college.
3) Magically find a job, with zero higher education or experience, that will pay for his college education.
4) Don't go to college.
If you've read my post on college, you know how I feel about that racket. But realistically, your chances of being financially successful without some form of college education are pretty slim.
This kid chooses option number one. While he is attending school he meets a lady friend and gets married. Now, he doesn't want to start his new life by living with his parents, so they begin looking at apartments and houses. House payments are less than rent payments so they buy a nice little home to start their family. Between the mortgage and school loans he's now sitting at $150,000 (quite conservative for certain areas of the country) in debt...at 22 years old.
You know the story from here. Money gets tight, credit cards become a necessity, and no matter how much they pay the debt never quite seems to get any smaller. Notice how I haven't mentioned his wife's potential debt or any children. It's out of hand enough without that.
This is American culture. This is the American way. This is the American Dream.
And when the government as a whole starts trying to help everyone accomplish their own American Dream, it becomes disastrous.
We (You included. Congressmen/women are elected. They even let ladies vote now. It's a new thing they're trying) have gotten ourselves into our very own Kobayashi Maru situation. There is physically no possible solution that will allow us to continue our current borrowing/spending, uphold our current financial obligations, and maintain our current income. Improvements MUST be made on all three fronts. Bickering with your millionaire colleagues over minortribbles quibbles helps no one.
Borrowing/Spending
This will have to be the main focus.
Governmental, business, and personal debt are necessary for nearly everything. The government borrows money from other countries to uphold fiscal promises it has made to businesses and citizens. Businesses borrow money from banks and the government (sometimes it's hard to tell the difference, and sometimes there's not one) to purchase product so they can continue to operate. Citizens borrow money from anyone who will listen for every imaginable expense.
Think of a "middle class" (quotes are necessary because the middle class doesn't actually exist) high-school student looking at his future. His parents don't make enough money to pay for college but they make too much for him to qualify for grant money. His grades are okay but not stellar. He starts looking at the cost of schools and sees that he really only has four options.
1) Go to college using a mix of government and personal loans. (Side note: Personal "student loans" are legalized loan sharking)
2) Join the military. Once he's done spreading democracy/doing Big Brother's dirty work/occupying countries that haven't seen conflict in 70 years/protecting his country (You can pick which one of those you like best. It's fun. It's your very own Choose Your Adventure) he can let Uncle Sam pay for his college.
3) Magically find a job, with zero higher education or experience, that will pay for his college education.
4) Don't go to college.
If you've read my post on college, you know how I feel about that racket. But realistically, your chances of being financially successful without some form of college education are pretty slim.
This kid chooses option number one. While he is attending school he meets a lady friend and gets married. Now, he doesn't want to start his new life by living with his parents, so they begin looking at apartments and houses. House payments are less than rent payments so they buy a nice little home to start their family. Between the mortgage and school loans he's now sitting at $150,000 (quite conservative for certain areas of the country) in debt...at 22 years old.
You know the story from here. Money gets tight, credit cards become a necessity, and no matter how much they pay the debt never quite seems to get any smaller. Notice how I haven't mentioned his wife's potential debt or any children. It's out of hand enough without that.
This is American culture. This is the American way. This is the American Dream.
And when the government as a whole starts trying to help everyone accomplish their own American Dream, it becomes disastrous.
We (You included. Congressmen/women are elected. They even let ladies vote now. It's a new thing they're trying) have gotten ourselves into our very own Kobayashi Maru situation. There is physically no possible solution that will allow us to continue our current borrowing/spending, uphold our current financial obligations, and maintain our current income. Improvements MUST be made on all three fronts. Bickering with your millionaire colleagues over minor
Borrowing/Spending
This will have to be the main focus.
- Foreign aid has to be reigned in. More spending does not equal more help. Analyze where the money goes. Cut the middlemen or cut the program.
- Unemployment benefits simply cannot last for 112 weeks. (I may be wrong on that number. It may actually be higher) If they're unemployed for that long then something other than their resume is suspect. I don't want to see anyone lose their belongings, but handing someone money for over two years enables fiscal irresponsibility and puts the financial burden on other Americans. I am not demonizing the citizen here. If you can collect unemployment, and use that money to pay your bills for two years, why would you want to get a job?
- The security theater that is the TSA has to be stopped. Feeling up a six year old girl does nothing to keep me safe. And spending millions upon millions of dollars for machines to take pictures of her naughty bits while her clothes are still on is insane.
- Governmental salaries/pensions need serious cuts.
- A simple version? 5% budget reduction for EVERY government program to start. Then reevaluate from there.
Financial Obligations
- Are we seriously still planning universal healthcare? Does anyone honestly want to give more responsibilities to the assclowns in Washington right now?
- Corporate tax incentives are completely out-of-hand. GE is in the 35% tax bracket. They made $14.2 billion in profit last year. Not income, pure profit. They paid as much taxes as my cat did. (Just for giggles, 35% of $14.2 billion is $4.97 billion. GE cheated the American taxpayers out of nearly $5 billion.)
Income
- Can we please stop pretending that illegal immigration is something that can be stopped? The only way to stop someone from trying to make a better life for themselves/their family by coming into our country is to shoot them in the head. Many people actually suggest that. Would you stop breaking another country's ill-conceived and selectively-policed law if you thought that doing so would provide a better life for your children? Of course not. Personally, I think having Americans line the border and fart at people trying to come over would be more effective than our current tactics. Illegal immigrants are here working, driving, getting healthcare, and doing everything else that other humans do. Can we please give them a simple way to become an American citizen so they can start paying their share?
- Bonus Round: The above suggestion would also provide a huge, giant, gargantuan new source of income for Social Security, Medicare, AND Medicaid which would in turn mean we would need less cuts for those programs.
- I previously mentioned GE and the tax code. A huge chunk of their income was reported as overseas income. We cannot compete with labor costs in other readily-exploitable countries. When companies move jobs offshore they save on labor and taxes and America is left with fewer jobs and tax revenue. I don't have an incredibly insightful suggestion here because, quite frankly, I don't have the time or intelligence to piece together just what the hell our tax code says. I just wanted to mention that our current tax code REWARDS companies TWICE for moving jobs out of the country.
Some of these suggestions may be completely unfeasible, or mildly insane. But are they really any worse than the ideas our elected officials get paid to tell us we want?
Friday, June 24, 2011
Society = MMORPG
This post will be one giant metaphor. You were warned.
