Sunday, November 27, 2016
Given their new found understanding of the world, it occurred to me that perhaps I could con them into accepting not receiving presents on Christmas, but every month on their birthday. This means Matthew would receive a gift every 6th of the month and Ella every 23rd of the month. This is in contrast to receiving gifts only on their normal birthday and Christmas.
Naturally, the idea of receiving gifts every month enticed their little minds. Yet, I was taken quite aback by what followed next. Despite everything they now know about the Christmas holiday, they very much wanted to still receive presents on Christmas. I even pointed out how close to Christmas they would be receiving gifts. Ella, just a few days before and Matthew just two weeks or so following and a few weeks previous. They were just downright adamant that they wanted to still receive gifts on Christmas specifically. There was just no convincing them. I told them to sleep on it and we would discuss it in the morning, then bid them goodnight. They were laughing at the very prospect and we all enjoyed our little back and forth on it.
I kept thinking, though, who would really benefit here? Let us actually think of the economics of this. Pretend that we spend $600 per child on Christmas and birthday presents. If you split that up evenly across the year, you have $50 per month. I don't know about you, but I already spend a bit of money each month doting on the kids in one form or another. I think the parents would really win out if we could somehow knock our spending down to something paltry like $50 a month. Every month, just one more thing. Maybe splurge for two $50 gifts for birthday and an extra $50 gift for Christmas. Perhaps that could reduce your costs in the long run.
Regardless of what you think you would actually like to do, pose the question to your kids to see what their little minds might think up. Mine liked the idea of gifts every month, but not the loss of Christmas, despite knowing the "truth" about Santa Clause.
Enjoy your holiday season!
Saturday, November 19, 2016
Just a few ideas to share...
I went to chat a Smart Water demo gal at the store who looked super bored at her little booth. I thought she was attractive and I figured I could use the practice regardless. As soon as I heard her voice I wanted to just act like I was walking by, but I took the coupon she offered and bought two bottles. This made me realize that it would be nice to hear someone's voice before making that decision to throw down a couple lines in chat if we matched.
There are so many factors that go into play for someone to make a choice of selecting to pursue a person. The visual certainly works, the last gal that I was pursuing had selected me by Quickmatch on OkCupid. She didn't even know that you could tap the picture to flip through. She hadn't answered any questions other than the few that the site first asks. We chatted for a week through the messenger on the site and her friends pressed her to ask me to dinner before the day I had planned to. We met and hit it off. Things didn't work out, but the point of the story is that the visual aspect is powerful.
Something else that I have found to be interesting is how a person moves. My OkCupid match had a couple of different walks, looks, and other small movements that just drove me wild about her. There is an app called Phhhoto that takes several images in succession and puts them together for a GIF or will convert to video for Instagram upload. If you check it out or are already familiar with it, the image is just a second or two long. What would also be nice is to have the ability to use those for profiles or to have a short video clip like the Vines of Twitter yesteryear.
Music choice via Spotify and Instagram are already linked to Tinder and OkCupid profiles, but limiting on media type would probably help. Users already upload Snapchat pictures. Just more fun to be had with GIF and video.
Additionally, it could be used to help prove that someone is real. I had a conversation with a friend last night who is a pilot and he said that women didn't believe he was real.
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Surely there is a better wayWhat other options do we have in regards to grouping people to vote together for legislative representatives to Congress? Well, that is a tough one. There really is not a "better" way. There must be an equitable representation by each representative in order to ensure that no one group has more power than another. This still happens as a result of who they are representing and the time that they have served as a representative. Nancy Pelosi, for example, represents roughly the same number of people as any other from the state of California, but she has been around a while and represents some big money - much of San Francisco - thus has considerably more power than any other from her state.
Think for a moment, how would you group up a population of people to be represented at the federal level of the legislature? Maybe start off with a representative from each major city and then group regions. At what point does a suburban town not fit in with the metropolitan area? Oh, you didn't realize that most "major" cities that you think of are actually metropolitan areas? Yes, Boston only has a population of a bit more than 600,000 people - as does Baltimore, Denver, Seattle, and Nashville (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population). So that probably doesn't work all that well.
