Tag: nytimes

Losing Our Morals One Dollar At A Time

by rhealitycheck

It seems to me that this economy is nothing but a product of sheer greed. What has always baffled me are the pay scales for people in different industries. I mean, in the banks people make millions of dollars in bonuses for what exactly? I would like to know why those executives make approx 100x what the lowest paid employee makes. Perhaps I believe too much in equality but I really think that’s a huge problem. When you have no clue what your actions effects are on the general populous and you no longer know how “normal” people live.

Not to mention our law-makers. It’s not just Wall St that let things go haywire, it’s our politicians too. Who quite frankly are totally out of touch with reality. I mean I’d really like to know who thinks that a salary of $169K+ is the salary of any average American (if you don’t believe me here are the links for actual figures for the House and Senate). I believe statistically speaking the average household income in America is approximately $50K, so why is it that our law-makers who are supposed to “be in touch with the pain and reality of regular Americans” make 3x as much as the average American? Not to mention, I don’t know about y’all but I am still a small fry so I only get 2 weeks of vacation but you know congress took 5 weeks just this summer when the housing market was crashing and the auto industry was in distress. Not to mention the fact that they will have government health care benefits for the rest of their lives for themselves and their families if they have served in office for 5 years. I ask you, how many corporate employers would do that? In fact, does the government even do that for any other employees? I know for a fact that isn’t true for teachers, so why are our policy makers so different? What exactly gives them all these rights and benefits when I’m not seeing a return on our hard-earned tax dollars. Sure, I’m upset with the banks. No, I don’t believe that their executives should be making the kind of money that they have been for the past I don’t even know how long, but at least that is their own private wealth that they can choose to dole out howsoever they see fit. (At least that was the case until the bailout and I believe there are no bonuses this year so at least there is *some* change in that field). Congress, on the other hand, is benefiting from *our* tax dollars. I mean the general public is expected to be able to balance our own budgets and live within our means but what about you? What right did Congress have to give themselves these raises? (They give themselves a raise every year, how generous right?) Have they truly made enough progress for us to think they are so above the rest of us? Quite frankly the way things are going, I’d say most of them deserve to lose their jobs *and* their benefits as is what would happen in the private sector if they did such a piss poor job as they’ve been doing for the last 8 years.

Granted I also believe that Wall St became too greedy and too loose with their money and with the government supporting their every move it’s hard to want to pull back. I mean why be smart when you could be getting an incredible bonus. You’ll have the money and will probably be gone by the time the whole thing goes bust, right? So who needs to be responsible. And Paul Krugman wrote a great piece on The Madoff Economy where he talks about what happened with the salaries. I think he makes some great points. I just wonder why no one ever considered him for a position in the White House considering he did just win the Nobel Prize and he has been writing insightful pieces for the NY Times for years now. Perhaps he wasn’t interested but I’m sure there would have been rumors if he had ever been considered and I find it quite distressing that he wasn’t. In fact I find a lot of the appointments to be less-than stellar. I mean it’s just a new set of characters from Wall St isn’t it? Instead of Hank Paulson we have Tim Geithner who headed up the NY Fed. Great let’s put more people who were involved in this giant mess into positions of power. Not to mention Larry Summers, why that man should be allowed anywhere after his Harvard fiasco is beyond me. And I mean let’s face it he’s the one that went along with Alan Greenspan back in the Clinton days and clearly that was not a good choice. But oh, I forgot we’re not allowed to criticize our new fabulous President-Elect because he is, of course, Prince Charming and will save us all. (And yes I am *still* licking my wounds that Hillary is only Secretary of State and not our first female President, not just because she’s a woman but because I still think she is the better candidate even if I have resigned myself to being satisfied with the lesser of two mediocre candidates.)

Is America Becoming Socialist?

by rhealitycheck

Because that’s certainly what it feels like at least from *all* the socialized losses that we seem to be picking up these days. What I want to know is where are the benefits for the majority of Americans? Surely there has to be something more in it for the average person to be picking up over a trillion dollars worth of bad business. At the rate that we are handing out money to corporations I really do hope that someone is going to be held accountable because I find it absolutely unacceptable that there are many executives that have truly made a giant mess of things and yet are still being paid in the millions.

Perhaps I just don’t understand capitalism but I was always under the impression that should you run your business poorly, it will go under and you will “lose your shirt”, but clearly we no longer believe in that. As it is being proven by the fact that we are now bailing out the automakers along with Wall St. Who else are we going to take on as charity cases? I’m just waiting for the next shoe to drop. For all these years we have criticized and absolutely down-played the need for any socialist tendencies, yet now, now we are essentially taking from the poor and giving handouts to the rich who have managed to mismanage their money. (Sure, I know I’m exaggerating a bit but if you really do take an overly simplistic view that is exactly what is going on.)

So I hope that the new administration does not forget that this is not a socialist country. And until the base standard of living can come up to some sort of reasonable standard, such as universal health care and an appropriate minimum wage and appropriate taxes on the wealthy to compensate for such things, I would hope that the government can control themselves as to just how sorry they feel for those poor, poor corporations that have managed to go astray.

Being a “Skinny Bitch”…

by rhealitycheck

seems to be a tall order. At least if you read the book Skinny Bitch by Rory Freedman and Kim Barnouin. I never truly intended on reading this book, I had read a review in the New York Times and aside from the catchy title I didn’t really have much interest in it. But recently I’ve been a little more into health and being more proactive about getting healthy and well I ended up with a 3 hour delay on my flight back to Chicago after Thanksgiving. So what’s a girl to do other than go pick up the first relatively interesting book she finds at the airport bookstore.

I inteded this to be an amusing, interesting read. Considering I had already read the Times review on it I had a vague idea what the book was supposed to be about and I had no intention of changing my eating habits to become a vegan. Little did I know that they took excerpts from a book slaughterhouses when I first cracked that book open. The most interesting part of the whole thing was that this little book does not look like it can change your life. Quite frankly, it looks like a fabulous piece of fluff to put on your bookshelf for shock value – much like this book Queer that I own which just has fabulous pictures and some historical content but mostly fabulous pictures.

Yet I couldn’t take my eyes off it. I read it on the plane and then the train and in the cab and even in bed once I got home. I haven’t gotten through the entire book yet but I am about 3/4 of the way through and I think it is great. I also had no intention of becoming vegan yet I can’t seem to look at meat the same way. Those passages about the slaughterhouse just changed something in my psyche. I can’t say that this will be a lasting change just yet since it has only been 2 days of relatively vegetarian eating (I am stubbornly trying to hold on to my carnivorous roots, it’s not working out so well for me – I rebelled when all my friends became vegetarian and I have a hard time eating my words).

It’s amazing how without even intending to make a huge change in my life, I have done so anyway. And I actually feel really good about it. Partially because, well if even a fraction of what they said was true about the slaughterhouses I can’t eat meat in good conscience. I was happy being blissfully unaware but now that I know I do think it may just be time to make that change in my life. I don’t know how I feel about being vegan because well, I haven’t cooked in about a year and it is hard to find easily available vegan food. I will try to be as vegan as possible but I don’t know that I can go the whole 9 yards that the girls tell ya to go.

And I would truly recommend this book to anyone. I mean you don’t have to believe what these women believe to find this to be an interesting read. If nothing else it makes you well informed. I may not stay vegetarian or vegan for long but the information that I have gathered here has certainly changed me and will stay with me for the rest of my life. I think that just changing your mindset and your outlook on life can be helpful and these women just put it so well in the book. I think one of my favourite passages was one about carbs when they start ranting about how only idiots don’t eat carbs. Having been an athlete, I have known about the virtue of carbs for years – trust me crew coaches don’t let you get away with not eating carbs.

The other thing I really love about the book is that it gives you a place to put all that energy most women spend about obsessing about being skinny. It gives you so many things to think about that are truly interesting and ways to change your life that are not difficult. Most of all it uses common sense that people can relate to easily. I mean what’s better than a book that tells you, come on idiot just use your brain, think about what you’re doing and you’ll be fine. It’s pretty awesome, at least I certainly think so.

Is Dark Matter For Real!?

by rhealitycheck

Because that would be awesome. It gives me hope for String Theory after all. Now I know I rarely get to let my nerdy science side out on this blog but secretly I am a pseudo theoretical physicist. I say pseudo because I was really into it in college but have left the realms of amazing academic science for corporate America. Yes, it is rather disappointing but I do like to keep up with what’s going on in the world of physics and I have a special place in my heart for the articles that make it to places like the New York Times Science section because it gives me hope that maybe some day more people will think it’s cool too! (Because really it is the coolest thing EVER!)

Anyway, I was super excited to open up my Science Times this morning and find this article talking about dark matter. Now I’m not sure how this will all pan out, I mean people have been talking about dark matter for years and it really only seems to come in bursts. But boy would it be exciting if we could actually prove that there are particles interacting in another dimension that has some sort of effect here! Also I happen to be a little partial to this because I am a bit partial to string theory and if they can prove that dark matter exists in another dimension this is just one small step in proving that string theory is *actually* the theory of everything! I am *so excited*.

Should Hillary Be Secretary Of State?

by rhealitycheck

I actually think that’s a very tough question. Obviously I’m no political expert but for a woman of her stature, especially with the manpower she has behind her right now that’s a big question. I know nothing is formal and that most speculate that the offer will be formally made and that she will formally accept it but I wonder if it is the right choice.

Now, when I first heard that Hillary might be Secretary of State, I’m not gonna lie, I was pretty excited. But then I discussed it with my mother and I read a few articles by some pretty intelligent older women about the reasons why she shouldn’t and I have to say I am torn. Right now Hillary Clinton is a power house in the senate. She is the woman that has 18 million votes. She is the woman that everyone wants on their team. She may be the junior senator from New York but she will never be just another senator. Everyone wants her on their committee, everyone wants her to be their friend because Hillary Clinton wields a lot of power with her 18 million votes.

So why would she want to move over to being Secretary of State. It’s true being the head of the state department is extraordinarily prestigious but it isn’t quite the same sort of change as being the party leader in the Senate or heading up as many committees in the Senate. At the same time being Secretary of State she gets to make her own rules in her own department and there is far less clawing for position. The part that I find interesting is that as Secretary of State, she is officially Obama’s face to the International World and that is what would given me pause (you know, if I were cool enough to be Hillary Clinton).

As Secretary of State you are not quite your own woman anymore, which I find interesting. I just wonder what this step means should she choose it. I am sure she will do a fabulous job no matter what she decides but would it be better to be your own voice, your own power house in the senate or to be the president’s voice to the world?

Why I Was Wary Of The Bailout…

by rhealitycheck

Really, now we want to bailout the automakers in Detroit who haven’t been performing up to par for years? This is the ultimate in privatized profits and socialized losses. Sometimes I wonder about the Democrats in office… Are they actually paying attention or do they just think handing out money to anyone who asks is a good idea? Because I don’t. I may be a liberal but I still believe you should have to earn your own bread and butter. I have come to terms with the fact that our entire economy would have collapsed if we had not bailed out the banks. That I can accept, unhappily but accepted nonetheless. If the automakers cannot create vehicles that people in this country would like to buy then they should not be rewarded for their incompetence by being bailed out.

Yes, I do realize that allowing the auto-giants in Detroit to fail does mean a significant amount of jobs lost. But let’s be realistic, if you run your business poorly, you don’t pay attention to your consumers and the fact that your sales have been going down for years then you are going to run yourself into the ground. And it is not the general public’s problem to clean up. You fail, you close, too bad for you.

And I know Detroit is crying out that we bailed out the banks so why not them. Well, to put it simply, yes the banks made a mess of things but unfortunately they effect every other industry in the United States and, with these fantastic global markets, the rest of the world too. So not bailing them out would have most likely guaranteed a Depression that would have been unprecedented. While I may not like that we bailed out the banks, it certainly was necessary in order to maintain some semblance of an economy, even if it is in crisis. The automakers on the other hand, well ok too bad they go out of business, we still have a bunch of foreign automakers that have factories in the US. This will not effect the entire country much less the world even an iota of what the banks failing would have done.

Perhaps it isn’t fair but it’s true and the less socialized losses we take the happier I am because let’s face it we’re not a socialized country. I am all for socialized losses as long as we start socializing the profits, you just let me know when that happens cause I’m not gonna be holding my breath for that one. And just one final thought, perhaps we should take a look at Britain and learn from their mistakes, bailing out a lousy automaker does nothing for anyone. It’s just plain stupid.

Keeping An Eye On Palin

by rhealitycheck

I believe that Sarah Palin may have learned something in her disastrous run for VP. When I was reading the article about the Republican Governor’s meeting in the Times I was thoroughly shocked by many of the Palin quotes. I do believe she is one that the Dems should keep their eyes on because she is charismatic, attractive and if she learns how to actually speak well she could become a thorn in the side of liberals everywhere.

I mean just the simple fact that she didn’t want to talk about 2012 and instead redirected the conversation to what the governors should be focusing on now are their budgets and giving Republicans all around a better name, well that actually shows some vision. If she continues to make statements like that and thinks before she speaks, well, colour me concerned.

And it’s not just her, I know many people may have forgotten about Mike Huckabee but he is yet another Republican with amazing charisma. I generally don’t agree with anything he says but what I will give him credit for is actually making sense when speaking about what the middle class needs. With someone as grounded as he is and Palin starting to get her act together, I’m a little concerned about our future.

The Dems really need to get it together and fast because I can see some major competition coming up in our future. And I think it would be nice to have a more moderate government for a while, I mean idealistically I’d like it to lean left but you know I’ll settle for moderate. I just don’t want to think of what could happen should the likes of Palin and Huckabee get to be more significant National figures for the Republican party.

The Suit Makes A Comeback

by rhealitycheck

I have to say that I was thrilled when I opened up my Thursday Styles section to find that suits are making a come back. I have always loved a classic well tailored power suit, probably more well known as your typical interview suit. It’s just my thing. I think they look absolutely wonderful.