I have come to the realization that society has become an MMORPG, a game with no ending that is impossible to "win". No matter what you do, how much you collect/accomplish, there will always be more. Finding happiness in life is being able to leave quests unfinished. Whether you solo your way to 80 (years old) or you combine forces to raid the high level boss task and gain fame and fortune, you will never have everything. It's just not possible.
Being under the burden of adulthood is killing me. To me, being an adult is synonymous with a 9-5 job, mortgage payments, being functional in the A.M., living through your kids, 401Ks, talking politics, and cutting ties with anything that gets in the way of those tasks. That sounds like hell. I never want to end up like th....wait.....I just described me. I am the mid-level off-tank who sacrifices dreams of DPS and loot to carve out his own support role for his guild-mates.
Here's what I'm trying to say: Most humans have entirely too much stuff. Some of that stuff may be physical, some intangible. Keeping your vault and quest log full at all times does nothing but clog up your life and hinder you from seeing the beauty around you.
Before a few days ago, I could not have told you the last time I mono-tasked. THAT is what was killing me. Not the mortgage, or the kids, or the 9-5 job, or financial stress. It was the ever-present feeling that I was missing something. If I'm watching TV then I'm wasting time where I could be reading. If I'm on Facebook then I'm missing a great conversation on Twitter. How can I read all the comics and novels I want to read when new ones come out all the time?
This never-ending cacophony of white noise in my head was the root of all my problems. My son wants me to get him some more orange juice. But to do that I would have to stop reading before I'm done with this chapter. And if I do that then I it will put me 14 seconds behind on my quest to read everything by this author. And what if someone brings up the next chapter at work tomorrow? I won't know what the monster said to the protagonist because my son wanted some freaking orange juice!
Put some things aside. Remove some quests from your log. You can always go back to the quest-giver and start again. Sell, or give away, those 14 broken dwarf axes in your vault. You're never going to need them for anything. Minimize your chat window and take a walk through the starting area for your character's race. Look at all the amazing artwork that took someone countless hours to create. You missed all of it. All you saw was a waypoint to the next quest hub. What you missed were the seven trees arranged in a semi-circle meant to signify the burial plot and memorial for a great warrior that time forgot.
Okay, the metaphor has served it's purpose.
What makes humans different from other animals?
Self-control? You're kidding right?
Superior intellect? see: Jersey Shore
Compassion? Maybe you misunderstood me. I said HUMANS.
I only see two things that humans excel at more than any other earthly creature: Creating/experiencing art and having opposable thumbs. Music, film, novels, comic books, dance. These are what defines humanity. Unlocking the achievement of "Read All Asimov Novels" shouldn't be the goal. Unlocking the enjoyment of experiencing, analyzing, discussing, emulating, evolving, and sharing Asimov's art should be the achievement.
SO...To hell with titles, SUVs, McMansions, and $80 t-shirts. I'm looking forward to a life filled with imaginary creatures and mono-tasking.
I have come to the realization that society has become an MMORPG, a game with no ending that is impossible to "win". No matter what you do, how much you collect/accomplish, there will always be more. Finding happiness in life is being able to leave quests unfinished. Whether you solo your way to 80 (years old) or you combine forces to raid the high level boss task and gain fame and fortune, you will never have everything. It's just not possible.
Being under the burden of adulthood is killing me. To me, being an adult is synonymous with a 9-5 job, mortgage payments, being functional in the A.M., living through your kids, 401Ks, talking politics, and cutting ties with anything that gets in the way of those tasks. That sounds like hell. I never want to end up like th....wait.....I just described me. I am the mid-level off-tank who sacrifices dreams of DPS and loot to carve out his own support role for his guild-mates.
Here's what I'm trying to say: Most humans have entirely too much stuff. Some of that stuff may be physical, some intangible. Keeping your vault and quest log full at all times does nothing but clog up your life and hinder you from seeing the beauty around you.
Before a few days ago, I could not have told you the last time I mono-tasked. THAT is what was killing me. Not the mortgage, or the kids, or the 9-5 job, or financial stress. It was the ever-present feeling that I was missing something. If I'm watching TV then I'm wasting time where I could be reading. If I'm on Facebook then I'm missing a great conversation on Twitter. How can I read all the comics and novels I want to read when new ones come out all the time?
This never-ending cacophony of white noise in my head was the root of all my problems. My son wants me to get him some more orange juice. But to do that I would have to stop reading before I'm done with this chapter. And if I do that then I it will put me 14 seconds behind on my quest to read everything by this author. And what if someone brings up the next chapter at work tomorrow? I won't know what the monster said to the protagonist because my son wanted some freaking orange juice!
Put some things aside. Remove some quests from your log. You can always go back to the quest-giver and start again. Sell, or give away, those 14 broken dwarf axes in your vault. You're never going to need them for anything. Minimize your chat window and take a walk through the starting area for your character's race. Look at all the amazing artwork that took someone countless hours to create. You missed all of it. All you saw was a waypoint to the next quest hub. What you missed were the seven trees arranged in a semi-circle meant to signify the burial plot and memorial for a great warrior that time forgot.
Okay, the metaphor has served it's purpose.
What makes humans different from other animals?
Self-control? You're kidding right?
Superior intellect? see: Jersey Shore
Compassion? Maybe you misunderstood me. I said HUMANS.
I only see two things that humans excel at more than any other earthly creature: Creating/experiencing art and having opposable thumbs. Music, film, novels, comic books, dance. These are what defines humanity. Unlocking the achievement of "Read All Asimov Novels" shouldn't be the goal. Unlocking the enjoyment of experiencing, analyzing, discussing, emulating, evolving, and sharing Asimov's art should be the achievement.
SO...To hell with titles, SUVs, McMansions, and $80 t-shirts. I'm looking forward to a life filled with imaginary creatures and mono-tasking.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Andy Boot Camp Update 06/10/11
I'm still chugging toward a weight-loss goal that is seeming nigh impossible at this point. As I speak (type?), I am 80 pounds from my goal. To meet my goal that would be an average of 13+ pounds per month. Assuming that my goal in this whole endeavor is to become healthier I think cutting that much weight per month might be just as unhealthy as being a walking behemoth. Alas, I shall stumble forth on my quest for purchasing my garments at a fine retail establishment, rather than a catalog for shapely individuals.
