#SmartPeople #doctors #scientists #teachers #discrimination #ControllingForces
There seems to be a strategy by some in politics to try to control smart people.
Doctors, scientists, teachers and others who have professional credentials are seeing their work ridiculed, criticized or otherwise restricted.
It’s tough to do what they do in this environment.
But, that may be the point. And, it’s not unprecedented in history.
Groups who have faced discrimination have faced it because those in power are envious of what they have, and their abilities. Or, they have faced it because of the labor they can provide.
The world flourishes when smart people with good intentions are given free rein to do their jobs.
It’s tough to innovate when restrictions are improperly imposed upon those with the greatest minds.
Teachers can’t teach well if they are told that only certain books can be used, or only certain subjects can be addressed.,
Doctors can’t practice medicine properly when they are restricted on what medical procedures they can use to treat patients.
Scientists can’t advance science when others ridicule or condemn scientific progress.
Usually, those doing the restricting are not qualified to do so. They merely believe they have the power to do so.
Often, it feels like an assault on intelligence. Yet, there is a method to the madness.
By restricting how intelligence is used, it enhances the control of those doing the restricting.
This type of control in history has led to slavery, the holocaust and other forms of humanitarian destruction.
Those who have not achieved what the most intelligent have achieved revel in this power grab. They are jealous of others’ intelligence and knowledge.
They feel that if you can’t be as smart, be more powerful.
Fortunately, the intelligent folks under assault have ways to fight back. They can remove those restrictors from power.
They, and their supporters, at least in the United States, can vote out those who would restrict the best and the brightest.
We in the U.S. value innovation. We value the fact that we can make progress. We recognize problems that can be solved by unleashing the talent we have in this country.
Yet, some who wish to control the intelligent refuse to recognize the problems that can be solved through innovation.
They feel their lives will be upended by progress. They want to go back to the way things were before innovation.
We have to remember, particularly as Americans, that things like innovation and demographics are like flowing water. We can try to divert them, if they don’t suit us, but we can’t stop them.
In the case of the best and the brightest, let’s try a little less diversion and a little more unleashing.
Peter
Author Archives: pbilodeau01
WHAT IF BREAKFAST WAS NO LONGER FREE?
#FreeBreakfast #hotels #eggs #PriceofEggs #HowPeopleFeel
Free hot breakfast.
Many hotels offer that as a perk to their guests.
Most of them are buffet style, as guests come down to the lobby to serve themselves.
But some hotel chains, like Hyatt Place, are considering charging, say, $7 a head for breakfast.
That probably still beats what you would pay if you went out to a nearby restaurant for breakfast. But, will guests object to that idea?
It’s not a big deal to charge for breakfast. But, the psychology here is different. You don’t give people something, then take it away and expect them not to complain.
Perhaps, when the hotels try this, there will be some initial blowback from guests. Still, it’s imprudent to bet that the blowback eventually will subside and things will be normal again, albeit at a higher price for hotel guests.
The overall trend of raising prices on just about everything is having a real effect on people. In fact, it’s been said that the price of eggs, among other things, influenced whom people voted for in the recent election.
It’s not that the candidates(s) can really do much about the price of eggs. It was the feeling people had about whom they thought would be more likely to make their lives better.
Apparently, they were willing to overlook the bad things about a candidate, if that candidate gave them a good feeling that things were going to improve.
Let’s hope these gut feelings were not misplaced.
As political analyst Matthew Dowd put it: “You can’t tell people how to feel.”
These feelings may have little to do with a candidate’s policies or ideas. They are not data points.
In fact, when candidates try to tell people that their feelings don’t match the data, the people really don’t care about the data.
They are worried more about how they are going to pay, say, $6 for a dozen eggs, when they probably paid $2 a few years ago.
You can talk to them about supply-chain issues, bird flu outbreaks and other things that may have affected egg prices. But that doesn’t solve THEIR problem.
In fact, it’s very likely that those egg prices are spurring hotel chains to consider charging for their “free” hot breakfasts.
Of course, the cost of almost all necessities has gone up. Most salaries have, too, but people are still hurting.
Is this really the time for hotel chains to, in relative terms, nickel and dime their guests?
In most cases, hotel stays are a luxury, unless people are homeless because of storms or other reasons.
Travelers will vote with their feet on free breakfasts. Those chains that keep their free hot breakfasts are likely to fare better than those who try to charge for them
On the other hand, some chains never went the free-breakfast route, and they don’t appear to be suffering for it.
Still, psychologically, it would have been better not to have offered free breakfast at all, than to offer it and later charge for it.
Peter
Free hot breakfast.
Many hotels offer that as a perk to their guests.
Most of them are buffet style, as guests come down to the lobby to serve themselves.
But some hotel chains, like Hyatt Place, are considering charging, say, $7 a head for breakfast.
That probably still beats what you would pay if you went out to a nearby restaurant for breakfast. But, will guests object to that idea?
It’s not a big deal to charge for breakfast. But, the psychology here is different. You don’t give people something, then take it away and expect them not to complain.