Friday, October 28, 2016
The difference between thinking and believing is that people are willing to kill for their beliefs.That really strikes home for me and heavily influences how I think about things. Really, I don't have any religious beliefs, I just have religious thoughts. Nothing that I say here is guaranteed to be what I think after I post it.
It is more of a "last time I edited this" type of post.
DeityI suppose it makes sense to describe my thoughts in relation to deity or deities. Your first thought may be, "Why did he not use God, god, or gods?" Excellent question. Thinking back to history classes, I have learned from my many great teachers and professors that those who were in charge defined how history was written. In much the same way, the words we use often are affected by those who lead. My thought that the Christian name for their deity is God and that the colloquial term used for any being discussed at such a level is also 'god' is intended as one of two (or possibly both) scenarios. The first that the 'one true God' is reinforced by saying that all other deities described are different interpretations of God. The second that it gives a connotation that they are somehow lesser than God. No matter what, you reference the 'one true'.
Stepping away from that, I think that if there is a 'creator' of our species, that it is of another civilization that had power quite beyond that of our ancestors of 6,000+ years ago thus our perception of deity status.
Furthermore, even if there was a creator and it was scientifically proven to be true or somehow presented in such a way that I found it to be true - I can not worship such a deity. Why in all of the awful, terrible, no good, very bad things that happen on this planet every day would we worship such a deity? They quite clearly do not have the power anyone thinks they have and therefore are not worthy of such worship. We don't expect other creatures to worship us, why should we be expected to do such a thing?
I don't think there is any one creator or creators. I think chemistry or physics happened in pools upon our planet or elsewhere that over billions of years led to our species dominating our planet. Could it have been seeding? Could the universe we perceive have been created within a much larger universe that we can not perceive? Certainly. Why not? Still not worthy of worship.
I am not so thick to think that we could not be created, but I won't pretend that I receive favor over the billions of other presently living humans or other creatures that exist upon this planet. I certainly won't beg for a favor either.
My View of OthersDo I view religion as silly? Kind of, however, I understand that other people do believe and they are more than welcome to believe in such things in my opinion. That being said, the rights of an individual should not infringe upon the rights of another person. My religious right should not be infringed by your religious right. So pestering me to buy into your belief system infringes upon my rights of religious freedom. Much the same if I pestered you to not believe in your religious beliefs.
When Does Your (My) Child Get to Choose?I think my children should have the choice to select their religious preference when they can give me a researched understanding of the major religious orders of this planet and their respective histories. So I am talking Christianity (Catholicism included - I group Orthodox Greek, Catholicism, Protestants, et. al. together), Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and any other 500 million plus strong religious traditions. At that point, I think they will have the background, depth of understanding, and motivation to make a choice.
I suppose I feel that it is a very personal choice to make and that one should not choose lightly. Truly, the vast majority of people believe what they believe because that is what their parents believed and taught them. Personal choice means that you connected in some way with the history, tradition, practice, and teachings. Growing up with it just means that is what you are comfortable with because that is how the world was dictated to you.
My earliest recollection of questioning was the summer between third and fourth grade. We were at the pool as the guests of the family who ran the pool that summer. They were in the Catholic church that we were starting to attend and the priest was there too. At some point during that day, my Dad asked me if I wanted to get baptized. I knew I already had. So, I asked why I would need to be baptized again. What was different about it? Just Catholic vs. Protestant (or whatever it was). I think I grew up with a lot of contradictions in my life and also viewed many actions taken by people that were not good by most folks' standards. As such, I have developed a distrust of people in general, a questioning of what people tell me is true without evidence or reference, and a lack of respect for certain types of authority.
In addition to that experience, there were the classes that educated me on the Catholic faith. One may say that these types of classes help to give a person choice, but really it is about teaching a particular way of thinking of the world. It may or may not be good, but it does not allow someone personal choice. If you only knew of people to walk on concrete surfaces and never was given the opportunity to walk on sand, would you be able to walk on sand? Would you even try?
What about culture or traditions?I think that many traditions and cultural lines of thinking can be carried forward without belief in a deity. Given the time of year, Day of the Dead can certainly be taught that the ceremony and rituals are meant to honor our past family members. To remember of good times with them. To accept that death is a part of life, but our memory of others carry forward. Great deeds that are accomplished can live on in stories. None of these things require belief in a deity or afterlife.
