Parent to look up to

I wish the children of politicians would stay out of their parent’s campaigns whether or not they are a parent to look up to.  Politicians should be open to all forms of scrutiny yet Chelsea and Ivanka say whatever they wish yet are protected by the press and the general population’s civility. They offer fodder which is supposed to be insight.  As for the other Trump children, they appear to have inherited much of what is wrong with their famous father.

First off there’s Chelsea Clinton, a lightweight, earning 65 grand making speeches less than an hour long and who apparently has no trouble taking that money, who has adopted the Clinton position of persecution, and who cannot see that any discussion of unwanted sex promulgated by her father may not be appropriate for the political arena but remains not only a large issue of character, but how he has damaged some women’s lives. Chelsea, whose husband started a business in the financial arena funded by the chairman of Goldman Sachs not because of brilliant business models but because of what family he married into.

And there’s Ivanka who thinks it is a business model to relay that as a child she ran a lemonade stand and dared the hired help not to buy it though it was a dare she unknowingly had made. Coercion.   Ivanka, whose famous father discusses her anatomy, definitely not a parent to look up.

Parent to look up to. Honorees and presenters arrive for GLAMOUR Magazine's 2014 Women of the Year Awards, sponsored by L'Oreal, held at Carnegie Hall in NYC. Pictured: Ivanka Trump Kushner and Chelsea Clinton Ref: SPL887350  101114   Picture by: Johns PKI / Splash News Splash News and Pictures Los Angeles:310-821-2666 New York:	212-619-2666 London:	870-934-2666

Parent to look up to. Honorees and presenters arrive for GLAMOUR Magazine’s 2014 Women of the Year Awards, sponsored by L’Oreal, held at Carnegie Hall in NYC.

Pictured: Ivanka Trump Kushner and Chelsea Clinton

Ref: SPL887350 101114

Picture by: Johns PKI / Splash News



It’s just part of the problem, the fluff problem in our political system.  A serious discussion of the candidate’s vision for the country rarely occurs.

Perhaps we can have the kid’s fight, the winner winning the election for their parent.

Parent to look up to

Parent to look up to

“Juanita Broaddrick, who accused Bill Clinton of raping her nearly 40 years ago, fired back at Chelsea Clinton in a series of tweets Wednesday after the former first daughter lamented attacks on her parents’ character in a new interview.”


“Broaddrick alleged in 1999 that Bill Clinton raped her during his 1978 run for governor in Arkansas. While no physical evidence tied Bill Clinton to the crime, Broaddrick has staunchly defended her account over the years.”

“Then-President Bill Clinton was impeached in 1998 as a result of a lawsuit filed against him by Paula Jones, a woman who alleged Clinton had sexually harassed her. The late 1990s also saw the surfacing of Clinton’s in-office affair with then-intern Monica Lewinsky.”

“Broaddrick has argued Hillary Clinton is also culpable in the crime she says the former president committed. After Bill Clinton allegedly raped Broaddrick while she was volunteering for his gubernatorial campaign, she says the presidential nominee worked to cover up his misdeeds. Broaddrick told Mic in January that Hillary Clinton thanked her for “all [she] was doing for them” at a campaign event in 1978.”


“We were at the end of a cul-de-sac in an affluent community of spacious homes on sprawling properties. In every other respect, this was a prime spot, but it was a dead zone for aspiring lemonade magnates.”

“So the kids copied their father and conned working-class people — specifically, the family’s employees — into covering their poor business failures.”

“The pair persuaded their bodyguard, their parents’ driver and household staffers to buy enough lemonade to cover their costs.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Neurotic Man Dips His Toe In The Job Pond

This Neurotic Man needs a job, any job.  The pangs of hunger from my stomach are like a tom tom beating in my gut.  On the other hand those pangs are most likely from Rudolpho’s Surprise #3 that I scarfed down at Jaime’s Tacqueria last night.

The smart thing (and I am nothing if not smart) is to do field research and find a winner before I submitted my application (and won).  You could never do enough research. So I headed off to the tacqueria to watch the action.  And maybe a #2.  Ole!

Neurotic Man

Neurotic Man

It only took a few minutes for me to realize that restaurant work was not for me.  The kitchen was too hot for me and all those flames!  All the workers on the floor had to put their hands near plates of partially eaten food.  All those germs!  That left being a host and I would have to talk to people to do that job.