Perhaps, when the hotels try this, there will be some initial blowback from guests. Still, it’s imprudent to bet that the blowback eventually will subside and things will be normal again, albeit at a higher price for hotel guests.
The overall trend of raising prices on just about everything is having a real effect on people. In fact, it’s been said that the price of eggs, among other things, influenced whom people voted for in the recent election.
It’s not that the candidates(s) can really do much about the price of eggs. It was the feeling people had about whom they thought would be more likely to make their lives better.
Apparently, they were willing to overlook the bad things about a candidate, if that candidate gave them a good feeling that things were going to improve.
Let’s hope these gut feelings were not misplaced.
As political analyst Matthew Dowd put it: “You can’t tell people how to feel.”
These feelings may have little to do with a candidate’s policies or ideas. They are not data points.
In fact, when candidates try to tell people that their feelings don’t match the data, the people really don’t care about the data.
They are worried more about how they are going to pay, say, $6 for a dozen eggs, when they probably paid $2 a few years ago.
You can talk to them about supply-chain issues, bird flu outbreaks and other things that may have affected egg prices. But that doesn’t solve THEIR problem.
In fact, it’s very likely that those egg prices are spurring hotel chains to consider charging for their “free” hot breakfasts.
Of course, the cost of almost all necessities has gone up. Most salaries have, too, but people are still hurting.
Is this really the time for hotel chains to, in relative terms, nickel and dime their guests?
In most cases, hotel stays are a luxury, unless people are homeless because of storms or other reasons.
Travelers will vote with their feet on free breakfasts. Those chains that keep their free hot breakfasts are likely to fare better than those who try to charge for them
On the other hand, some chains never went the free-breakfast route, and they don’t appear to be suffering for it.
Still, psychologically, it would have been better not to have offered free breakfast at all, than to offer it and later charge for it.
Peter
FREEDOM TO … FREEDOM FROM
freedom #FreedomTo #FreedomFrom #progress
Everyone loves freedom.
But, people view the concept differently.
Some want to have the freedom to do something.
Others want freedom from something.
Those who want freedom to do something generally are looking ahead, searching for the freedom to do something new.
Those who want freedom from something generally are looking back to a time when things that exist now either were not there, or were kept under wraps.
Generally, progress brings more freedom. It allows people to explore who they are, to interact with people who are different from them and to check out new things.
That progress can interfere with the freedoms others thought they had, and those folks want to stop progress in its tracks and go back to the way things were.
Since toothpaste cannot be put back into a tube, once progress has evolved, one cannot un-evolve it.
Those who want freedom from such progress may have to adjust how they live with it. The world generally doesn’t move backward, regardless of some people’s desires.
As individuals, we have to realize that things will change. In this world. They often change rapidly and often.
The security of the past can be shattered in an instant.
We may want to hold on to that security for as long as we live, but, chances are, something will happen to diminish or even obliterate it.
Such progress can upend what was a good life for some.
It’s not only progress that can be upending. Tragedy can do the same.
Some tragedy can be prevented or minimized. Other tragedy will come whether we are ready or not.
In decades past, progress was much slower. Tragedy was more infrequent.
People could grow and mature in a bubble that was unlikely to burst for a long time. That bred a contentment that may no longer be here for some.
What to do? If you sincerely seek freedom from progress and tragedy, and feel powerless to do anything to mitigate those things, you may want to concentrate on what you will do when the unthinkable hits.
It’s not what happens to people that is most significant. It is how they react when it happens, and how they recover from upending life circumstances.
It may take work to do so. From some things, one may never fully recover. Adaptability can be learned. Difficult change might even open doors one may never have seen.
Such events, perhaps, can turn a person who wants freedom from something into someone who wants freedom to do something.
Peter
Everyone loves freedom.
But, people view the concept differently.
Some want to have the freedom to do something.
Others want freedom from something.
Those who want freedom to do something generally are looking ahead, searching for the freedom to do something new.
Those who want freedom from something generally are looking back to a time when things that exist now either were not there, or were kept under wraps.
Generally, progress brings more freedom. It allows people to explore who they are, to interact with people who are different from them and to check out new things.
That progress can interfere with the freedoms others thought they had, and those folks want to stop progress in its tracks and go back to the way things were.
Since toothpaste cannot be put back into a tube, once progress has evolved, one cannot un-evolve it.
Those who want freedom from such progress may have to adjust how they live with it. The world generally doesn’t move backward, regardless of some people’s desires.
As individuals, we have to realize that things will change. In this world. They often change rapidly and often.
The security of the past can be shattered in an instant.
We may want to hold on to that security for as long as we live, but, chances are, something will happen to diminish or even obliterate it.
Such progress can upend what was a good life for some.
It’s not only progress that can be upending. Tragedy can do the same.
Some tragedy can be prevented or minimized. Other tragedy will come whether we are ready or not.
In decades past, progress was much slower. Tragedy was more infrequent.
People could grow and mature in a bubble that was unlikely to burst for a long time. That bred a contentment that may no longer be here for some.
What to do? If you sincerely seek freedom from progress and tragedy, and feel powerless to do anything to mitigate those things, you may want to concentrate on what you will do when the unthinkable hits.