Granted I tend to side with the folks that are fans of pantsuits. I think that skirt suits are beautiful, sure but for some reason I always associate it with secretaries. Could be that I saw too many old movies where secretaries are in fabulously beautiful skirt suits but it’s true. And maybe I’m being a bit too controversial in my light fluffy post about fashion and how I’m excited about suits making a comeback but I also think the skirt suit brings up some gender discrepancies for me. I think the pantsuit comes off as more powerful and more formal. Although in the article I was reading there were quite a few that disagree with me but it’s just my opinion.

Ok Forget Prop 8, Let’s Talk About Arkansas

by rhealitycheck

While the rest of the country is bemoaning California passing Proposition 8, which I still find extremely depressing, let’s discuss what just happened in Arkansas. What you may not have known and what I did not know until very recently was that they just passed a motion to ban people who are “cohabitating outside a valid marriage” from serving as foster parents or adopting children. I have to say I was horrified to see that in my op-ed page of the Times!

I find it quite disturbing that there are now laws being passed about the marital status of an individual’s ability to raise a child. I was raised by a single parent and in our case it was because she was widowed rather early in life but what if someone had deemed her unfit. I don’t believe the state can determine what is best for the child simply by the marital status of an individual. For example, in college one of the religious advisers at the school refused to marry her “partner” (who is a man) because she is morally opposed to marriage if it isn’t equal for all people. What would Arkansas say about her children, would they be taken away simply because she opposes the institution of marriage?

Anyway reading that just horrified me. First California goes and passes a law that protects the rights of chickens over the rights of their gay residents and now this. Really, what is this country coming to? And since when did we want the government to come knock down our doors and take a peek into our bedrooms? I thought America was all about freedom, what ever happened to that? I thought conservatives were really about small government, somehow this does not sound like small government to me. And Little Cog made a fabulous point in this article about how there should be “Marriage for none, Civil Unions for all” and I completely agree with that sentiment.

And to throw a little amusement your way watch this video about a counter proposition banning divorce in California.

I will end this with a happy thought, CT just legalized gay marriage. Yay!

The Importance of California’s Proposition 8

by rhealitycheck

To be honest I hadn’t really been paying too much attention to Proposition 8 in California, I guess I just viewed it as just another one of those votes that irritates me. But after reading this article in the New York Times and as a member of the queer community I feel that it is not just my right but my responsibility to speak out on this matter.

Proposition 8 matters.
It matters because it is an issue about human rights.
Civil liberties.
In fact what it is mostly about is discrimination.

Before you stop reading, hear me out.

This is not about what you believe in as a church. This is not about what your religion dictates. This is about legalities. This proposition is allowing a blending of church and state. It is about denying two people that love each other the right to visit the other one in the hospital should one of them fall ill. It is about not allowing two committed people the right to adopt a child because it would be better to have that child jump through several different dysfunctional foster homes. It is about the legal institution of marriage not the religious one. I don’t care what your religion dictates. Feel free not to have gay marriages at your church, synagogue, mosque, temple or what have you. That is your right in following with your religious beliefs. But a legal marriage license is simply a partnership between two people that affects their taxes, their property, their bank accounts, visitation rights and all other legal matters. What happens outside of the realm of the legal system really is not a concern.

What I find unacceptable is not allowing two committed people who intend to spend the rest of their lives together the right to do so legally. It is perfectly ok to allow Britney Spears to have a 24-hour marriage because she married a man yet gay couples that have spent 10, 20, 30 or any number of years together are denied that right. How is that acceptable to this society? How is it acceptable in a society that touts “liberty and justice for all”? That is not justice.

Also, I find it fascinating that many liberals are suddenly conservative when we talk about gay marriage just because of that one little word marriage. But you know what I’m not willing to budge, when you speak in legalities you apply for a license to get married not to have a civil union. If you want to oppose the term marriage then it must not hold legally for anyone. It is perfectly acceptable if everyone, regardless of whether they are marrying someone of the opposite sex or someone of the same sex, is applying for a license for a civil union. That way it would still be the same rights and the word marriage is no longer in contention. But until that can change the simple fact is that in order to be equal and fair, the equivalent would be to allow gay marriage. Creating new laws to separate the two institutions legally allows for discrimination and therefore is not acceptable, hence the need for gay “marriage”.

In fact this sort of discrimination reeks of the same sort that existed when interracial marriages were not allowed. Is this truly any different?

Again, this is not a matter of religion, it is a matter of legalities. And until we can offer all people equal rights this will be a problem for this country and, in my opinion, for the world.

In the immortal words of Catie Curtis:
Some day we’ll all be free
I can feel it, it’s our destiny
Some day, I believe
Love will make an honest world for me

I hope Californians will choose to keep that refrain true.