Here's the latest weigh in numbers:
04/11/11 309.6 (Small improvement from the last weigh-in)
04/13/11 311.8 (Rapid-fire weigh-in FTL)
04/17/11 309.4 (Then again, more numbers means more chances for success?)
04/30/11 309.0 (At this rate, I'll hit 300 sometime during Sasha Obama's 3rd term)
05/18/11 310.8 (Three weeks later....)
05/25/11 306.2 (Shit got real. This is my true beginning) (#existentialism)
05/29/11 305.4 (NUMBER GO DOWN!!) (The Hulk wrote that synopsis)
05/31/11 303.0 (FAT BAD!!!!) (Tarzan this time) (R.I.P. Phil Hartman)
06/06/11 302.6 (Still headed in the right direction)
06/08/11 301.8 (At this point, I really need to think of a name for myself after 300)
That's it. I'll check back in after a few more weeks after I inexplicably reverse course and start my journey toward the Fattest Man Alive crown.
Here's the latest weigh in numbers:
04/11/11 309.6 (Small improvement from the last weigh-in)
04/13/11 311.8 (Rapid-fire weigh-in FTL)
04/17/11 309.4 (Then again, more numbers means more chances for success?)
04/30/11 309.0 (At this rate, I'll hit 300 sometime during Sasha Obama's 3rd term)
05/18/11 310.8 (Three weeks later....)
05/25/11 306.2 (Shit got real. This is my true beginning) (#existentialism)
05/29/11 305.4 (NUMBER GO DOWN!!) (The Hulk wrote that synopsis)
05/31/11 303.0 (FAT BAD!!!!) (Tarzan this time) (R.I.P. Phil Hartman)
06/06/11 302.6 (Still headed in the right direction)
06/08/11 301.8 (At this point, I really need to think of a name for myself after 300)
That's it. I'll check back in after a few more weeks after I inexplicably reverse course and start my journey toward the Fattest Man Alive crown.
Friday, May 27, 2011
Filesharing Rant 3.0
I try to see the artists' plight when they go on misinformed rants about how illegal downloading is destroying the music industry but I'm starting to see new reasons why they're wrong.
First, the claim that illegal downloading is hurting the music industry is false. It may be hurting overall ALBUM sales but it's definitely not hurting the industry. Buying a $.99 single on iTunes just doesn't provide the same income as an entire $12 album with 8 filler songs. I would argue that legal sales of digital singles have done FAR more to hurt album sales than pirating ever will. The people buying $.99 singles are the same ones who used to buy $12 albums. The people downloading albums now are the same ones who used to copy their friends' cassettes. And, as I've stated before, illegally downloading an album can, and does, lead to new ticket buyers, t-shirt purchasers, and, yes, even future single/album buyers.
Second, the music industry was built on impossibly inflated prices and unsustainable excess. The old model of "release an album > sell millions(?) of copies > stop producing anything and live off the profits for years and years" sounds a little silly when you try to apply it to other professions. I can't set-up and mail-out 20 computers in a week and then say "You know what? I had a pretty good week. I think I'll not come into work for a few months. Just keep sending the royalty checks for my groundbreaking work to my home address." That's ridiculous.
Artists should get paid for their work. But don't expect us to make you a millionaire because you bought a thesaurus and auto-tune. From my perspective, as a non-millionaire/aspiring professional musician, I would think that touring should make up the majority of profit for a band.
Also, let's talk about the lawsuits.
I'm going to start by saying that the RIAA is one small step away from the mafia. They will attack 12-year-old girls and repeatedly wrongly accuse others. They have a history of "sue first, then find actual evidence". And now it seems that even when they win a judgement against known infringers they will be keeping the settlement money rather than sharing it with the artists they supposedly represent.
It is unfortunate that great new artists may be cut early, or not signed at all, because of lackluster album sales. But here's to hoping this will lead to a new breed of artists utilizing the very digital structure that took down the media conglomerates to start a "creation > self-distibution > self-promotion > profit" model for success. And then maybe we can cut out the money-grubbing, exploitative loan sharks and pimps that permeate throughout the music industry.
First, the claim that illegal downloading is hurting the music industry is false. It may be hurting overall ALBUM sales but it's definitely not hurting the industry. Buying a $.99 single on iTunes just doesn't provide the same income as an entire $12 album with 8 filler songs. I would argue that legal sales of digital singles have done FAR more to hurt album sales than pirating ever will. The people buying $.99 singles are the same ones who used to buy $12 albums. The people downloading albums now are the same ones who used to copy their friends' cassettes. And, as I've stated before, illegally downloading an album can, and does, lead to new ticket buyers, t-shirt purchasers, and, yes, even future single/album buyers.
Second, the music industry was built on impossibly inflated prices and unsustainable excess. The old model of "release an album > sell millions(?) of copies > stop producing anything and live off the profits for years and years" sounds a little silly when you try to apply it to other professions. I can't set-up and mail-out 20 computers in a week and then say "You know what? I had a pretty good week. I think I'll not come into work for a few months. Just keep sending the royalty checks for my groundbreaking work to my home address." That's ridiculous.
Artists should get paid for their work. But don't expect us to make you a millionaire because you bought a thesaurus and auto-tune. From my perspective, as a non-millionaire/aspiring professional musician, I would think that touring should make up the majority of profit for a band.
Also, let's talk about the lawsuits.
I'm going to start by saying that the RIAA is one small step away from the mafia. They will attack 12-year-old girls and repeatedly wrongly accuse others. They have a history of "sue first, then find actual evidence". And now it seems that even when they win a judgement against known infringers they will be keeping the settlement money rather than sharing it with the artists they supposedly represent.
It is unfortunate that great new artists may be cut early, or not signed at all, because of lackluster album sales. But here's to hoping this will lead to a new breed of artists utilizing the very digital structure that took down the media conglomerates to start a "creation > self-distibution > self-promotion > profit" model for success. And then maybe we can cut out the money-grubbing, exploitative loan sharks and pimps that permeate throughout the music industry.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Osama bin Laden
I don't really know how to feel about the news that Osama bin Laden is dead. On one hand I am relieved that the search is over and organized terrorism (there's an oxymoron) might have been dealt a setback. But on the other hand, I find it absolutely disgusting that people are joyously celebrating the death of Osama Bin Laden. Not because of who he was. Osama was a worthless piece of shit and deserved to die. I just think that celebrating his death in the streets with snare drums and beach balls is appalling. Killing one human being does not magically bring others back to life. Killing Osama will not take away the pain that the families of 9/11 victims still feel everyday.