It’s not what happens to people that is most significant. It is how they react when it happens, and how they recover from upending life circumstances.
It may take work to do so. From some things, one may never fully recover. Adaptability can be learned. Difficult change might even open doors one may never have seen.
Such events, perhaps, can turn a person who wants freedom from something into someone who wants freedom to do something.
Peter
THE ECONOMY: PERCEPTIONS AND REALITY
#economy #wages #prices #PerceptionOfEconomy #EconomicData
The data show the economy is good, even robust.
But people don’t always see it that way. They see prices that are higher than a few years ago on almost everything.
So why the difference between data and perception?
First, almost everything costs more than a few years ago for a few reasons. First, some companies are trying to make up for their losses during the pandemic. Some may call that price gouging, but it becomes that only when prices stay up AFTER the losses have been made up.
Secondly, almost everyone is getting paid more than they were a few years ago. If you are not in this category, look around for other opportunities. They are out there, in many places.
To help pay for those higher wages, companies raise the price of what they sell or make.
There are certain categories of prices that have unique issues. Housing (rents and purchases) prices are up. There are lots of entities out there competing with individual families for housing. They buy properties for cash and rent them out at rents that are often unaffordable for many.
That takes many houses off the market for individuals, and raises rents for renters.
Auto insurance and repairs are another unique category. Today’s cars are a lot more complex than those from the past. What may look like a simple repair gets complicated because systems in the cars may have to be recalibrated. That could double or triple the cost of a simple repair.
The same could be said for home repairs. That may be why repair insurance companies have a market, and why auto and homeowner’s insurance in general have risen in price.
No matter who serves in the U.S. government, he or she can only do so much to bring prices down.
The good news here is that if you are making more money in your job, most data show that your higher pay is outpacing inflation.
That begs the question: would you prefer lower pay and lower prices, or the current situation? Before answering that, know that the data again shows price inflation coming down.
We may never see $1 a gallon gasoline again. Those pandemic prices, when no one was going anywhere, may not return unless there is another pandemic. No one wants that.
Food prices are also affected by distributors, who are raising their prices. Also, one has to consider climate issues that affect the growth of what we eat. If food can’t grow as well, or gets destroyed in storms, what is not affected is going to be more expensive.
Therefore, be skeptical of anyone who runs for public office who says he or she will lower prices.
There may be things they can do to mitigate inflation, but the government can’t subsidize everything, and it has limited ability to force producers and sellers to lower prices on what they make or sell. The main thing that will affect pricing is whether people buy things at the price charged. Some necessities have to be bought, but we may want to try to use less of those if we can.
The government can lower your taxes on certain things as one mitigation. But, the government can’t control pricing, nor do we necessarily want it to.
Certainly, your parents or grandparents paid less to live in their younger years than you do now. But, in that time, much progress has been made. Society, as a whole, has seen much improvement.
The betterment of society comes at a price. Most of us do not want to go back to the “good old days.”
Peter
The data show the economy is good, even robust.
But people don’t always see it that way. They see prices that are higher than a few years ago on almost everything.
So why the difference between data and perception?
First, almost everything costs more than a few years ago for a few reasons. First, some companies are trying to make up for their losses during the pandemic. Some may call that price gouging, but it becomes that only when prices stay up AFTER the losses have been made up.
Secondly, almost everyone is getting paid more than they were a few years ago. If you are not in this category, look around for other opportunities. They are out there, in many places.
To help pay for those higher wages, companies raise the price of what they sell or make.
There are certain categories of prices that have unique issues. Housing (rents and purchases) prices are up. There are lots of entities out there competing with individual families for housing. They buy properties for cash and rent them out at rents that are often unaffordable for many.
That takes many houses off the market for individuals, and raises rents for renters.
Auto insurance and repairs are another unique category. Today’s cars are a lot more complex than those from the past. What may look like a simple repair gets complicated because systems in the cars may have to be recalibrated. That could double or triple the cost of a simple repair.
The same could be said for home repairs. That may be why repair insurance companies have a market, and why auto and homeowner’s insurance in general have risen in price.
No matter who serves in the U.S. government, he or she can only do so much to bring prices down.
The good news here is that if you are making more money in your job, most data show that your higher pay is outpacing inflation.
That begs the question: would you prefer lower pay and lower prices, or the current situation? Before answering that, know that the data again shows price inflation coming down.
We may never see $1 a gallon gasoline again. Those pandemic prices, when no one was going anywhere, may not return unless there is another pandemic. No one wants that.
Food prices are also affected by distributors, who are raising their prices. Also, one has to consider climate issues that affect the growth of what we eat. If food can’t grow as well, or gets destroyed in storms, what is not affected is going to be more expensive.
Therefore, be skeptical of anyone who runs for public office who says he or she will lower prices.
There may be things they can do to mitigate inflation, but the government can’t subsidize everything, and it has limited ability to force producers and sellers to lower prices on what they make or sell. The main thing that will affect pricing is whether people buy things at the price charged. Some necessities have to be bought, but we may want to try to use less of those if we can.
