Run Little Gnome Run!
I'm back in Portland after working in Seattle today. It was quite the workday, requiring three ounces of Ireland's finest and a pint of homebrew to decompress. I had to take a couple personal days to:
-get the DOD off my back (IRR B.S.)
-get the state off my back (Truck Tags and Insurance)
-get the Feds and states to pony up the dough they owe (Navy/Treasury/IRS snafu)
-turn in expense reports in order to stop floating my company a no interest loan.
On the way home I heard today's Fresh Air. It's an Al Gore interview on global warming. He makes a point about the Bush administration that has always chapped my ass. Bush's implicit/explicit statment prior to getting elected was basically 'hey, I'm an idiot, but I'll surround myself with my dad's cronies, who are bright dudes' (I paraphrase). Problem is they are all crooks and always have been. The case in point is Phillip Cooney. He is supposed to be telling the president what to think about 'Environmental Quality', but he is a PR man for Exxon, as well as Exxon's counsel for the Valdez affair. He isn't a scientist, he's a crooked lobbyist, as are the rest of the cabinet.
Lawyers and PR men are not scientists, and newspapers are not peer reviewed, but we treat their misinformation with undue legitimacy. This allows the general populace to walk around ignoring problems such as an overinflated economy, environmental devastation and energy shortfalls that make me cringe.
If you are not following the scientific method, and your studies are not peer reviewed then you have no business attempting to set public policy, as you are just an asshole in a suit who will F shit up in the long run.
This includes but is not limited to:
-Evolution
-Global Warming
-Energy Policy
-Economics
This last one is important. Economics as understood in modern academia is not really a science. It is a Socratic idealogical study based on the core idea that the economy can and will expand forever. I don't know about you, but I live on a finite sphere. The only answer to all three aforementioned problems is to stop breeding and stop breeding NOW! Way to go Chance, Missy, Sean, Christina G. et al. for leading the way to a future with less mouths to feed, burning fossil fuels and generally cluttering up the planet.
(CK's note- despite this rant we love all rugrats, including but not limited to: Dylan, Jaiden, Julian, Vanessa, Annalise, Solstyn, Tandem, Daniel, Christopher, Alex and any other rat bastards I may have missed.)
posted by nate @ 9:39 PM
9 Comments:
We could also do what the Chinese do and only allow each family to have only one kid. This would lower the worlds population, and in turn help save the environment, and somehow stimulate the economy. Whatever we have to do to make a better place for me and you, Nate, I'm all for it!
p.s. The black Trek mountain bike of mine that you worked on in VA is now an extra bike at the Story house. Any suggestions?
Ironically, China is now facing workforce size issues due to that policy. Also, there's a rough correlation between better education and fewer children (the more educated people are, the fewer children they tend to have). As such, there is supposedly (unconfirmed by me) a population decline in the US as well. Know what the big worry is? The old bastages wanting to know who's going to pay for *their* Social Security checks. Americans are too self-centered and media-blitzed to have any clue, let alone concern, for all the *real* problems out there.
I've heard some people say that our having less children in general will result in declining quility of life as we grow older since no one will be around to tend our gardens and empty our colostomy bags, but it is a chance I'm willing to take for the good of the planet.
Jason- Good to hear from you, I suggest 'Urban Hucking'; the practice of riding around town looking for cool and interesting places to ride. Remember those dumb ass Family Circus comics where Bil Keane draws PJ wandering around the house and indicates his path of travel with a dotted line? Well, it's like that only with a beefy beater and outdoors.
If the derraileurs get out of whack I'd remove them. Then choose a front chainring and rear cog that give you a workable gear ratio and a clean chainline. Voila, instant single speed. Then beat it to death around town, but learn how to true a wheel and adjust your brakes first. These two skills will serve you well no matter what.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I am all for less kids out there, we need to stop growing and start living in harmony with our environment!
Come to think of it and on the topic...I was helping a poor schmuck at work the other day and he was sitting in my man cage i.e cubicle and he looks me right in the eye and goes "you dont actually believe that global warming crap do you"? I had to stop a sec, bight my tongue and say " did you forget what office you are in", meaning that this was the ENVIRONMENTAL flight. Then he went in on this "well the volcanoes emit more than we humans do that contribute to the problem" and that was his justification for being a dumb prick.
I am all for not having litters O kids in order to maintain sanity, ecology as well as decency but we do need to figure something out about these old farts. Our medical/care system needs a major overhaul.We cant just let the 90 year old cat lady die of starvation or lack of meds. In my oppinion....medical and education should be free to all. Call me a socialist and I'll remember to call you Susan.
P.S
Pardon my rant. I blame the beer.
Can I be susan too? I think I'm wearing pink socialist underwear today.
I'd say we could pay to make sure all our citizens were fed properly and had health care before we pay the Raytheons and Lockheed Martins to make weapons to fight wars we don't need.
Agreed but can we have a seperate budget for paying off other countries and making them like us? Oh wait...
Post a Comment
<< Home