You just don't understand. We brought him to justice.
Justice? Killing a 50+ year-old man with diabetes living in caves and constantly moving around to stay hidden is just punishment for that man organizing the murder of thousands of innocent humans?
Osama was evil. He deserved to die. But public celebrations of his death do nothing but make us look like petty, ignorant fools. The "You kill us and we'll kill you back" mentality. Osama didn't invent terrorism and killing him won't stop it.
You don't see ANY reason to celebrate?
I am quite happy that an evil person can no longer do evil things. I just don't see the sense in acting like this makes everything better. Nothing has changed. Evil people will still do evil things and the rest of the world will either rise against them or crumble.
You're just a cynic trying to see the worst in everything.
Maybe. I've thought that myself at times. I'm not saying that peaceful people everywhere shouldn't be glad about this news. Americans, Afghans, Christians, Muslims, and anyone else who hates violence as much as Osama himself hated America should all rejoice that one less evil person is among us. But that's it. ONE person. A very important person in the world of terror, but one man just the same.
I just can't understand celebrating the death of a human being, no matter who that person might be.
Maybe I'm wrong. I don't know anymore.
You just don't understand. We brought him to justice.
Justice? Killing a 50+ year-old man with diabetes living in caves and constantly moving around to stay hidden is just punishment for that man organizing the murder of thousands of innocent humans?
Osama was evil. He deserved to die. But public celebrations of his death do nothing but make us look like petty, ignorant fools. The "You kill us and we'll kill you back" mentality. Osama didn't invent terrorism and killing him won't stop it.
You don't see ANY reason to celebrate?
I am quite happy that an evil person can no longer do evil things. I just don't see the sense in acting like this makes everything better. Nothing has changed. Evil people will still do evil things and the rest of the world will either rise against them or crumble.
You're just a cynic trying to see the worst in everything.
Maybe. I've thought that myself at times. I'm not saying that peaceful people everywhere shouldn't be glad about this news. Americans, Afghans, Christians, Muslims, and anyone else who hates violence as much as Osama himself hated America should all rejoice that one less evil person is among us. But that's it. ONE person. A very important person in the world of terror, but one man just the same.
I just can't understand celebrating the death of a human being, no matter who that person might be.
Maybe I'm wrong. I don't know anymore.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Nerd Culture
I refer to myself as a nerd quite frequently (exhibit #1: the header above). I get a wide range of responses to my proclamation.
Some people go with "Noooo! I don't think so!" which means one of two things. 1) They've never met me or 2) They put a negative connotation on the word "nerd".
The most common response is nervous laughter while they try to ascertain how I feel about my own label.
But the response that spurred this post is the admonishing "Don't say that!" Somehow, in the current heyday of geek chic, being labeled a nerd is still seen as an unfortunate occurrence.
I have no qualms about calling myself a nerd. I wear it as a badge of honor. I care about something(s) enough to be considered a nerd.
But then I really blow people's minds with the sheer diversity of my nerdscape.
Wait just a second my opinionated opiner, I like some of those things but I'm not a....nerd.
And here's where the conundrum comes in. Given the current accepted definition of "nerd", everyone is a nerd about something.
Patton Oswalt may have written the best rant ever on this subject. He points out that the internet gives us instantaneous access to a wealth of information that would have taken basement dwellers of old years to compile.
Why argue about how many episodes of Star Trek TOS had Kirk hooking up with a pastel-colored lady when all it takes is a quick Wikipedia search? You want to own life-sized replicas of Ian Holm circa Alien AND Fellowship of the Ring? Look no further than Ebay/Craigslist. You might just find some herpes while you're there.
So, my dear reader(s), I say embrace your emerging nerdiness. Accept your irrational obsessions. And don't be afraid to read that Farscape/Care Bears crossover fanfic just because Karen in HR would think you're weird.
Some people go with "Noooo! I don't think so!" which means one of two things. 1) They've never met me or 2) They put a negative connotation on the word "nerd".
The most common response is nervous laughter while they try to ascertain how I feel about my own label.
But the response that spurred this post is the admonishing "Don't say that!" Somehow, in the current heyday of geek chic, being labeled a nerd is still seen as an unfortunate occurrence.
I have no qualms about calling myself a nerd. I wear it as a badge of honor. I care about something(s) enough to be considered a nerd.
But then I really blow people's minds with the sheer diversity of my nerdscape.
Comics, Sci-Fi (not SyFy), computers, fantasy books, Star Trek/Gate/Wars, documentaries, music deconstruction, baseball stats, genre TV shows, gadgets, math......
Wait just a second my opinionated opiner, I like some of those things but I'm not a....nerd.
And here's where the conundrum comes in. Given the current accepted definition of "nerd", everyone is a nerd about something.
Patton Oswalt may have written the best rant ever on this subject. He points out that the internet gives us instantaneous access to a wealth of information that would have taken basement dwellers of old years to compile.
Why argue about how many episodes of Star Trek TOS had Kirk hooking up with a pastel-colored lady when all it takes is a quick Wikipedia search? You want to own life-sized replicas of Ian Holm circa Alien AND Fellowship of the Ring? Look no further than Ebay/Craigslist. You might just find some herpes while you're there.
So, my dear reader(s), I say embrace your emerging nerdiness. Accept your irrational obsessions. And don't be afraid to read that Farscape/Care Bears crossover fanfic just because Karen in HR would think you're weird.
Friday, April 15, 2011
Life
Life shouldn't have to be what happens in between work and sleep. Work should try to wedge its unwanted ass into your life. Why is it that to be considered "successful" you have to put work first? Now that I have an infant in my house I feel like I'm missing 800 things everyday that are WAY more important than anything I'm doing at work.
With respect to jobs, I always hear "Do what you love and you'll never work a day in your life." That would be great if someone would pay me to play music, or stare at boobs, or read comic books, or play video games with my son, or eat buffalo chicken. But I don't see anyone offering me jobs in those fields right now. (I'm holding out for a cross-over. Maybe boobs covered in buffalo sauce? Or playing music with my son? Or just the boobs?)
Why is it accepted that you're going to hate your job? Including drive-time I spend roughly 50 hours per week dedicated to my job. Quick math lets me know that I waste 2600 hours per year doing something I don't enjoy. Why is this normal? Does anyone start college wanting to be phone support? Or an accountant? Or middle management? No. You get stuck there.