While I was sitting and observing I looked at the newspaper I brought with me to go incognito.  Newspaper.  Journalism.  Voila!  I believe in signs (especially on doors of bathrooms).  So I did my research and found this:

“It probably comes as no surprise that jobs for journalists at newspapers continue to disappear. But in a disturbing development, digital news jobs that had been replacing some of the legacy positions appear to have hit a plateau.”

“Earlier this year, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released a chart showing the total number of employees working in the newspaper industry is now lower than those working in the “internet publishing and broadcasting” sector. Given the struggles of the newspaper industry, and the increasing popularity of “digital native” news publishers, such figures may seem intuitive. Yet it only captures how many employees work in these industries—not how many journalists.”

“With digital native websites becoming more prominent, it is worth exploring how many journalists work in this sector and whether its growth is likely to offset losses in the newspaper industry. Because the American Society of News Editors (ASNE) recently announced it will no longer estimate the size of the newspaper workforce, and no organization surveys digital outlets to measure the size of its workforce, I sought out a new data source to explore these figures.”

Neurotic Man

Neurotic Man

That sign did not help much. But wait, maybe my destiny was to be Neurotic Man online. Except for the painful initial contact I wouldn’t have to talk to or see anybody.  Bliss.  And like that I came up with the title for my column.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

See What They Want

This morning the press turned toward further analysis of the Clinton – Trump debate and in continuance of their first reviews the pundit’s see what they want.  What the media establishment saw was the good debater – Clinton, easily outpoint the bad debater – Trump.  The media establishment will see what they want and in doing so will continue to miss the biggest stories of the day such as the rise of Trumpism or the anger in the populace about the status quo.  They could have forgotten the debate if it was all about style points – Hillary is willing to prepare after all and the Donald is not.

See What They Want. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are tightening their grips on the Democratic and Republican presidential nominations.

See What They Want. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are tightening their grips on the Democratic and Republican presidential nominations.

But the Donald is willing to use the fatigue factor, a point that media pundits and politicians were willing to consider way before the Donald began his meteoric rise in the polls.  The fatigue factor is a problem any candidate from the successful party must deal with.  And that is, after two consecutive terms it is much harder for a party to win the third.  It is true historically and has a basis in our psychology.

When Trump talked about our crumbling infrastructure and our incredible indebtedness though little money has been allocated to fix that infrastructure, and that representatives of the party in power should be held responsible for not fixing the infrastructure, his argument is directed toward the fatigue factor.

That the media has suddenly forgotten both Trump and Sander’s success at supporting populist issues is astonishing.  The crumbling of the infrastructure is both literal and a metaphor.  The media establishment will see what they want but that does not make the problems go away.  There is anger and distrust of politicians and winning a debate on points is no big deal.  If Hillary plans on pulling this one out ‘the vision thing’ must once again be part of the Democratic Party.

“These are two different ways to consider the nation’s current predicaments and ponder possible solutions. And the fact that (so far) the electorate is closely divided between the two suggests a deep cleavage in the body politic: Trump voters are from Mars, and Clinton voters are from Venus. Immediately following the debate, CNN pundits (that’s what was on the television screen at the media filing room where I was) pronounced the debate a win for Clinton, and instant focus groups backed them up. She was calm and knowledgeable; Trump could not control his excesses. (He defended having called Rosie O’Donnell a “pig”! He practically admitted to not paying taxes. He explained stiffing contractors by saying they did crappy work. He falsely claimed that Clinton’s 2008 campaign sent a reporter to Kenya to investigate Obama’s birth. He conceded he exploited the housing market crash that triggered an economic collapse, noting, “That’s called business.”) Clinton prevailing was a fair assessment, but the question is: does it matter? Trump is a candidate who vents. Facts don’t matter to him. They may not matter to many who want to send an angry bully to Washington to beat up all those elitists there.”

“Before the debate, I spoke to a senior Trump surrogate who told me the Trump campaign was quite pleased with recent developments: “His message, his themes are being heard. It’s working. We’re connecting. People are giving him due consideration. People are angry. He just needs to stick to these themes and messages.” And his themes are memes: law and order, bring our jobs back, she’s low-stamina, make America great again. Do these transcend the nitty-gritty of the debate and the usual political discourse?”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Expectations Game

There are two aspects of tonight’s debate that remain crucial – how does each candidate match up with the expectations game of him or her, and which candidate sets the tone for the first third or so of the debate.

