Retrogression Blues

'One step forward, Two steps back', is a familiar cliche of complaint. I'd say it was apropos of our political leaders, except it's too mild to apply. Our guys and gals in Washington appear to live by 'One step forward, Two steps back, and while we're at it, let's take another Two backward.'

How does this manifest itself in our lives? Figuring out the labyrinthian processes in Washington are beyond me, but I can hazard a guess, and here it goes:

A bill gets passed - say one that will allow stem cell research to move forward, benefiting throngs of victims to a sadly wide and expanding menu of afflictions. Let's postulate this bill has been opposed by a certain segment of the population on some grounds or other - in this case we can posit fundamentalist religious beliefs as the motivating factor.

The opposition organizes successfully enough to pay for legal challenges to the new rule. They achieve an injunction against implementation of the rule. That will give them time to twist the arms (figuratively speaking) of vulnerable politicians(included elected judges) and build support for overturning, or drastically modifying the rule.

Now, faced with this opposition, what do the originators of the bill do? They compromise. In addition to the compromises already made in the passing of the bill. This is done through the process of mapping out how the rule will be administered. Rest assured by the time they are done, stem cells will only be available under circumstances that are rare at best.

What's worse, during this process of tinkering and 'tweaking', measures may be introduced through legal action that weren't even there in the first place. New interpretations of general passages that will now be refined into legal action. This may be taken so far that the bill will now allow less research into stem cells than before the bill was even passed. The modified rule may actually prohibit actions that weren't specifically prohibited before.

So, here's what we have: as far as the general voting public is aware, they have approved a bill that will stimulate stem cell research, ultimately benefitting the health and welfare of all citizens. But what they actually get is a bill that does very little, or at worse, undermines the whole concept.

Voters may never know until they see another bill up for a vote which does the same thing the old bill was supposed to do. They may wonder why another rule was needed. After all, isn't this fixed already?

Then again, given the persistence of voter memory in this country, they may never notice. Sort of a national, political, Alzheimer's. The kind of disease that no amount of stem cell research will ever solve ...

Flight of the Doh-Dohs

I know I've been flying too much when I begin to expect people to behave intelligently on a plane. Maybe it's the millionth hearing of those pre-flight instructions that makes me so sure others have heard them and understand too.

I couldn't be more deluded.

On both legs of my flight today, my fellow denizens of the air shoved bulging bags plus every other personal item they were carting into the overheard, despite the attendants' repeated instructions to put the smaller items UNDER THEIR SEATS.

While bag-stuffing, my aerial compatriots plugged up the aisles in exactly the way the crew were saying fervently not to.

Then, getting comfortable, they reclined their seat backs and dropped their tray tables. Some began furiously texting as if their lives depended on it. Maybe they did.

The obviously experienced (and borderline exasperated) crew were savvy and persistent enough to clean up the mess and button us up for takeoff, but the going was tough. As the wheels left the ground I reflected on what it must be like to repeat the same instructions, and witness the same acts of misunderstanding, obliviousness, or rebellion, time and again.

I had time enough to appreciate the lot of the attendant before the first Doh-Dohs got up from their seats in a beeline for the toilet, and my reverie was broken by the loudspeaker refrain, "the Captain has not turned off the seat-belt sign - please remain in your seats ..."

I guess I can understand why one of the crew might grab a beer and slide away from the mess, from time to time ...

Inerttainment

There may be a reason why the economy is in the doldrums. We are just passing MidSummer, a time historically known for doldrums, economic or otherwise.

This time of year, whenever I am not working, I tend to sit and watch. It's not that I don't enjoy active hobbies, I just seem to have less energy to devote to them, so sitting seems the best option.

And today's technology makes it easy. The world of news and entertainment comes to your TV, your computer, or your smart phone (aka 'mobile personal media center'). You can get shows and movies that aren't currently running through direct internet streams. If all else fails you can browse You Tube.

If you miss someone, there's no need to actually walk, drive, or fly to meet them, just adjust the scenery and lighting to best effect and engage Skype or video iChat. If your someone isn't living in the dark ages (i.e., the 1990s), they can engage too and it will be just like being there. Mostly.