What about Santa Clause?I find that Santa is largely harmless fun. Some people don't think so. I do. Ho! Ho! Ho!
Thursday, October 13, 2016
This post is about gender, though. I honestly do not think I have the appropriate vocabulary to talk about this, but perhaps that will help in some way to push the conversation forward. So many problems are a result of communications issues. Not that they don't happen, but that we are missing an understanding of each side and that, in some cases, the same words are used with different meanings.
In this article from the New York Times titled, 'What Politicians’ Reactions to the Trump Video Reveal About Sexism,' the author describes some of the nuances of politicians' responses from the analysis of a company who specializes in the matter, Textio.
I, a 32-year-old man who grew up in Kansas, felt that the article was very pointed. I felt a little sharpness enter into me from the article. I very much felt that I was being deemed a misogynist for thinking about my familiar relationships in that way. I know that I am not, but am I viewed that way for feeling that I need to protect the people, in this case, women, in my life?
I think that this goes along the lines of this black-and-white or binary view of various topics that are major points of contention in our everyday public discussions across our citizenry. There is not an easy method to draw people to these types of conversations without someone feeling like they are being negatively tagged with labels such as misogynist or sexist. I, for example, feel that women should have equal pay, positions of authority, standing in society, and so on down the list of unequalness.
I want my daughter to be able to do anything she wants in life. She currently wants to make music to sell on the radio so she can live with cheetahs to study them and build a time machine there. Excellent, she wants to be a zoologist, physicist, engineer, musician, and entrepreneur! I will do everything I can to help her move forward with her dreams. She currently takes piano lessons, excels in science and mathematics in school, and attends a STEM club every week.
Yet, she is my daughter, which is my familiar relationship, and I very much feel that I have a responsibility to protect her. Outdated chivalry? Maybe that is part of the case. I also have a high level of respect for her and know that she can achieve anything to which she sets her mind.
I think we need to have more of a discussion and education on this subject without devolving to binary labels being thrown at each other. Perhaps some alternate means for wording and some ways of viewing from the different perspective. There is not an overnight solution, but a sliding along a spectrum that needs to take time. Otherwise, expect reactions to act as a counter from those who perceive their world is flipping around them. I think we have come along way in just the last 10 years and continuing to slide in a positive direction for women is very much a good thing that we must continue.
Saturday, October 8, 2016
Wednesday, October 5, 2016
"11/30. Chicago's Murder rate exceeds the entirety of Canada. Currently, Chicago is at 554 gun deaths this year. Canada is at 516.
Up here in America's Hat, the media is reporting 2016 to be the year of the gun because, at 516, this is the most violent year on record.
I would also like to point out that the population of Chicago is about 2.7 Million. The Population of Canada is about 35 Million."
How do you solve this problem?
Do we work to bring those levels up or do we mix populations up so as to bring the average up?
- Discusses benefits of integration: https://tcf.org/content/facts/the-benefits-of-socioeconomically-and-racially-integrated-schools-and-classrooms/
- Discusses placing high-risk children into better schools: https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/www/external/labor/seminars/adp/pdfs/2010/deming.pdf
Would a low-cost or free afterschool care program improve the quality of life in these neighborhoods or cities?
- This gives some saying of 'yes': http://youth.gov/youth-topics/afterschool-programs/benefits-youth-families-and-communities
- This Harvard study from 2008 gives a 'yes': http://www.sedl.org/pubs/sedl-letter/v20n02/afterschool_findings.html
- This one from 2014 says that +8 million kids are in afterschool programs and that the parents of more than 18 million would attend if they were available to them. http://www.afterschoolalliance.org/documents/Deeper_Dive_into_Afterschool.pdf
Now the question is, how do YOU improve the after-school care programs in YOUR city?
- Volunteer: http://www.volunteermatch.org/search/?categories=22
- Seek out a local program and ACT: http://www.afterschoolalliance.org/policyStateMap.cfm
- Donate: http://www.networkforgood.org/topics/education/afterschool/