Donald Trump has a huge advantage going into the debate.  It is true that his knowledge of policy is superficial, that there is no consistency in what he says, and there is much venom that he spews.  But because of these descriptions his advantage remains firm.  That is because anything other than being completely destroyed in the debate by a more competent Hillary Clinton will seems like a huge victory on his part.

Remember Sarah Palin versus Joe Biden? The debate appeared as a clear victory for Ms. Palin because she wasn’t destroyed by the more experienced, articulate Biden.  Though most analysts felt that Mr. Biden won the debate the fact that the winning had to be considered at all after the expectations game was considered was a victory for Palin.

Expectations Game

Expectations Game

And Trump is a superstar with one-liners and meaningless policy descriptions that fill the air time and are reinforced by his positive posture and air of confidence. Clinton will not appear as likeable as Trump (with this presidential race being a contest between the two most detested candidates of our time) even though his statements suggest he is truly a horrific person.

The first few hours after the debate is the world of spin and of the analysts. When Obama or Bernie debate Hillary they often immediately appeared to be losers and public opinion firmed days later around that they had won.   What happens in public opinion a few days later is more likely to set the tone for the result of the debate then the initial analysis.  How the sense by the public relates directly to the expectations game.

Expectations Game

Expectations Game

So if Hillary does not come off in the first thirty minutes as likeable enough, and if the Donald can appear Presidential enough, Hillary and the Democrats will suffer through the appearance they do not want to make.

“Veteran presidential debate coaches and campaign strategists say the tone and trajectory of general election debates have long been set in their opening minutes, and that the explosion of real-time spin and Twitter groupthink has only accelerated the trend.

And so, as Clinton and Trump square off Monday at Hofstra University before a national audience that is expected to shatter viewership records, the pressure will be especially intense right at the start.

“You have your maximum audience at its most impressionable stage in the first minutes of the debate,” said Mari Maseng Will, a veteran Republican debate coach who served as communications director in the Reagan White House.

Campaigns now specially design one-liners for those crucial opening minutes and map out plans to pivot to safer ground if the early questioning veers into rockier political terrain, such as, say, classified emails for Clinton or charges of misogyny for Trump.

In a sign of the warp speed in which debate storylines can form, BuzzFeed in 2012 famously posted a story with the headline, “How Mitt Romney Won the First Debate,” only 42 minutes into the first Obama-Romney clash in Denver.

The early minutes proved critical in some of this year’s primary debates, too.

In February, Chris Christie’s campaign-crushing retort to Rubio’s repeating of a talking point — “There it is. The memorized 25-second speech. There it is, everybody” — came fewer than 20 minutes into the two-hour debate. Rubio never recovered that night, or the rest of the campaign.

Curt Anderson, chief strategist for Bobby Jindal, who appeared in the so-called undercard debates, said the bias toward the beginning was striking.

“There’s this whole Twitterverse dynamic where it’s decided in the opening minutes. It’s not rational or fair, and you can bitch all you want about it, but you have to adjust and deal with it,” he said. By the end, Jindal’s team designed their debate strategy around landing their weightiest punches early.

In the most extreme of cases, an entire debate’s storyline can be sealed after a single question.

In 1988, the very first question asked of Michael Dukakis was whether he would support the death penalty if his wife was “raped and murdered.” Without any visible emotion, he said he would not. (“When he answered by talking policy, I knew we had lost the election,” Dukakais’ campaign manager would later say.)”


“In 2012, BuzzFeed famously posted a story with the headline, “How Mitt Romney Won the First Debate,” only 42 minutes into the first Obama-Romney clash in Denver. | Getty

With Trump’s general unpredictability and his reported disdain for full 90-minute dress rehearsals at a lectern, he certainly could tire, slump or lash out late. Notably, Trump never debated one-on-one in the primary, and all those contests included commercial and bathroom breaks that are absent from the formal fall debates.

Meanwhile, Clinton, in a 2007 primary debate, suffered a late blow after she took two different positions on drivers’ licenses for illegal immigrants in the closing minutes. “I can’t tell whether she was for it or against it,” Obama pounced.

But historically, it has been the first third to half of debates that prove decisive.