I don't mean to sound like a whiny teenager but my family is the only thing I'm remotely happy with right now.
But that's all that matters. Right? Well, kind of. Loving my family doesn't help me feed/clothe/bathe/spoil them. And it sure as hell doesn't make me hate the job any less.
But loving your family should make all the bad things worth it. Well, then I must be broken. I love my family, and I will do anything for them, but it does not make everything worthwhile. I'm not okay with wasting any intelligence/talent/initiative that I have for a paycheck that almost pays the bills. Just so I can turn around and give every bit of that money to multi-billion dollar companies.
I have always adhered to the philosophy of "don't sacrifice today for what might happen tomorrow". Doesn't that also apply to me? If I throw away my dreams and desires and put on my Corporate Andy hat just so I can put food on the table, am I not doing that same thing? If children are our future does that mean that our future is over?
I'm struggling with how to feel about how I feel.
Am I a selfish bastard for bitching when I actually have a job and three other human beings dependent on me? Or am I an idiot for basically giving up on my dreams at 25?
I have no idea.
Why is it accepted that you're going to hate your job? Including drive-time I spend roughly 50 hours per week dedicated to my job. Quick math lets me know that I waste 2600 hours per year doing something I don't enjoy. Why is this normal? Does anyone start college wanting to be phone support? Or an accountant? Or middle management? No. You get stuck there.
I don't mean to sound like a whiny teenager but my family is the only thing I'm remotely happy with right now.
But that's all that matters. Right? Well, kind of. Loving my family doesn't help me feed/clothe/bathe/spoil them. And it sure as hell doesn't make me hate the job any less.
But loving your family should make all the bad things worth it. Well, then I must be broken. I love my family, and I will do anything for them, but it does not make everything worthwhile. I'm not okay with wasting any intelligence/talent/initiative that I have for a paycheck that almost pays the bills. Just so I can turn around and give every bit of that money to multi-billion dollar companies.
I have always adhered to the philosophy of "don't sacrifice today for what might happen tomorrow". Doesn't that also apply to me? If I throw away my dreams and desires and put on my Corporate Andy hat just so I can put food on the table, am I not doing that same thing? If children are our future does that mean that our future is over?
I'm struggling with how to feel about how I feel.
Am I a selfish bastard for bitching when I actually have a job and three other human beings dependent on me? Or am I an idiot for basically giving up on my dreams at 25?
I have no idea.
Friday, March 25, 2011
Andy Boot Camp Update 3/25/11
I few weeks back I posted about finally wanting to do something about the spare Michelin Man I'm carrying around. I made several bold statements and I still intend to keep every one of those goals. But Life gets in the way, or should I say, Life takes precedence. My wife and I had a baby girl a little over a month ago and she, along with my wife and son, are more important than anything else right now.
That being said, all is not lost. I have made some progress. Not as much as I hoped for but a little bit is better than nothing. Here are the completely irregular weigh-in totals:
01/14/11 318.6 (That's embarrassing)
01/21/11 319.2 (I must have made a wrong turn at Albuquerque)
01/28/11 317.6 (Slow and steady wins the race?)
03/10/11 307.8 (Stress is a hell of a drug)
03/18/11 314.2 (Wait, what?) (Disclaimer: This is the only weigh-in done at night)
03/25/11 309.8 (Back on track....I guess)
I'm not necessarily happy with the progress so far but I'm creeping closer to the exit from...Tres-town? Drei-ville? Three's Company? Tri-force? I haven't decided what to call the magical sub-300 pound threshold. Maybe "making my re-entry into Earth's atmosphere from my own orbit"?
Oh well, thanks for all the support and please enjoy this awesome Blind Melon song about the number three.
That being said, all is not lost. I have made some progress. Not as much as I hoped for but a little bit is better than nothing. Here are the completely irregular weigh-in totals:
01/14/11 318.6 (That's embarrassing)
01/21/11 319.2 (I must have made a wrong turn at Albuquerque)
01/28/11 317.6 (Slow and steady wins the race?)
03/10/11 307.8 (Stress is a hell of a drug)
03/18/11 314.2 (Wait, what?) (Disclaimer: This is the only weigh-in done at night)
03/25/11 309.8 (Back on track....I guess)
I'm not necessarily happy with the progress so far but I'm creeping closer to the exit from...Tres-town? Drei-ville? Three's Company? Tri-force? I haven't decided what to call the magical sub-300 pound threshold. Maybe "making my re-entry into Earth's atmosphere from my own orbit"?
Oh well, thanks for all the support and please enjoy this awesome Blind Melon song about the number three.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Is College Still Worth It?
I got a statement from my student loan people recently. It said I paid $5600+ in interest on my school loans in 2010.
This means that in the two years I have been paying on school loans, the same amount of time I was actually in school, I have paid just under $12,000 in INTEREST. While my principle balance went down less than half of that.
And did I mention this debt was spread out over seven different loans because of various rules? Or that four of these loans (consisting of over 2/3 of the total amount borrowed) were accruing interest while I was in school?
All of this adds up to me paying 176% of the total amount borrowed by the time the loans are paid off.
If you've endured the grammar and numbers and are still reading this, I would like to thank both of you.
I bring this up to ask the question:
Is it still worth the investment to go to college?
I have heard all of my life that you can't get a good job without a college education. Yet everywhere I look I see people making $15-25/hr with nothing more than a high school education (and several people making WAY more). And I question if some of these people went to a real high school. Meanwhile, the suckers (those of us to went to college) might be making the same amount, or maybe a bit more, but with YEARS of school loans to pay off.
Is it worth making $6000 more a year if every bit of that has to go to school loans for ten or fifteen years? Right now my school loan monthly payments are about $50 less than my mortgage payment on a three bedroom house. I could afford a SECOND HOME with the money I'm throwing at school loans. How many doctors are out there making $100,000+ and still struggling because of ridiculous amounts of school loans? I would venture a guess somewhere in the "quite a few" range. (I'm nothing if not scientific.)
College as a whole is a very worthwhile experience. Between the knowledge gained, acquaintances met, and the experience acquired, several years spent in college can greatly influence a person's future. But I think the experiences and learning habits that a person develops may outweigh the fun facts a person may take from his classes.
Now, I'm not an idiot (at least not solely based on the prior sentence). I am not implying that the subject material is worthless. I certainly don't want a doctor who doesn't know his uvula from his vulva (I'll let you Google vulva yourself) diagnosing my mystery illness. But I think that the techniques learned with respect to observation and analysis are more important than trying to memorize every possible piece of information about your chosen career path.