In fact, there are very few activities you can't do, or wants and desires you can't fill, by just staying at home and texting, emailing, channeling, chatting, or browsing.

And maybe that's what modern Big Corporate wants: when we are not working, we should be browsing and ordering, or at least noticing the adds and banners blinking and sliding on the periphery of our internet lives. That may be the strategy to fill their coffers.

But I feel I must rebel against this impulse to sit.

After all, movement has its own pleasures, and much of our local economies depend on us getting out and shopping in physically-real stores, eating at restaurants not run by screaming megalomaniacs, and seeing movies, plays, and musical performances in local venues.

I would add 'attending sporting events', and this may be true where you live, but MidSummer heat can be cruel in Los Angeles, if the event is inland and outdoors. In which case, watching the event on TV is an acceptable option and no penalties will be accrued.

Yes, the webs of economic and social life that are our communities depend on us getting up and getting out and about. But man, the doldrums are tough, and I have the entire original 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' BBC TV series queued up on Netflix, ready to stream to my living room at the touch of a button.

Maybe I'll rebel tomorrow ...

Car on Mars, Revisited

Once upon a time, I likened attempts to 'fix' our economy to 'driving a car on Mars'. Every input has a delayed reaction, so you must be careful not to give it too much 'gas' (read: 'stimulus') too quickly, and you'd better be ready with the 'brakes' (read:'the Fed raising interest rates') if the pace gets too hot.

What was I thinking? If our leaders are to be believed, we've shot so much fuel into that car on Mars that it ought to be ricocheting between the frozen carbon dioxide drenched poles. Yet the reality seems the car is stuck in the Martian dust, and if it's moving, we can't see it from here.

Perhaps the economy isn't like a car on Mars but like a car sunk to the bottom of the ocean. Giving it gas just moves it around the bottom, but it'll never reach the surface and see the sun, no matter how fast it goes.

Or maybe it IS like that car on Mars, but the fuel hasn't been getting to it. We've been madly pumping it in, but there's a leak, maybe a blow-out, and the fuel has never reached our stranded car.

Or it could be the people we've hired to control the car and get the fuel to it just don't know what they are doing.

I do hope we can recover that car someday, don't you?

Ringing the (Money) Bell

By now we are all inured to the outrageous salaries of corporate executives. From Enron to BP we've long since ceased to be surprised with the kingly fortunes handed over to other humans, who presumably just like us, put their pants on one leg at a time and drool in their sleep. Except, of course, these folks can afford custom tailored pants and personal drool-wiping attendants, if so desired.

But what are we to make of the salaries paid to run-of-the-mill public servants in the City of Bell, California, a metropolis of 40,000 mostly working class souls nestled in the sprawl of greater Los Angeles? It seems they managed to pull a fast one on their citizens by giving themselves paydays that, while not quite reaching corporate fat-cattiness levels, nonetheless boggle the brain.

Actually, now that I contemplate it, given the low incomes of most of their citizens, the compensation these folks gave themselves may be worse than anything in the corporate overlordship. Almost Bernie Madoff unethical - by which I mean criminal.

You have to ask yourself how such a small municipality could afford to pay its city manager nearly $800,000 a year, or pay their police chief more than the leader of Los Angeles' much larger force.

This news came along in time to remind us, just when we might have been looking down our noses at 'third world' countries and tsk-tsking about their rampant corruption, that we can compete with anyone when it comes to greed.

When it comes to lining their pockets at the expense of their citizens, no one has done it much better than the city leaders of Bell. They may be fleecing a small town, but they are doing it with world class skills.

Fast Friends

It's striking how travel affects us. Mentally. When at home, I would never read a USA Today, yet on the road, reading one brings on the same feeling of comfort and reassurance conversation with a good friend might. Go Figure.

On a recent trip, that paper featured an article about how social media outlets were eroding the depth and meaning of personal friendships. In short, people today may have many more 'friends', in the internet sense of the word, yet have few if any close, personal friendships. This, the piece says, is not good for us, and will have damaging effects on individuals and society going forward.

I couldn't help but contrast this with elements of the movie 'Up in the Air' - the one starring George Clooney, not the animated thing featuring Ed Asner's voice and a house suspended by balloons.

At one point Clooney's character reassures us that his life isn't a lonely one. He is constantly surrounded by people in airports, hotels, even city streets. At another he mentions how he sometimes engages in enjoyable conversation with airplane seatmates, sharing personal histories, jokes, and dreams. Even the inevitable parting at flight's end didn't seem to blunt his pleasure with that sort of friendship.

And how different is that from the internet sort? For one, I suppose talking in person with someone on a plane is more intense and immediate than anything you could get from the internet. Not even video chat would provide the full physical presence - the body language, ability to see nuances in facial expressions, etc., you get with speaking with someone totally new to you on a plane.

For another, there's the time factor. Internet interactions are mostly brief and choppy, with conversations carried on like chess games, move by move, over hours, days perhaps. The expectation of continuance is always there. On a plane you may spend hours in deep and varied conversation, but then it's over, likely never to continue.

Still, both types of friendships miss the mark - neither are the sort of deep and close interactions USA Today says we need most.

By the end of 'Up in the Air', the director wants us to believe that Clooney's frequent traveler has realized the error of his shallow ways, made painfully aware by seeing himself reflected in the similar behavior of a woman he wants to settle down with. But he doesn't really look that much happier than he did before, and if you've seen the movie you know what ultimately befalls him. For the rest of you, I won't spoil it - see the film.

All of which leads me to believe that USA Today got it half-wrong, and so did 'Up in the Air'. Surely we should all desire deep and meaningful relationships with other people. But we can enjoy life with nothing but remote internet friendships, spiced with the occasional brief but more personal meetings.

We humans are a sociable lot, and we'll take whatever we can get, or as Woody Allen has posited, 'Whatever Works'. Fast Friends can work, at least until something better comes along.

Middling America

Just when I was beginning to feel slightly better about the economy - probably because I had been avoiding reading anything about it, my attention was caught by a post on Yahoo News, concerning the vanishing Middle Class. And now I am depressed again.

The picture painted is bleak, but the main piece of ill news was this little factoid: "... the bottom 50 percent of income earners in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the nation’s wealth."

Now, if there's one thing we don't imagine when we think of America and the 'American Dream', it's a country where so much is owned by so few, and the 'have-nots' make up perhaps the majority of the population.

The article places much of the blame on globalism, and I can see the point. How CAN someone living in America compete with someone living in, say, India, who is willing to do the same work for several times less? The only advantage a local worker would have seems to be proximity. If your job can be done remotely, you are basically screwed.

The article also blames excessive government regulation, making it more likely for businesses to go outside the US, which I can also see, even if the logic is murkier.

But I think the article missed an important point, once which I believe to be the main reason the middle class has begun to disappear: the wonderful buying engine that was the American Middle Class Consumer is no longer viewed as indispensable to the world economy. Now there's the emerging Chinese middle class to take up our slack, and then some.

Who needs an increasingly poorer bunch of Americans to buy your goods, when there are perhaps ten times as many increasingly richer Chinese to do the same? As businesses world-wide focus more on this emerging Asian consumer engine, they care less and less about what becomes of us.

Still, we aren't down and out just yet. There is still a lot of potential buying power in what's left of the Middle Class, and, if we can only get the credit markets lending again, the working poor can once again buy like they are Middle Class.

In the meantime, there are a couple of things I think might help slow the decline:

We can all try to make conscious decisions to buy products and services from companies that employ workers living in America, and who are being paid reasonable American wages. This may be hard to discern, but if you can, do it.

Also, buy local whenever possible. The more local the company, the more likely the money you spend gets recycled right back into your local economy, which helps you and your neighbors have a better quality of life. So at least you'll think you are Middle Class.

There are probably many other ways to help, but I am not savvy enough to know them. I am happiest when I don't think too much about the economy, which is either a survival strategy or a sure-fire way to be doomed to that poor 50%.