The government can lower your taxes on certain things as one mitigation. But, the government can’t control pricing, nor do we necessarily want it to.
Certainly, your parents or grandparents paid less to live in their younger years than you do now. But, in that time, much progress has been made. Society, as a whole, has seen much improvement.
The betterment of society comes at a price. Most of us do not want to go back to the “good old days.”
Peter
LOVE AND ROBOTS
#robots #love #AI #ArtificialIntelligence #humans #emotions
“What does a robot know about love?”
That begins an Etsy TV ad, to make the point that Etsy conducts its commerce with more human activity than robot activity.
But, as time progresses, more robots and other non-human technology will be used in commerce, factories, research and many other endeavors now mostly conducted by humans.
That could have an effect on current jobs, and the jobs of the future.
For some workers, technology is moving too fast. More work that was previously done by humans is being done by machines.
] That means some good jobs are being eliminated, and those who’ve lost those jobs are having difficulty finding alternative jobs that pay as well.
It’s important to note here that no matter who is serving in the U.S. government, those jobs likely are not coming back.
With the advancement of artificial intelligence, many people who thought their jobs would never go away may have a rude awakening sometime in the future.
Make no mistake: machines and humans are not equivalent. That statement can have a good, or not so good, connotation.
For employers, machines have fewer needs – no vacations, no illness, no pensions etc. That can save them lots of money.
Machines, on the other hand, break down. If they can’t be fixed immediately, that can be a real cost to employers.
Also, customers and clients mostly prefer dealing with humans rather than machines. Though machines can try to talk back to customers, no real conversation takes place. Plus, machines have no power to actually solve problems, if a customer has one. With varying degrees of success, perhaps a machine can put a customer in touch with a human.
AI is attempting to be creative by compiling the past creativity of humans into a mechanically driven recitation.
There is no machine that can be as creative as a human. For human creativity is raw, original and direct.
Going back to the Etsy ad, robots have no ability for human emotion. Human emotion is something we all crave, no matter what type of interaction.
So, as useful as robots or AI can be in some instances, they are not human.
But, as humans, we still have to look over our shoulders lest robots or AI replace us in the workplace.
In many cases, it’s not a matter of whether that will happen. It’s a matter of when.
As humans, we have the raw, original and direct creativity to prepare for most eventualities. When replacement comes, we can, and should, be ready. Longing for the old days will not prevent the inevitable.
Peter
“What does a robot know about love?”
That begins an Etsy TV ad, to make the point that Etsy conducts its commerce with more human activity than robot activity.
But, as time progresses, more robots and other non-human technology will be used in commerce, factories, research and many other endeavors now mostly conducted by humans.
That could have an effect on current jobs, and the jobs of the future.
For some workers, technology is moving too fast. More work that was previously done by humans is being done by machines.
] That means some good jobs are being eliminated, and those who’ve lost those jobs are having difficulty finding alternative jobs that pay as well.
It’s important to note here that no matter who is serving in the U.S. government, those jobs likely are not coming back.
With the advancement of artificial intelligence, many people who thought their jobs would never go away may have a rude awakening sometime in the future.
Make no mistake: machines and humans are not equivalent. That statement can have a good, or not so good, connotation.
For employers, machines have fewer needs – no vacations, no illness, no pensions etc. That can save them lots of money.
Machines, on the other hand, break down. If they can’t be fixed immediately, that can be a real cost to employers.
Also, customers and clients mostly prefer dealing with humans rather than machines. Though machines can try to talk back to customers, no real conversation takes place. Plus, machines have no power to actually solve problems, if a customer has one. With varying degrees of success, perhaps a machine can put a customer in touch with a human.
AI is attempting to be creative by compiling the past creativity of humans into a mechanically driven recitation.
There is no machine that can be as creative as a human. For human creativity is raw, original and direct.
Going back to the Etsy ad, robots have no ability for human emotion. Human emotion is something we all crave, no matter what type of interaction.
So, as useful as robots or AI can be in some instances, they are not human.
But, as humans, we still have to look over our shoulders lest robots or AI replace us in the workplace.
In many cases, it’s not a matter of whether that will happen. It’s a matter of when.
As humans, we have the raw, original and direct creativity to prepare for most eventualities. When replacement comes, we can, and should, be ready. Longing for the old days will not prevent the inevitable.
Peter
WHAT WILL DETERMINE YOUR FUTURE?
#vote #RegisterToVote #choices #ChooseWisely
Decisions, not conditions, determine one’s future.
That paraphrases a partial comment by California Gov. Gavin Newsom when asked by Jen Psaki what keeps him up at night these days.
Psaki is host of “Inside With Jen Psaki” on MSNBC. The show aired Oct. 20, 2024.
Newsom was discussing the upcoming presidential election. He was explaining that voting is a decision we all can make to help determine the future.
But, digging deeper into his comment, let’s analyze how each of us determines our future.
Do we let the conditions – most of which we cannot anticipate – determine our future? Or, do we take action to determine our future?
Some believe that no matter what actions they take, their future is somehow predetermined.