I learned many things in my years of college. But I would put my current "Things learned in college" to "Things learned on the job" ratio at about 15:85. And some things, such as proper terminology, I am forced not to use. You should see the looks I get when I throw out words like "browser" or "forward-slash".
So, what do you think? Does a college degree (I'm not going to say education) mean as much as it used to mean?
This means that in the two years I have been paying on school loans, the same amount of time I was actually in school, I have paid just under $12,000 in INTEREST. While my principle balance went down less than half of that.
And did I mention this debt was spread out over seven different loans because of various rules? Or that four of these loans (consisting of over 2/3 of the total amount borrowed) were accruing interest while I was in school?
All of this adds up to me paying 176% of the total amount borrowed by the time the loans are paid off.
If you've endured the grammar and numbers and are still reading this, I would like to thank both of you.
I bring this up to ask the question:
Is it still worth the investment to go to college?
I have heard all of my life that you can't get a good job without a college education. Yet everywhere I look I see people making $15-25/hr with nothing more than a high school education (and several people making WAY more). And I question if some of these people went to a real high school. Meanwhile, the suckers (those of us to went to college) might be making the same amount, or maybe a bit more, but with YEARS of school loans to pay off.
Is it worth making $6000 more a year if every bit of that has to go to school loans for ten or fifteen years? Right now my school loan monthly payments are about $50 less than my mortgage payment on a three bedroom house. I could afford a SECOND HOME with the money I'm throwing at school loans. How many doctors are out there making $100,000+ and still struggling because of ridiculous amounts of school loans? I would venture a guess somewhere in the "quite a few" range. (I'm nothing if not scientific.)
College as a whole is a very worthwhile experience. Between the knowledge gained, acquaintances met, and the experience acquired, several years spent in college can greatly influence a person's future. But I think the experiences and learning habits that a person develops may outweigh the fun facts a person may take from his classes.
Now, I'm not an idiot (at least not solely based on the prior sentence). I am not implying that the subject material is worthless. I certainly don't want a doctor who doesn't know his uvula from his vulva (I'll let you Google vulva yourself) diagnosing my mystery illness. But I think that the techniques learned with respect to observation and analysis are more important than trying to memorize every possible piece of information about your chosen career path.
I learned many things in my years of college. But I would put my current "Things learned in college" to "Things learned on the job" ratio at about 15:85. And some things, such as proper terminology, I am forced not to use. You should see the looks I get when I throw out words like "browser" or "forward-slash".
So, what do you think? Does a college degree (I'm not going to say education) mean as much as it used to mean?
Friday, February 25, 2011
Daughters
Hopefully by the time this post is published I will be a proud papa of a new baby girl. If not, then I'll have one pissed off pregnant wife.
I've heard a bit of advice about raising a daughter but it all seems to be focused on what could/will go wrong. Here's a gem that stuck in my mind:
I think this sort of mentality is contributing to my anxiety about having a daughter. Fear of the unknown is ever prevalent in my life. I like to be prepared for anything and everything. You can never have enough money/time/blood/energy/information/towels to be prepared for every situation. So I think I'm psyching myself out about parenting a girl.
I always hear about the bad stuff. However, I don't think any of these issues have anything to do with my latest child being female.
She'll have you wrapped around her finger.
Valid concern. But only valid because my son has already shown how susceptible I am to such tactics.
Just wait until she starts talking.
Have you met my son? If he's awake, then he's talking. And I doubt my daughter will be making lightsaber noises for six straight hours on a daily basis. (I wouldn't be too upset if she did though)
Look out when she starts driving.
I'm nervous about my wife driving. Not because I doubt her skill (if she can dock a 46' boat on Lake Erie in choppy seas, I think she can handle navigating a parking lot in a Mercury). But my concern is all the other idiots on the road. My child being female doesn't affect my limited trust in human intelligence.
Just wait for the teenage years.
I don't mean to sound like I'm constantly degrading my son, but he's a bottle of black nail polish away from an angsty teenager right now. And he can't tie his shoes yet.
I just don't think all the drama people assume will come with having a girl is warranted. Yes, her clothing budget may be astronomically higher than my son's. But my son may need hundreds more for musical instruments or new cleats. I honestly think it will even out. For all I know, my son could be the fashionista and my daughter will be begging for a new batting glove.
Dads are always going to worry about their daughters. I just think I need to spend more time worrying about making sure she's safe and happy now rather than how much of a bitch she might be when she's fourteen.
#FamousLastWords
I've heard a bit of advice about raising a daughter but it all seems to be focused on what could/will go wrong. Here's a gem that stuck in my mind:
If you have a boy, then you have one penis to worry about. If you have a girl, then you have everyone else's penis to worry about.Couldn't you easily switch the genders and genitalia and still have an accurate statement?
I think this sort of mentality is contributing to my anxiety about having a daughter. Fear of the unknown is ever prevalent in my life. I like to be prepared for anything and everything. You can never have enough money/time/blood/energy/information/towels to be prepared for every situation. So I think I'm psyching myself out about parenting a girl.
I always hear about the bad stuff. However, I don't think any of these issues have anything to do with my latest child being female.
She'll have you wrapped around her finger.
Valid concern. But only valid because my son has already shown how susceptible I am to such tactics.
Just wait until she starts talking.
Have you met my son? If he's awake, then he's talking. And I doubt my daughter will be making lightsaber noises for six straight hours on a daily basis. (I wouldn't be too upset if she did though)
Look out when she starts driving.
I'm nervous about my wife driving. Not because I doubt her skill (if she can dock a 46' boat on Lake Erie in choppy seas, I think she can handle navigating a parking lot in a Mercury). But my concern is all the other idiots on the road. My child being female doesn't affect my limited trust in human intelligence.
Just wait for the teenage years.
I don't mean to sound like I'm constantly degrading my son, but he's a bottle of black nail polish away from an angsty teenager right now. And he can't tie his shoes yet.
I just don't think all the drama people assume will come with having a girl is warranted. Yes, her clothing budget may be astronomically higher than my son's. But my son may need hundreds more for musical instruments or new cleats. I honestly think it will even out. For all I know, my son could be the fashionista and my daughter will be begging for a new batting glove.