“Attention spans wane,” said Brett O’Donnell, a Republican debate coach who has worked with past presidential candidates, including Romney, Bush and McCain. “They’re really set in the first 30 minutes, and you never get a second chance at a first impression.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Pulpdiddys Permutations Sunday

Today is Sunday and also my day off at Pulpdiddys Permutations.  At one time it wasn’t – I would write at Pulpdiddys Permutations seven days a week.  But I found like so many other things in life, pacing myself was important.  I told myself that I needn’t burn myself out.  Sadly the problems I address will be still here tomorrow.  But it makes me a bit nervous to leave this column, even for a day, so for several years now I post a Sunday column explaining why the my Sunday postings do not follow the format found here for the rest of the week.  After all, Today is Sunday

Today is Sunday and I’ve tweaked this Pulpdiddys Permutations column that appears on Sunday again but the story remains the same – I take the day off.  I have taken to use this Sunday space so that it is a little bit about me and a whole bunch about what I am trying to do with this blog.  It has become apparent to me that the roots for the blog come from three things.  First of all, I love to write.  I enjoy the process and especially how attempting to communicate with others forces my thought process to focus in a way that not having the writing would not cause.  Secondly, I have been fascinated with how we interact with each other from an early age.  My political and social precociousness led me to turn away from the almost brutal focus on scholasticism and athleticism that dominated my early years.  In my case, this break was a good thing as it expanded my interest in understanding my empathy.  And last of all I realized I had developed a way of looking at the world that focused on want. When I explained this to others I found they often shared my thoughts but that for the most part they did not desire to consciously understand or express the theme of want, or if they did, found they had shuttled it off to the recesses of their mind – a way of living that contained the shuttling as an inconvenient truth.

Pulpdiddys Permutations

Pulpdiddys Permutations

The inconvenient truth is that we drown in want.  The want may be the search of fame or sex or health or power or toys but these wants ultimately have the same catalyst and that catalyst is money.  Some theorists and analysts think we only see that want in our dreams and that dreams are healthy.  The problem is that this want invades our day to days and we make decisions based on that want that often has far reaching and sometimes tragic consequences.  The want may be quite basic such as the quest to survive or quite advanced like controlling politicians or having a lobbyist team to market your ideas of law.  The thing about want is we largely are embarrassed about it, especially if the want becomes public and obvious and though at times we may expose our want it is often done in a non serious game show sort of way.  The other thing about want, especially in the most unconscious of us, is that we trample our fellow human beings in an attempt to achieve whatever it is that is our want.

I have found that magazines, blogs, and newspapers don’t understand want but instead focus on the shell – an agenda as if rote answers deal with today’s problems.  Somehow the media has failed to see that in reality their own agendas are full of fiction and as such, are as much want as that of anyone else.  As for these agendas, most are political in nature.  The problem with an agenda is that it blinds you to certain realities – at least for a while.  For example a journalist at the Washington Post almost fifty years down the road realizes the paper missed the mark by ignoring Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech when it was delivered, instead focusing on crowd control that day.  Or journalists at the New York Times realizing that they were too enthusiastic in support of the Vietnam War.  Or ditto for the enthusiasm of both papers when the misdirected terrorist war known as the Iraq War took place.  Of course this is an over-simplification and I mention it only as an illustration.

As I do my research for what to write at Pulpdiddys Permutations I think about the want that each of us has – the want we may not know exists.  Hopefully I can glean enough of the want to make an intelligent observation.  While personally I remain far more liberal then not regarding economic, political, and social issues I bring up the question of want in my analysis of issues and how the issue will affect all, most, or some of us.  So when President Obama does something that I find wrong I am not loathe to mention that wrongness at this site.  No person or accepted belief is sacrosanct.

Pulpdiddys Permutations

Pulpdiddys Permutations

Love of writing, looking at the world with empathy, and focus on want are the triumvirate that has brought about Pulpdiddys Permutations.  Though I believe I am eventually found out to be correct more often then not and certainly more so than any pundit I know that’s out there, I certainly am not infallible.  But I give you my pledge that I’ll continue to do the research, continue to consider the matter using the frame of reference of want in the material posted by me at this site, and correct myself when my opinion eventually is shown to just be wrong.  And if you’d like some lighter reading there’s always my e-book:

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How Are You Going To Pay For That?

When Bernie Sanders announced his free public college proposal and then announced his public option proposal for healthcare, Hillary Clinton replied with the question that politician’s rely on when faced with when an opponent releases a popular plan and that is, How are you going to pay for that?   It is disheartening when politicians should know better than resorting to How Are You Going To Pay For That?