Perhaps that’s what they were taught as children. Did you ever have a parent, teacher or other elder tell you that this is what you were going to do — or were meant to do — for the rest of your life?
Or, have you been affected by circumstances, from which you believe you will never recover? Some victims of recent storms may feel that way, while others are determined to rebuild, or otherwise carry on.
Many are busy creating their future. They are saving and investing their money to help ensure security. Or, they are building a business with the intention that it will succeed, perhaps beyond their wildest dreams.
Perhaps one’s imagination does not extend that far. A person may just be looking for contentment rather than wild success.
Undoubtedly, there are small things one can do to ensure that.
But, regardless of your desires for the future, it’s largely up to you to make it happen. Generally, things don’t just happen serendipitously, like winning a lottery.
Usually, they are the result of decisions one makes throughout his or her life. One may decide to go to college – or not. One may decide to work for Employer X – or not. One may decide to get married and have children – or not.
Each of these decisions individually can really help determine one’s future.
But Newsom was talking about collective decisions – decisions made by lots of people individually that can determine everyone’s future.
Voting is such a decision. If everyone who is eligible to vote registers, and then votes, the future will be different – likely better – from having many decide not to vote because, say, they don’t like the choices.
When one is starving, usually he or she grabs what’s available to eat. Choices are immaterial.
There are choices in this election. Some may not like the choices offered. But, choosing the one you think is the best alternative – not necessarily the ultimate alternative – can help determine one’s individual and everyone’s collective futures.
Choose wisely, but, whomever you choose, vote.
Peter
Decisions, not conditions, determine one’s future.
That paraphrases a partial comment by California Gov. Gavin Newsom when asked by Jen Psaki what keeps him up at night these days.
Psaki is host of “Inside With Jen Psaki” on MSNBC. The show aired Oct. 20, 2024.
Newsom was discussing the upcoming presidential election. He was explaining that voting is a decision we all can make to help determine the future.
But, digging deeper into his comment, let’s analyze how each of us determines our future.
Do we let the conditions – most of which we cannot anticipate – determine our future? Or, do we take action to determine our future?
Some believe that no matter what actions they take, their future is somehow predetermined.
Perhaps that’s what they were taught as children. Did you ever have a parent, teacher or other elder tell you that this is what you were going to do — or were meant to do — for the rest of your life?
Or, have you been affected by circumstances, from which you believe you will never recover? Some victims of recent storms may feel that way, while others are determined to rebuild, or otherwise carry on.
Many are busy creating their future. They are saving and investing their money to help ensure security. Or, they are building a business with the intention that it will succeed, perhaps beyond their wildest dreams.
Perhaps one’s imagination does not extend that far. A person may just be looking for contentment rather than wild success.
Undoubtedly, there are small things one can do to ensure that.
But, regardless of your desires for the future, it’s largely up to you to make it happen. Generally, things don’t just happen serendipitously, like winning a lottery.
Usually, they are the result of decisions one makes throughout his or her life. One may decide to go to college – or not. One may decide to work for Employer X – or not. One may decide to get married and have children – or not.
Each of these decisions individually can really help determine one’s future.
But Newsom was talking about collective decisions – decisions made by lots of people individually that can determine everyone’s future.
Voting is such a decision. If everyone who is eligible to vote registers, and then votes, the future will be different – likely better – from having many decide not to vote because, say, they don’t like the choices.
When one is starving, usually he or she grabs what’s available to eat. Choices are immaterial.
There are choices in this election. Some may not like the choices offered. But, choosing the one you think is the best alternative – not necessarily the ultimate alternative – can help determine one’s individual and everyone’s collective futures.
Choose wisely, but, whomever you choose, vote.
Peter
CLIMATE CHANGE IS HERE; WE HAVE TO ACT
#storms #hurricanes #ClimateChange #Helene #Milton
If you still don’t believe the climate is changing, look at the quantity and severity of the 2024 storms.
First, Helene. Second, Milton a week or so afterward.
In fact, Milton had grown to a Category 5 hurricane (the worst) before it hit land.
Florida got the double whammy of both storms consecutively, as debris from Helene had yet to be cleared before Milton hit.
Some folks on Florida’s Gulf Coast had gone nearly 50 years before being affected by storms. Then, they got a double hit.
Though the damage is not as bad as predicted it could have been, it will probably take years for places like Florida and Western North Carolina to fully recover from the destruction.
Climate change is happening worldwide. In fact, many migrants are coming to the U.S. because the climate in their countries has become so severe they cannot make a living as farmers etc.
Western North Carolina, shielded by the Blue Ridge Mountains, has learned that it is not immune from storm devastation.
All this means that sea levels will eventually rise, perhaps rendering expensive beachfront properties nearly worthless.
Will property insurers give up insuring properties in some areas? In some cases, they already have. Though most people devastated by storms say they will rebuild, how long with the rebuilding take, and how long will it last before the next storm comes along?
All hands, and minds, need to be on deck to try to mitigate this change as best we can.
It will be no easy task. Property near water has become the most desirable, yet the most vulnerable.
If we do nothing, it will only get worse. So, we have to do something. We have to try new ways to protect people and property from these frequent severe storms. Mitigation ideas and potential solutions are already out there, but the will to enact them is still missing.
Perhaps a new building material will be widely available to withstand these storms.
Perhaps we should not build so close to water that even the smallest storm-generated waves could do real damage.
Certainly, it will take money for this mitigation. But, money alone won’t solve the problem. The money has to be combined with innovation, keeping in mind that all the manmade innovation in the world cannot always defeat Mother Nature.
The other issue is time. We can’t wait years for the innovation, or the will to enact it, to come. It has to come ASAP.
So, as we continue to brace for more severe storms, we have to first recognize the problem. Denying a problem won’t make it go away.
Then, we have to put the best scientists, unrestricted by political or financial constraints, to work finding solutions.
The storms will always come. How we prepare for them, and recover from them, will be the key to the planet’s survival as we know it.
Peter
If you still don’t believe the climate is changing, look at the quantity and severity of the 2024 storms.
First, Helene. Second, Milton a week or so afterward.
In fact, Milton had grown to a Category 5 hurricane (the worst) before it hit land.
Florida got the double whammy of both storms consecutively, as debris from Helene had yet to be cleared before Milton hit.
Some folks on Florida’s Gulf Coast had gone nearly 50 years before being affected by storms. Then, they got a double hit.
Though the damage is not as bad as predicted it could have been, it will probably take years for places like Florida and Western North Carolina to fully recover from the destruction.
Climate change is happening worldwide. In fact, many migrants are coming to the U.S. because the climate in their countries has become so severe they cannot make a living as farmers etc.
Western North Carolina, shielded by the Blue Ridge Mountains, has learned that it is not immune from storm devastation.
All this means that sea levels will eventually rise, perhaps rendering expensive beachfront properties nearly worthless.
Will property insurers give up insuring properties in some areas? In some cases, they already have. Though most people devastated by storms say they will rebuild, how long with the rebuilding take, and how long will it last before the next storm comes along?
All hands, and minds, need to be on deck to try to mitigate this change as best we can.
It will be no easy task. Property near water has become the most desirable, yet the most vulnerable.
If we do nothing, it will only get worse. So, we have to do something. We have to try new ways to protect people and property from these frequent severe storms. Mitigation ideas and potential solutions are already out there, but the will to enact them is still missing.
Perhaps a new building material will be widely available to withstand these storms.
Perhaps we should not build so close to water that even the smallest storm-generated waves could do real damage.
Certainly, it will take money for this mitigation. But, money alone won’t solve the problem. The money has to be combined with innovation, keeping in mind that all the manmade innovation in the world cannot always defeat Mother Nature.
The other issue is time. We can’t wait years for the innovation, or the will to enact it, to come. It has to come ASAP.
So, as we continue to brace for more severe storms, we have to first recognize the problem. Denying a problem won’t make it go away.
Then, we have to put the best scientists, unrestricted by political or financial constraints, to work finding solutions.
The storms will always come. How we prepare for them, and recover from them, will be the key to the planet’s survival as we know it.
Peter
WILL THERE EVER BE ENOUGH HOUSING?
#housing #AffordableHousing #ExpensiveHousing #RecyclingProperty
It seems in many places, particularly fast-growing areas, they can’t build enough housing.
We are seeing apartments, or condos, being built next to big shopping areas, usually in commercially zoned areas and not for residences. If shopping traffic weren’t enough, residents now have to navigate streets around supermarkets and other retail outlets.
These apartments or condos are convenient, since residents can walk to the store(s), restaurants etc. But, would you want your outside balcony overlooking streets clogged with shopping traffic? Do you want to breathe that smoggy air every nice, summer night?
If you have to travel to work, how long will it take you to get out of these clogged streets, or back in when you come home? In short, say, a five-mile commute could take you 45 minutes or an hour, because of traffic.
In another housing area, cities are constructing housing units from old shipping containers. Yes, these are small, cramped units, but if they can keep people from living on the street, who cares?
The key to housing is affordability. Million-dollar homes are being built in places that were designed for the working-class buyer.
Can that be sustained in the long term?
Developers are working on building more affordable houses, apartments and condos. But, with the ever-increasing cost of materials, there is only so low their prices can go.
As more people are working from home, many downtown office buildings are seeing vacancies on a large scale.
New office space is attractive to expanding businesses, so these businesses will leave older office space in favor of new.
Some cities are looking at converting these old office buildings into affordable apartments, but that may be easier said than done.
Will the owners of that old office space accept lower rent for an apartment, vs. an office? Yes, occupancy is almost always better than vacancy, but can these office developers sustain their property values if these buildings suddenly become residences? The financial performance of these office developers, and their investors, could be greatly affected.
Can, and will, governments subsidize these office-to-apartment conversions over the long haul?
Will the occupants of these units require the kind of property management the offices did?
All these questions tell us of a housing market in flux. Rents, selling prices and other housing costs have gone through the roof. Many people elect to live on the street because they cannot afford rent.