Dads are always going to worry about their daughters. I just think I need to spend more time worrying about making sure she's safe and happy now rather than how much of a bitch she might be when she's fourteen.
#FamousLastWords
Friday, February 11, 2011
New Year's Resolutions Suck
Simple topic. New Year's resolutions suck. Discuss...
If you're waiting for some magical day to suddenly give you the willpower to accomplish something in your life then 1) You're doing it wrong and 2) You've already failed before you even started.
I say this from personal experience. My resolution last year was to lose 100 pounds. It really shouldn't be that hard. I could lose 100 pounds and still be the lard-ass hogging the armrest in the theater. I have made this resolution many times dating back to high school. (Fun Fact: That may be the only time you'll ever hear me mention myself, dating, and high school in the same sentence.)
I started off decently. I "borrowed" a WiiFit from my in-laws and started doing it every day. I couldn't rely on having time every night so I decided to get up early and exercisethe demons before getting ready for work. And by early I mean Five.O.Clock. Before this time I had seen 5 A.M. quite a few times in my life. But previously a look at my clock saying 5 A.M. generally resulted in "Damn! I need to go to bed."
Being a math nerd, I figured if I could lose eight pounds a month then I would be almost there. The first two months went great. I would sweat a little in the morning and it helped me get to sleep at a decent time at night. I was down twenty pounds, ahead of schedule, and feeling great. Then came a cataclysmic event the likes of which even Ray Finkle wouldn't envy: My wife's parents asked us to return the WiiFit.
Gasp. Shriek.
We promptly went out that night and dropped another $90 for our very own WiiFit. I brought it straight home and immediately set it up. Aaaaaaaaand ten months later I can't remember if I ever even turned it on again.
Wait, what?
We never actually went an entire day without a unit in our house. How could switching WiiFit units cause me to fall off of my schedule?
My theory: My success was so desperately hanging on at that point that anything could have disrupted the routine. A stone falling out of a washed-up kickers' Dolphins AFC championship ring could have caused it.
I was fooling myself. I wasn't eating any better. In fact, I was actually eating worse because I felt like I deserved it for all the "exercise" I was doing.
By the end of the year I was down a net of ten pounds for the year. Far short of my goal.
So, once again I will try to drop some weight this year. I've used all kinds of reasons in the past. Health, looks, desire to fit into normal chairs. But now I have a wife and kids. ( I don't think I'll ever get used to saying that.) I can't just think about myself anymore.
I don't want to be the fat dad who can't run with his kid outside. I don't want to chill on the side of the pool too embarrassed to take his shirt off and get in the water with his family. I don't want to use my weight as an excuse not to do things anymore. I'm tired of my own shit. I not going to take the excuses anymore. I can't scream "Laces out, Dan" and ignore my own shortcomings.
I'm going to Andy Boot Camp.
I'm going to set up a page on this here blogtacular site and keep track of my progress. Please feel free to stop by and lend encouragement or insult my feeble attempts, whichever you would like.
Just do me a favor: Be Real. Don't sugar-coat the truth. (mmmm...sugar)
[Editor's Note: There are four references to Ace Ventura in this post.]
If you're waiting for some magical day to suddenly give you the willpower to accomplish something in your life then 1) You're doing it wrong and 2) You've already failed before you even started.
I say this from personal experience. My resolution last year was to lose 100 pounds. It really shouldn't be that hard. I could lose 100 pounds and still be the lard-ass hogging the armrest in the theater. I have made this resolution many times dating back to high school. (Fun Fact: That may be the only time you'll ever hear me mention myself, dating, and high school in the same sentence.)
I started off decently. I "borrowed" a WiiFit from my in-laws and started doing it every day. I couldn't rely on having time every night so I decided to get up early and exercise
Being a math nerd, I figured if I could lose eight pounds a month then I would be almost there. The first two months went great. I would sweat a little in the morning and it helped me get to sleep at a decent time at night. I was down twenty pounds, ahead of schedule, and feeling great. Then came a cataclysmic event the likes of which even Ray Finkle wouldn't envy: My wife's parents asked us to return the WiiFit.
Gasp. Shriek.
We promptly went out that night and dropped another $90 for our very own WiiFit. I brought it straight home and immediately set it up. Aaaaaaaaand ten months later I can't remember if I ever even turned it on again.
Wait, what?
We never actually went an entire day without a unit in our house. How could switching WiiFit units cause me to fall off of my schedule?
My theory: My success was so desperately hanging on at that point that anything could have disrupted the routine. A stone falling out of a washed-up kickers' Dolphins AFC championship ring could have caused it.
I was fooling myself. I wasn't eating any better. In fact, I was actually eating worse because I felt like I deserved it for all the "exercise" I was doing.
By the end of the year I was down a net of ten pounds for the year. Far short of my goal.
So, once again I will try to drop some weight this year. I've used all kinds of reasons in the past. Health, looks, desire to fit in
I don't want to be the fat dad who can't run with his kid outside. I don't want to chill on the side of the pool too embarrassed to take his shirt off and get in the water with his family. I don't want to use my weight as an excuse not to do things anymore. I'm tired of my own shit. I not going to take the excuses anymore. I can't scream "Laces out, Dan" and ignore my own shortcomings.
I'm going to Andy Boot Camp.
I'm going to set up a page on this here blogtacular site and keep track of my progress. Please feel free to stop by and lend encouragement or insult my feeble attempts, whichever you would like.
Just do me a favor: Be Real. Don't sugar-coat the truth. (mmmm...sugar)
[Editor's Note: There are four references to Ace Ventura in this post.]
Friday, January 28, 2011
Kevin Smith
I will preface this post with the admission that I love just about everything associated with Kevin Smith. For me, his movies are infinitely rewatchable. Some may think his movies are a bit heavy (not a fat joke, Kevin) on the dialogue, but none can deny his unique eloquence. This post is a public acknowledgement of my man-crush for Kevin Smith.
Now that the verbal BJ is out of the way, I think the man is a visionary. How many people can you say truly do what they love for a living? How many people do what they love ever? This man is a walking posterboy for perseverance. He gets destroyed in the media every time he opens his mouth, but a quick glance at his Twitter page shows that robot journalist douchebags do not speak for the masses. He is the paradigm for any serious artist.
Kevin's latest endeavor is one of the most inspirational things for aspiring artists that I've seen in a while. Rather than feeding the corporate machine, he is financing and releasing his film on his terms. I almost equate this with the tactic Radiohead took for the release of In Rainbows. Why would you want to sell your product for $15, give up the majority of that to others who had little to nothing to do with the end product, and bring home a few bucks when you can release your product for $5 (or in Radiohead's case, pick-your-price) and only have minor hosting and administrative fees to cover? Artists and consumers are both happier and more apt to create/consume. The wretched hive of scum and villainy that is the Internet allows for artists to interact directly with fans, admirers, critics, and -let's be honest- consumers. Artists are finally realizing they have other options than lining the pockets of industry blowhards.
This is why Kevin Smith is a visionary. The man has 1.7+ million followers on Twitter. I challenge any ad firm (hell, bring in Don Draper if you'd like) to find one outlet where you can advertise to 1.7 million people in your target audience FOR FREE. Let's say 10 million people are watching a TV show and a trailer for Red State runs. Of those ten million, how many are in the target demographic? How many were in the bathroom during the commercial break? How much did the ad cost? This marketing strategy is only accepted because the "just throw some money at it" approach is so prevalent. We watch the Superbowl and see companies pay millions of dollars to show us their trailer only to be forgotten the next day because Budweiser had a commercial with a farting dolphin on right after that. Seeing it from that perspective makes it seem pretty ridiculous.
As an aspiring artist, I have great hope that this will become a viable route for reaching an audience. Obviously, not everyone has a million followers and an established fanbase, but I think future artists can use this model to cheaply (Read: free) interact with their fans, and potential fans.
Here's to hoping that art trumps greed.
Or maybe he'll fail miserably. Either way, at least we can get a few entertaining podcasts out of it.
Now that the verbal BJ is out of the way, I think the man is a visionary. How many people can you say truly do what they love for a living? How many people do what they love ever? This man is a walking posterboy for perseverance. He gets destroyed in the media every time he opens his mouth, but a quick glance at his Twitter page shows that robot journalist douchebags do not speak for the masses. He is the paradigm for any serious artist.
Kevin's latest endeavor is one of the most inspirational things for aspiring artists that I've seen in a while. Rather than feeding the corporate machine, he is financing and releasing his film on his terms. I almost equate this with the tactic Radiohead took for the release of In Rainbows. Why would you want to sell your product for $15, give up the majority of that to others who had little to nothing to do with the end product, and bring home a few bucks when you can release your product for $5 (or in Radiohead's case, pick-your-price) and only have minor hosting and administrative fees to cover? Artists and consumers are both happier and more apt to create/consume. The wretched hive of scum and villainy that is the Internet allows for artists to interact directly with fans, admirers, critics, and -let's be honest- consumers. Artists are finally realizing they have other options than lining the pockets of industry blowhards.
This is why Kevin Smith is a visionary. The man has 1.7+ million followers on Twitter. I challenge any ad firm (hell, bring in Don Draper if you'd like) to find one outlet where you can advertise to 1.7 million people in your target audience FOR FREE. Let's say 10 million people are watching a TV show and a trailer for Red State runs. Of those ten million, how many are in the target demographic? How many were in the bathroom during the commercial break? How much did the ad cost? This marketing strategy is only accepted because the "just throw some money at it" approach is so prevalent. We watch the Superbowl and see companies pay millions of dollars to show us their trailer only to be forgotten the next day because Budweiser had a commercial with a farting dolphin on right after that. Seeing it from that perspective makes it seem pretty ridiculous.
As an aspiring artist, I have great hope that this will become a viable route for reaching an audience. Obviously, not everyone has a million followers and an established fanbase, but I think future artists can use this model to cheaply (Read: free) interact with their fans, and potential fans.
Here's to hoping that art trumps greed.
Or maybe he'll fail miserably. Either way, at least we can get a few entertaining podcasts out of it.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Kids
Do you realize kids born within the last month have never seen an update to this site? That's not a world I want to live in.
Speaking of kids (I'm practicing my transitions for my television debut) I'm going to be Daddy2 soon. Some of you may say "Wait just a minute my rotund friend! Don't you mean Daddy * 2?" No, Sir, I do not. Because for each kid you have everything increases exponentially. Cuteness quotient, drama index, and poopy diaper coefficient.
My wife is currently in her eighth month of pregnancy. (Side Note: Eighth is a ridiculously spelled word. Just look at it. That's one of the dumbest looking words I've ever seen. Score one for illiteracy. At least they don't have to read it.) She is enjoying all the fun things that come with being pregnant. What's that? There's really not much about pregnancy that's fun? Well, then maybe we should carve this baby out and live it up. But am I ready?
I sway back and forthwhen I walk between excitement and sheer terror. I have never been a parent to someone under the age of two. I assume the snarky comments and general sass-mouth (medical term) are replaced with bottles and diapers. Other than that, I have no idea what to expect.
I am prepared for screaming children at 3 A.M. (and 3 P.M.) but am I prepared to parent an infant? Can I give my newborn daughter all the love she deserves without making my son feel like I'm robbing him of said love? Can I find time to show my wife that she's still the gorgeous, intelligent woman that I married even when we're both exhausted and delirious? Can I find time to further my career/continue my education/pursue my dreams when I now have two humans depending on me for everything?
It's overwhelming. I'm excited, but humbled.
I can't be the only person who's felt this way, right?
Speaking of kids (I'm practicing my transitions for my television debut) I'm going to be Daddy2 soon. Some of you may say "Wait just a minute my rotund friend! Don't you mean Daddy * 2?" No, Sir, I do not. Because for each kid you have everything increases exponentially. Cuteness quotient, drama index, and poopy diaper coefficient.
My wife is currently in her eighth month of pregnancy. (Side Note: Eighth is a ridiculously spelled word. Just look at it. That's one of the dumbest looking words I've ever seen. Score one for illiteracy. At least they don't have to read it.) She is enjoying all the fun things that come with being pregnant. What's that? There's really not much about pregnancy that's fun? Well, then maybe we should carve this baby out and live it up. But am I ready?
I sway back and forth
I am prepared for screaming children at 3 A.M. (and 3 P.M.) but am I prepared to parent an infant? Can I give my newborn daughter all the love she deserves without making my son feel like I'm robbing him of said love? Can I find time to show my wife that she's still the gorgeous, intelligent woman that I married even when we're both exhausted and delirious? Can I find time to further my career/continue my education/pursue my dreams when I now have two humans depending on me for everything?
It's overwhelming. I'm excited, but humbled.
I can't be the only person who's felt this way, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)