Like moral plans usually face, Bernie’s opposition continued to taunt him with How Are You Going To Pay For That?  The long term benefits of his plan should have been sufficient, but it wasn’t to the taunters, the Hillaryites.  So Bernie supplied the following:


“Plan Payment
Rebuild America Act: Sen. Sanders has proposed a $1 trillion plan to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and put 13 million Americans to work. Paid for by making corporations pay taxes on all of the “profits” they have shifted to the Cayman Islands and other offshore tax havens, which the Congressional Research Services estimates may currently create losses that approach $100 billion annually, and other loopholes.
College for All: Sen. Sanders has proposed making public colleges and universities tuition-free and substantially reducing student debt, in a plan that would cost about $75 billion a year. Paid for by imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators that would generate about $300 billion in revenue.
Expand and Extend Social Security: Sen. Sanders has proposed expanding Social Security and extending the solvency of this program until 2065. Paid for by lifting the cap on taxable income above $250,000 so that the wealthy pay the same percentage of their income into Social Security as working people.”

How Are You Going To Pay For That?

How Are You Going To Pay For That?

The main question should be How Are You Not Going To Pay For That?  Programs such as Healthcare or Education generate a greater Economic better than cost.  It is also beneficial to the society and morally just that the citizenry becomes healthier and more knowledgeable both technically and historically among the benefits of education.

Besides, for human advancement programs How Are You Going To Pay For That? is discussed and debated.  But there is one human activity that is tremendously costly yet that cost is usually analyzed after the fact, and that is


How Are You Going To Pay For That?

How Are You Going To Pay For That?

Military incursions cost lives and when successful, destroys a region’s infrastructure that is then rebuilt some time after the bombing stops.  Awfully inefficient to attempt to get back to where you were before, let alone try to advance.

War hawks like George Bush and his bros, even Hillary Clinton, don’t bother to consider How Are You Going To Pay For That?

AND WHO BENEFITS?  Certainly not you or me.  We bear the brunt of the cost as our families are used like fodder to support the wars.

Occasionally a war occurs, or a tyrant appears that requires world action.  But most wars are fought with little incisive analysis yet benefit a few select groups.  And those profiting never bother to answer How Are You Going To Pay For That?

“President-elect Barack Obama‘s administration needs to monitor war spending much more closely than the current White House has, according to a new study that criticizes President Bush’s approach to funding the Iraq and Afghanistan wars — a bill that is projected to approach nearly $1 trillion next year.”

“Even with declining troop numbers in Iraq, the direct price tag of the two wars could grow as high as $1.7 trillion by 2018, the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments reported last week. The defense think tank’s figure does not include potentially hundreds of billions more in indirect economic and social costs, such as higher oil prices and lost wages.”

“The war in Iraq alone has already cost more in inflation-adjusted dollars than every other U.S. war except World War II, the CSBA found.”

“Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, named by Obama to continue in that job, has made it clear that the incoming administration will scrutinize defense spending, which has mushroomed since 2001 as a result of the wars and related costs.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Media Madness

Historically, whistleblowers have been provided with some protection by those organizations they provide data for, but one of the most successful at breaking stories that seemed impregnable has opted out of its obligation and has indulged in media madness.  The Washington Post home to the reporters who used inside sources to break the story known as Watergate, received accolades and the Pulitzer Prize, along with The Guardian, The Intercept, and The New York Times for their reporting of the information made available by Edward Snowden.  But The Washington Post, unlike the other media outlets breaking this major story, has called for a trial of Snowden instead of protecting him.

Media Madness

Media Madness

This is the height of cynicism – using the material Edward Snowden provided to win the Pulitzer Prize and then once achieving that prize turning on Snowden.  If Snowden had followed a course that the Post’s non-approval would suggest, then the Post would have never won the Prize.  It is possible if The Washington Post’s Editorial Board had made it clear to Snowden that they would not support him, it is possible Snowden would never have gone to that media outlet with the story.  Media madness and totally corrupted.

“Three of the four media outlets that received and published large numbers of secret NSA documents provided by Edward Snowden — The Guardian, the New York Times, and The Intercept –– have called for the U.S. government to allow the NSA whistleblower to return to the U.S. with no charges. That’s the normal course for a news organization, which owes its sources duties of protection, and which — by virtue of accepting the source’s materials and then publishing them — implicitly declares the source’s information to be in the public interest.”