Young, growing families are forgoing, or postponing, buying starter homes because they cannot afford the steep prices. Plus, they face competition from investors with wads of cash to buy houses outright, with no mortgage.
Housing is a finite commodity. There is only so much land, and only so many builders out there.
Innovators are working diligently to come up with ways to recycle properties no longer being used as originally intended.
Let’s hope all concerned can create an equilibrium in the housing market fairly soon.
Peter
It seems in many places, particularly fast-growing areas, they can’t build enough housing.
We are seeing apartments, or condos, being built next to big shopping areas, usually in commercially zoned areas and not for residences. If shopping traffic weren’t enough, residents now have to navigate streets around supermarkets and other retail outlets.
These apartments or condos are convenient, since residents can walk to the store(s), restaurants etc. But, would you want your outside balcony overlooking streets clogged with shopping traffic? Do you want to breathe that smoggy air every nice, summer night?
If you have to travel to work, how long will it take you to get out of these clogged streets, or back in when you come home? In short, say, a five-mile commute could take you 45 minutes or an hour, because of traffic.
In another housing area, cities are constructing housing units from old shipping containers. Yes, these are small, cramped units, but if they can keep people from living on the street, who cares?
The key to housing is affordability. Million-dollar homes are being built in places that were designed for the working-class buyer.
Can that be sustained in the long term?
Developers are working on building more affordable houses, apartments and condos. But, with the ever-increasing cost of materials, there is only so low their prices can go.
As more people are working from home, many downtown office buildings are seeing vacancies on a large scale.
New office space is attractive to expanding businesses, so these businesses will leave older office space in favor of new.
Some cities are looking at converting these old office buildings into affordable apartments, but that may be easier said than done.
Will the owners of that old office space accept lower rent for an apartment, vs. an office? Yes, occupancy is almost always better than vacancy, but can these office developers sustain their property values if these buildings suddenly become residences? The financial performance of these office developers, and their investors, could be greatly affected.
Can, and will, governments subsidize these office-to-apartment conversions over the long haul?
Will the occupants of these units require the kind of property management the offices did?
All these questions tell us of a housing market in flux. Rents, selling prices and other housing costs have gone through the roof. Many people elect to live on the street because they cannot afford rent.
Young, growing families are forgoing, or postponing, buying starter homes because they cannot afford the steep prices. Plus, they face competition from investors with wads of cash to buy houses outright, with no mortgage.
Housing is a finite commodity. There is only so much land, and only so many builders out there.
Innovators are working diligently to come up with ways to recycle properties no longer being used as originally intended.
Let’s hope all concerned can create an equilibrium in the housing market fairly soon.
Peter
VIOLENCE, RELIGION A VOLATILE MIX
#violence #religion #Christianity #Christians #TeachingsOfJesus
Christianity teaches us to love thy neighbor as thyself.
But there are many people who say they are Christians who support, even encourage, violence against others.
Perhaps they believe that violence, for the right cause, is just, even ordained by God.
Certainly, history teaches us about wars fought over religion. We saw Protestants and Catholics fight in Northern Irelands a few decades ago. Many relics of that fighting remain in Northern Ireland today. Even though the fight was not over religion per se, most of those who were loyal to the British crown were Protestant, and most of those who wanted Ireland united as a separate republic were Catholic.
Today, the majority of people in Northern Ireland are Catholic, according to tour guides. Peace prevails there today, but few believe the country will remain peaceful forever. The fear of more “troubles,” as they call them, is prevalent.
In the U.S., some Christians feel they are “under attack,” from those who are not like them.
They believe they have to fight, with whatever weapons necessary, to regain “their” country.
The U.S. has always been a melting pot of religions, nationalities, races etc. So, what the Christians who feel under attack want is power – and they want to subjugate all others to their way of life.
People are entitled to believe what they believe, live however they want, as long as they don’t harm others, or interfere in others’ lives. But, some actually want to interfere in the lives of others, whom they see as not believing what they believe.
There is also the adage “live and let live.”
That means you pay no attention to lifestyles that don’t conform to yours, as long as practitioners of those lifestyles don’t bother you.
An effort to keep children away from those their parents hate can be futile, if the child grows to deviate from his or parents’ beliefs.
You can’t stop others from being themselves using force. It will not be a long-term solution, if you are inclined to feel that way. Today, the internet and social media provide many ways for like-minded people to gather, communicate and socialize.
The children WILL grow to find a way to be who they are, regardless of parental restrictions.
Sometimes, the more a parent interferes in his or her child’s life, the more distant those children become from their parents.
If you are a Christian who feels under attack, ask yourself whether Jesus would behave the way you do. Many things you may oppose were not around in Jesus’ time, or, at least, they were not done openly.
Regardless, Jesus never espoused hatred in any form. His teachings would tell us, or should tell us, to embrace differences among us and live in peace.
Many who want the Ten Commandments posted in every public school classroom would do well to abide by all those commandments.
Peter
Christianity teaches us to love thy neighbor as thyself.
But there are many people who say they are Christians who support, even encourage, violence against others.
Perhaps they believe that violence, for the right cause, is just, even ordained by God.
Certainly, history teaches us about wars fought over religion. We saw Protestants and Catholics fight in Northern Irelands a few decades ago. Many relics of that fighting remain in Northern Ireland today. Even though the fight was not over religion per se, most of those who were loyal to the British crown were Protestant, and most of those who wanted Ireland united as a separate republic were Catholic.
Today, the majority of people in Northern Ireland are Catholic, according to tour guides. Peace prevails there today, but few believe the country will remain peaceful forever. The fear of more “troubles,” as they call them, is prevalent.
In the U.S., some Christians feel they are “under attack,” from those who are not like them.
They believe they have to fight, with whatever weapons necessary, to regain “their” country.
The U.S. has always been a melting pot of religions, nationalities, races etc. So, what the Christians who feel under attack want is power – and they want to subjugate all others to their way of life.
People are entitled to believe what they believe, live however they want, as long as they don’t harm others, or interfere in others’ lives. But, some actually want to interfere in the lives of others, whom they see as not believing what they believe.
There is also the adage “live and let live.”
That means you pay no attention to lifestyles that don’t conform to yours, as long as practitioners of those lifestyles don’t bother you.
An effort to keep children away from those their parents hate can be futile, if the child grows to deviate from his or parents’ beliefs.
You can’t stop others from being themselves using force. It will not be a long-term solution, if you are inclined to feel that way. Today, the internet and social media provide many ways for like-minded people to gather, communicate and socialize.
The children WILL grow to find a way to be who they are, regardless of parental restrictions.
Sometimes, the more a parent interferes in his or her child’s life, the more distant those children become from their parents.
If you are a Christian who feels under attack, ask yourself whether Jesus would behave the way you do. Many things you may oppose were not around in Jesus’ time, or, at least, they were not done openly.
Regardless, Jesus never espoused hatred in any form. His teachings would tell us, or should tell us, to embrace differences among us and live in peace.
Many who want the Ten Commandments posted in every public school classroom would do well to abide by all those commandments.
Peter
SHOOT FIRST; ASK NO QUESTIONS
#guns #SchoolShootings #GunOwnership #ResponsibleGunOwnership
Shoot first, ask questions later, the old Western adage says.
Today, it might be revised to say: shoot first, ask no questions.
After the latest school shooting at Apalachee High School in Barrow County, Ga., there are numerous “thoughts and prayers” being offered to the affected families.
But, the question will come down to whether anyone in power will make attempts to stop further gun violence.
The gun lobby has a certain group of legislators, governors and other officials in their pockets. These officials are assigned to prevent any gun restrictions from being enacted, no matter what.
Do we really care more about guns than children and teachers?
As context, no one in any position of power is urging repeal of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
There is nothing wrong with owning a gun for recreation, or even self protection in certain areas.
But, gun ownership is a massive responsibility. Owners have to keep their weapons and ammunition away from people who might misuse them. The question will be asked in Barrow County: How did a 14-year-old boy get a gun past his schoolhouse door?
By all accounts, the response after the shooting was outstanding. School officers confronted the boy with the gun, and he surrendered peacefully. And, the boy’s father was arrested, charged with allowing him to have the gun. His mother had alerted school officials well ahead of the shooting to keep an eye on her son. Another question to be asked: did school officials heed the mother’s warning?
Controlling guns is no easy task. They are as easy to buy as a tool in a hardware store. In many places, no one has to know who you are to sell you a gun. And, some residents of those places like it that way.
As the number of guns in civilian hands proliferates, the more likely it becomes that more of those guns will end up in the wrong hands.
Most gun owners don’t deliberately give or loan their guns to those who would do harm. But, often, the owners don’t know who would, or would not, do harm, or who would do harm eventually.
Some gun owners are careless, leaving their weapons accessible for anyone in their household, or who visits their household, to take.
Very rarely does a loaded gun in a nightstand offer protection. But, those guns are easily accessible, particularly to curious children.
Others carry guns as naturally as they carry a wallet. They’ll show up at an airport with guns in their pockets, and forget they was there.
In summary, gun violence is an epidemic in the U.S., unlike most anywhere else in the world.
Innocent children and adults are getting shot while conducting normal life. Children in school have to have active shooter drills.
Suggested solutions are many, but few rise to the level of absolute solution. But, the way we buy, sell, resell or otherwise get guns into people’s hands would have to change to minimize the threat of such violence. Almost nothing would eliminate the threat completely.
We may need to restrict some weapons that offer no useful civilian purpose. They are designed to shoot a lot of people quickly, We need to know, as a society, who has these weapons, and, perhaps, stop more of them from being sold.
The 2nd Amendment allows for gun ownership. We have to refine it to try to ensure only responsible gun and ammunition ownership. We need to somehow keep weapons out of the hands of children, or adults who would do harm.
Gun owners need to step up as individuals, if they want to preserve their right as it stands. If they don’t, someday someone who opposes easily available guns – and who wants to stop innocent people from being shot — will step up. And, the gun enthusiasts will not be happy.
We have a clarion call here. Who will heed it?
Peter