I have a hard time understanding people who send me complaints about their tax dollars being used to free students of burdening debts but never complain about paying tax dollars to support the infrastructure on which the Billionaire businesses rely while managing to pay almost nothing in taxes.
MORE THAT CONFUSES ME Leave a comment
ABOUT RELIEVING STUDENT DEBT 4 comments
To those who are upset about the thought of their tax money going to relieve other people’s student debt. After all, you honored your debts, why should you pay for someone else’s bad choice? Here’s why.
- Economics – money will be freed to enter the economy
- Family – People will be in a position to start a family – maybe buy a home.
- A Bill of Goods – Many suffering from too much debt compared to income were sold a bill of goods. It’s like taking a mortgage on a promised house that turns out to be nonexistent, or certainly far from worth what was paid for it.
- Confusion between correlation and causation. Yes, people with degrees generally make more money, but it’s not mostly that piece of paper that does it. It’s the influential people one meets on the way, or the ancillary learning one does through interacting with fellow students, or the specific training for traditional jobs that may or may turn out to be profitable as preferences change, or any number of things and experiences not enjoyed simply by passing enough exams to get that piece of paper.
- And here’s the one that’s really ironic. So often the people arguing against reducing the burden of the student loan – a fact that could facilitate starting a family – are the very ones pressing for increasing the population through increasing the birth rate, otherwise called “pro life” or “pro birthers?”
Remember, I spent a huge part of my career as a college professor. Just sayin.’
WHEN DOES THE LOVE OF LIFE END? 6 comments
What’s bothering me to the point of insomnia is the awful cruelty to children and the lifetime of effects they are likely to suffer because of political interference in the complex process of insemination, pregnancy, and birth. I’m concerned about the generation of poor (and they will be mostly poor) babies who, by definition – indeed by law — will be force-born into a world that can’t afford them or can’t care for them for one of many possible reasons.
If the folks behind the ban on abortion were truly concerned about the welfare of the children and the people they will develop into there’d be massive efforts to assure a healthy first nine months by way of financial, medical, and social support. How about enlisting the person who helped create the fetus in the first place. Wouldn’t it make sense for men to register their DNA like registration for the draft so they can accept their share of the responsibility?
Once the baby is born if the forced-birth folks really cared for the little ones there would be recognition of the importance of a continued loving relationship with the parent whose body has been home during those essential developmental months. They’d be advocating like crazy to provide everything necessary for a good heginning. That would require maternal, parental, and childcare funding at every level for every person. At the same time they’d be advocating for good nourishing lives – physical, psychological, social, educational — all through childhood and beyond. There would be lifetime structural support for every individual to “be the best that they can be.” And women would continue to be counted among those who count.
Otherwise, based on what we know about human development, those same forced birth advocates will be complaining in twenty years or so about the use of their tax money to support a generation condemned by them to the need for special services.
I love the diapers adds showing a beautiful newborn baby gazing trustingly into the mother’s loving eyes. That’s how it should be. We can help assure that kind of love for the newly born and the rest of us to the end of life if we focus on the love, unimpeded by cold “righteousness.”
LOSING AT WORDLE 1 comment
Seven days ago I was pushing a total of 50 wins eagerly striving for 100. Then I came across one of those words where early on I got all but the first letter leaving many possible words to choose. And I chose wrong, putting me back to zero. Not exactly an earth-shattering failure but I was interested in observing my reaction. Back at zero my whole body had lost its eagerness to win and I got to thinking about people, students and adults, who never had the opportunity to succeed at something they were good at. Like students in inferior schools, for example. Or even how different my own daughter’s career life might have been if her school district had not cut the art program as if it weren’t important. Or even families where parents strive to force their children into directions that may not fit what they have to offer.
That’s it. Even playing word games I can’t help thinking about the problems we create for the welfare of our people by failing to recognize and reward potential in everyone right from the beginning. Even worse, convincing people because of their color, or social status, or gender, or hair style, or religion, or whatever, that they are less worthy. It makes me sad. Emphasis on “reward potential.”
Leave a comment
WOULD THIS ONE BE A GOOD LEAD TO AROUSE INTEREST IN MY MANUSCRIPT? 3 comments
From King Lear to Carl Jung; from mud week to the verge of chaos and hope, a topical memoir of my psychological life told in story and vignettes as if around the kitchen table. On My Way Out: My Life of Psi, a 72-year career and still counting.
Would you buy this book? 5 comments
Based on the following description, would you read this book if some agent/publisher should get interested enough to see that it turns into a real thing?
“Is there such a thing as a “kitchen table theme memoir?” If so, then this is it — chats and vignettes around the theme of my very personal experiences as psychology and I interacted with the world. Expect a no holds barred account of seventy-two years as a professor, therapist, wife, divorcee, parent, colleague, author, human being in a very complicated world. And be as surprised as I am with the way it all came together up to this point as I approach the tail end of life – a life still vigorously and demandingly keeping me awake at night.”
I’d like to call it On My Way Out: My Life with Psi, but maybe it should be On My Way Out: From Variables to Vibes.
(This is a first stab. All suggestions are appreciated.)
MORE THAT I DON’T UNDERSTAND – WHO PAYS? 2 comments
From what I know of the people working to ban abortion, they are also people who believe that any costly regulation/legislation should be supported with a careful plan for payment. I think, too, they are usually folks who believe it’s important for fathers to take an important position vis-à-vis the family. So here’s my question. Why are there not active demonstrations and regulations to guarantee that those who sire the embryo/fetus should also be identified and required at least to provide lifelong financial support to the new person. That should be relatively easy given the availability of DNA identification.
MORE THAT I DON’T UNDERSTAND 6 comments
If the sanctity of newborn life is so important that women can be forced to endanger their own health and life, why isn’t there a concerted effort to be sure that the newborn result is guaranteed a healthy environment. That would require parental leave, supportive and secure housing, sufficient income to provide healthy food both to the infant and to the caretaker parent(s), a stress-reducing life situation, and education on the limitations and needs of infants. Maybe I’m missing something. I find that I’ve been assuming that those who lobby for banning abortion are doing it out of love for the unborn, but maybe love has nothing to do with it. Maybe sanctity doesn’t necessary imply love and caring. But then, what does it mean? Help me on this one, please.
WHAT I DON’T UNDERSTAND Leave a comment
Consider those who are so caring for the sanctity of life that they would require the protection of all possible fertilized embryos or at least those who meet a dictated timeline no matter what the circumstances. Why are they not actively lobbying for the assurance of the health and safety of those fetuses during their first nine months of uterine existence? That would, of course, require the funded best care of the pregnant parent including stress reduction, healthy diet, safe and secure housing, childcare to free hours to earn money for the family’s future, and the best of prenatal medical care.
Just wondering …
monagustafsonaffinito 