“But not the Washington PostIn the face of a growing ACLU and Amnesty-led campaign to secure a pardon for Snowden, timed to this weekend’s release of the Oliver Stone biopic “Snowden,” the Post editorial page today not only argued in opposition to a pardon, but explicitly demanded that Snowden — the paper’s own source — stand trial on espionage charges or, as a “second-best solution,” accept “a measure of criminal responsibility for his excesses and the U.S. government offers a measure of leniency.”


“In doing so, the Washington Post has achieved an ignominious feat in U.S. media history: the first-ever paper to explicitly editorialize for the criminal prosecution of its own source — one on whose back the paper won and eagerly accepted a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service. But even more staggering than this act of journalistic treachery against the paper’s own source are the claims made to justify it.”

“The Post editors concede that one — and only one — of the programs that Snowden enabled to be revealed was justifiably exposed — namely, the domestic metadata program, because it “was a stretch, if not an outright violation, of federal surveillance law, and posed risks to privacy.” Regarding the “corrective legislation” that followed its exposure, the Post acknowledges: “We owe these necessary reforms to Mr. Snowden.” But that metadata program wasn’t revealed by the Post, but rather by The Guardian.”


“But what makes today’s Washington Post editorial so remarkable, such a tour de force, is that the editors are literally calling for the criminal prosecution of one of the most important sources in their own newspaper’s history. Having basked in the glory of awards and accolades, and benefited from untold millions of clicks, the editorial page editors of the Post now want to see the source who enabled all of that be put in an American cage and branded a felon. That is warped beyond anything that can be described.”


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Neurotic Man Tries Out For the Voice

The Voice has had all kinds of champions – one-time child stars, established performers whose singers careers have fizzled, ex-addicts, and the occasional new discovery but they have never had an admitted Neurotic Man on the show.  The artists picked for the show spend the next several weeks worrying about their look, and their song choice and saving their voice for the big moment.  All of these people are amateurs as it takes a Neurotic Man (or woman) to fully examine and appreciate worry.  All the Voice contestants can sing.  Granted.  But the fine art of worrying is a skill set that I believe I have refined.

In addition, singing solo is sure to make a novice nervous.  Since I am always nervous I have an immediate advantage over all the other contestants.

Neurotic Man

Neurotic Man

Confident that I possessed something new for the Voice I proceeded on.  And as almost always, the internet was my first stop for preparation.  I was pleasantly surprised that the Voice had a website for auditions.  It was divided into two parts, the second being callbacks which I believed I belonged in.  The callback instructions include:

“(This is ONLY if you get a Red Card at the Open Call)

You may be asked to a callback. If you are selected, you will be scheduled a time & date to return. Here are the guidelines for the callback audition.

NOTE: This is ONLY for artists that audition at the open call and are given a callback.

You must prepare three (3) current/popular songs for the callback. You may be asked to perform a song of the producer’s choice.

NO original music.

You may sing to a backing track, play an instrument, have one (1) person accompany you. A cappella is NOT allowed at the CALLBACKS; you must have accompaniment.

If you play an instrument while you sing, you must perform at least one (1) song without.

The coaches will NOT be at the callback auditions.”

Neurotic Man

Neurotic Man

The first part is easy.  All you need to have is a red card.  I have plenty of those.  In fact, I have plenty in any color they want.

But I lost interest when I read the coaches will not be at the auditions.  How many times do you have to sing?  This is exploitation, plain and simple.  No way is this Neurotic Man going to put up with such exploitation.  Cry for me, Argentina!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Amazon Way

Fortunately for the Amazon Way it exists in a profit driven economic system.  As the second paragraph quoted below notes, the Amazon Way has negatively influenced the community of humankind in more than one way but because of its actual and potential profit the financial community has looked at the Amazon Way as a darling.  The company, because of its very competitive pricing structure is a favorite of consumers.  But in capitalism does a company bear any other responsibility?  Most of the U.S. citizens would not approve of slavery as a means for increasing profit, or the tenement sweat factories or even what took place during the building of our railroads.  But the Amazon Way, in order to save some money, created an un air-conditioned work environment leading to workers passing out from the heat and dehydration, gets a pass by most of the populace and media.  To get an idea of what the Amazon Way management thinks of its workers, EMT’s and ambulances were maintained near the Amazon Way warehouses as that was cheaper than installing air-conditioning.

Amazon Way

Amazon Way

Not only its workers but its Associates have found that the Amazon Way seeks to positively affect the bottom line by taking advantage of those who help make the Amazon Way profitable.

When the Amazon Way drives small retailers out of business by under pricing them, the benefits of a self-contained community and what that means to all retail ancillary concerns should not be minimized.

And when a local community pays for infrastructure repair without any sales tax portion coming from the Amazon Way, the local community is adversely affected.

The article, which is partially listed below, is enlightened because it mentions the Amazon problems. In one paragraph out of many.  The Amazon Way remains a darling of financial advisors and the media.  The Amazon Way hurts lots of people but makes a profit.  In some way the philosophy behind capitalism has not progressed very far.

Amazon Way

Amazon Way

“Yet while has commanded an immense presence in the world of retail and cloud storage, until recently it has lacked a certain coolness factor like, say, Apple has had with its iPhones and Google with its self-driving cars. Other than releasing the Kindle e-reader (essentially a delivery device for its online bookselling business), the Seattle company has had a pretty grim track record in coming up with electronics bling. Remember the Fire Phone? You don’t? Well, you’re not alone — it was discontinued last year after 13 months of sluggish sales.”

“For years investors have tolerated’s lackluster performance on the gadgets front, betting that the company’s future was bright and that someday it would become profitable. And investors have stuck with despite the knocks it’s taken on several fronts, including criticism over its treatment of employees, ruthless underpicing that’s perceived as hurting small retailers and ample tax-avoidance strategies — not to mention swipes that it’s driving publishers out of business. Despite these criticisms, Amazon’s online retail business has remained immensely popular with consumers. “

“In July did something it’s had never done before; it booked its fifth consecutive quarterly profit. No longer dependent on the holiday sales boost, the company appears to be on its way to emerging as more of a traditional blue-chip multinational — one releasing a regular stream of profitable returns.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Climate Change Deniers

I don’t understand climate change deniers.  I don’t understand their priorities.  I don’t understand how they view their families and others who they claim to love.  I don’t understand their lack of imagination when it comes to work in business – how protecting the environment is not only a good thing but can be extremely profitable.  I don’t understand that in a situation with such dire possibilities that they feel they can afford to guess.

I naively thought that after they checked their computer in their air conditioned and rode down the elevator to the garage that contained their car in a securely gated area opened by a chip in their car, getting into that car and making a phone call after they say a secure word to make a phone connection and then after the call driving off, following a route planned by their phone or car gps with an arrival time plotted for them, they would realize how dependent they are in technological advancement, all which is impossible without several branches of science.

Climate Change

Climate Change

Conservative they may be, or not.  But I thought the climate change deniers, using advances in science hundred, if not thousands of times in a day would have a respect for scientists.  Usually there is a contrarian view (or three or four) within the scientific community so that choosing a side possibly can be labeled an opinion.  But not when it comes to what is happening to and on our planet.  Science, all branches of science is uniform dealing with this subject and that is that we are irreparably damaging our planet and that our present use of the planet’s resources will adversely or permanently end the human life form on earth.   We should prioritize and working toward protecting the planet should be the goal.

Some are making the effort.  Fighting the good fight.  But the inability to get past our petty differences will kill us.

What’s in it for climate change deniers?  In their day to days they use the advantages of science but ignore this one crucial thing, that they rely on science all day long.  And in climate change there are no do overs.

Climate Change

Climate Change

“In a year of record-setting heat on a blistered globe, with fast-warming oceans, fast-melting ice caps, and fast-rising sea levels, ratification of the December 2015 Paris climate summit agreement—already endorsed by most nations—should be a complete no-brainer. That it isn’t tells you a great deal about our world. Global geopolitics and the possible rightward lurch of many countries (including a potential deal-breaking election in the United States that could put a climate denier in the White House) spell bad news for the fate of the Earth. It’s worth exploring how this might come to be.”

“That geopolitics will play a decisive role in determining the success or failure of the Paris Agreement has become self-evident.”

“The delegates to that 2015 climate summit were in general accord about the science of climate change and the need to cap global warming at 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius (or 2.6 to 3.5 degrees Fahrenheit) before a planetary catastrophe ensues. They disagreed, however, about much else. Some key countries were in outright conflict with other states (Russia with Ukraine, for example) or deeply hostile to each other (as with India and Pakistan or the United States and Iran). In recognition of such tensions and schisms, the assembled countries crafted a final document that replaced legally binding commitments with the obligation of each signatory state to adopt its own unique plan, or “nationally determined contribution,” for curbing climate-altering greenhouse gas emissions.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment