Taking on the Internal Revenue Service, in my book, or anyone else’s book, for that matter, would be more taxing than taking on the US Government. And if you think the IRS is part of the US Government, I’ve got news for you. They may be a federal agency, but they definitely act independently, and answer to no one. If they chose to audit the President, they could without any recourse, although they better have a damn good reason to justify doing so. The following is an example of how things are and how things should be. There’s nothing like a personal experience to enlighten the situation, and the subsequent jumping-through-hoops, often at the last minute, to solve a crisis and prevent an even-worse one, that being the loss of residence due to the inability to pay rent because of the initial crisis in the first place.
Let’s examine the details of my discovery, the theory based on what I was seeing, what I was going to do for the future, the subsequent backlash as a result of it, and how it differs from all other dilemmas regarding liens and garnishments unrelated to the IRS.
From the beginning, starting with my first job as a busboy at the age of 17, I’ve filed my taxes. Every year. On time. I received refunds for several years. In the beginning, I filed the 1040-A for a single person filing a single return, no deductions. Then, the process was made easier with the debut of the 1040-EZ. Even better. I was not married, had no kids, rented rather than owning a home, and didn’t have medical or any other bills to deduct. It was a simple process. List your income and what was paid out as taxes, and get your refund.
Somewhere along the way, the taxes owed began to exceed the taxes deducted. And I was filing as “1” dependent. So I started filing “0”, hoping that with an increased deduction, I would hopefully not have to owe. I received refunds for a few years after that. Then, someone told me by filing “0”, you’re lending the IRS money that you’re not getting any interest on when you get it back at the end of the year. I told them filing “0” was the only way to get a refund, since I wasn’t filing as “1”. And I’d rather lend it to them and get it back at the end of the year without interest, than to have to come up with additional funds to pay extra taxes if I had filed “1”..
I began thinking to myself, a theory that should be in practice, but obviously not. At least for the people only filing 1040-EZ. Stay with me. The IRS has an established tax structure to which businesses are required to adhere. Not all do. And that is to be expected. But I work in the financial district. Corporate environment. Not in retail. Not in a coffee shop. Not part-time. The corporate sector. Big Business. Where standards and practices are the same, no matter what office, company or industry you’re employed, as far as the IRS is concerned. And the corporate payroll deductions are structured to coincide with that of the IRS, in each and every tax bracket. I figured, since I filed the easiest of forms, without any deductions whatsoever, my payroll tax deductions should equal the same as what was owed, according to the IRS. Or so you would think. That’s the theory. This is the simplest of logic. It doesn’t get any more basic than that. But, then again, this was the IRS we’re dealing with here.
Somehow, this logic wasn’t working. I was owing, even though I was now filing “0”, with the intent of extra income being deducted, resulting in overpayment after filing “1” as a single dependent. I started filling it out in pencil to see if I owed. I had discovered a loophole. Legal, too. Halfway down the form is an instruction that if you chose to stop, and have the IRS fill out the rest, you could send it in and have them complete the form for you. In the process, they would send a refund or a bill, depending on the outcome. Simply send it in uncompleted, on April 15th, knowing, of course, exactly what you owe, and they would send a bill for the balance. This, obviously, took an extra couple of months. You, of course, received a bill with a due date 1-2 months later. So basically, you got a 3-4 month extension. This lasted only so long, of course. Out of frustration, I stopped filing. Not the smartest thing to do when dealing with the IRS, but I was young and brash, and hoping to force the issue out into the open. Uh, no.
Several years later, in an odd twist of events, the Payroll Department of my employer received a Notice of Garnishment. In the corporate sector, they usually notify you of this to give you an opportunity to correct the situation before your wages are garnished. Mine happened during the Thanksgiving holiday. Instead of sending the notice to my home, which was the standard procedure, they sent it to my work. Unfortunately, I took off the day before Thanksgiving and was not there to receive it. I didn’t get it until Monday. By then, it was too late. The papers were processed, and the wages were garnished. And here’s the difference I mentioned earlier about IRS garnishments that differ from all others.
Whenever your wages are garnished, for whatever reason, that being losing a court judgment, credit card debt liens, etc., the maximum percentage allowed by law is 25%. It is understood by the court that there are other expenses necessary to carry on the basic necessities of life – rent, utility bills, and food. Not the IRS. No, no, no. On my next check, the IRS deducted 70%. 70 fucking percent. Evidently, the IRS was not beholden to the 25% required by all other judgments. I had 3 days to file back years before my company’s payroll closed out for the next period. I tried explaining my theory to them. Uh, yeah. Thank God I had an understanding landlord. Makes you wonder just how many homeless are so as a result of an IRS or US Government screwjob.
How can I owe all these taxes when what is deducted was supposed to be equal to what I owed? Then it hit me. While it very may well have to do with the employer not deducting enough to match the IRS’s criteria, there was another possible reason. A more viable reason. The US Government. Taxes. Employers know from information received by the IRS, what percentage should be deducted from payroll. This happens at the beginning of the year, obviously. But then, things change. During the course of the year, tax bills become law. Do they go into effect at the beginning of the next year? Of course not. Do they go into effect immediately? Nope. They are immediately classified as retroactive.
All of the tax bills signed into law, don’t go into effect at the end of the year, or immediately. They are retroactive to the beginning of the current year. And in the process, what you owe goes up, but what is deducted, stays the same. This is why those who file the simplest forms, owe at the end of the year. Are employers informed of this, so as to adjust their current payroll deduction structure to coincide with the new law? Maybe. The best they can do is adjust it from that point forward. But only if their current payroll program allows them to do so. Retroactive is out of the question. Nowadays, everything is computerized, and program-based. Why do you think payroll programs based on tax bracket deduction structures only come out annually?! And most payrolls in the corporate sector are processed by an outside entity. (Can you say ADP?)
Bottom line: you owe from Day One. The tax brackets and the subsequent taxes owed for each of those brackets at the end of the year are based on tax laws put into effect either immediately, or retroactive to the beginning of the year, and most certainly will not match the established tax deductions according to the current year’s payroll software programs. Basically, the simple filers, 1040-EZ and 1040-A, are shit out of luck, and will always owe.
There are, however, three options. Two legal and one illegal. One is to just pay and not challenge or fight. It’s just not worth it. The second is to change jobs every two to three years. It is their job to catch you or catch up to you. Since it takes several years for them to catch up, and I think it is done on purpose, to rack up interest and penalty charges, simply change jobs and add a few more years onto their search. The third: intercept the garnishment so that it never makes it to Payroll. This is the most risky and can only be done if you work in the mailroom. The important thing to remember is that when this happens, it has to be dealt with immediately after interception. If nothing is done after they’ve sent the notice, they WILL call.
At the risk of revealing previous actions, I have to admit, I’ve done this once. As a result of dropping the ball after a previously-agreed-upon arrangement. I knew I could not take any time off for fear of running the risk of a single notice arriving in my absence. Stranger things have happened, though. Sure enough, a notice of garnishment came in and was subsequently intercepted. I wasn’t going to have 70% of my check deducted. No fucking way. After a period of time passed, and not calling on my part (the ultimate risk and a stupid one at that), I intercepted a second notice. Imagine my surprise upon reading that the garnishment was to be lifted. No reason was given. Huh?
Never look a gift horse in the mouth. I certainly wasn’t going to call them for an explanation. Needless to say, I still have outstanding issues, and I will deal with them. At the same time, I still stand by my theory about what I owe and what is deducted, should match. Of course, it helps to still work in the mailroom.
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Four of a Kind...Is a Straight Flush
The Big Four. No, not accounting firms. Nor the Nob Hill hotels built by the railroad barons in the 1800’s. I’m talking about the Big Four vices of all time. Four of the most consumed and abused in America today. Two are legal; two are not. For various reasons. And not all justified. For various reasons. Alcohol, Cocaine, Marijuana and Tobacco. The two that are legal, should be illegal, for the damage they do. To the users, and the people around them. They do more damage than one of the illegals, which is one that should be legal (marijuana). To a certain degree. For medicinal purposes, which has been proven. Why is it one of the four has never been the direct result of a death? How can you smoke too much marijuana? A can of worms, for sure. But all four, for whatever use beyond medicinal reasons, are a straight flush. Without going into the histories of each, let’s review some positives, some negatives, some conspiracy theories that accompany them, and my personal experiences, which validates my putting this all down for the record.
Alcohol
Positives
Alcohol is only beneficial in small amounts. Wine is the most beneficial. Has to do with increasing the body’s HDL (high-density lipoprotein), the good cholesterol, thanks to a key ingredient call resveratrol. It helps one unwind from an otherwise-stressful day. It lowers inhibitions relative to shyness, enabling one to comfortably socialize better. But that’s a crutch in the long-term. From the constant urination resulting from use, it ‘keeps the pipes flowing’, alleviating any possible calcium deposit buildup, resulting in stones. But beyond two drinks, alcohol has the opposite effect.
Negatives
Where do I begin. #1 – Drinking and driving. Alcohol impairs judgment, slows reflexes, causes drowsiness, and turns the vehicle into a weapon of mass destruction. Driving is a privilege, not a right, as so many take for granted. For all the accidents that occur, and deaths that result, this is one that should be 0% tolerance. DUI: lose your license, lose your ride, and a free ride to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.00.
Other negatives pale in comparison, but they exist, nonetheless. That would be the personality shift. For every person that benefits from a drink or two, socially speaking (the happy drunk), there are ten who become obnoxious, belligerent, loud, dominating, and an annoyance to everyone around them. The Irish are the worst. I know. It’s a blanket statement. But I’m a drinker. My malt liquor 40’s are my drink of choice. I’ve spent many a years at keggers, bars, clubs, etc. It’s the Irish that always start shit. I should know. I’m part Irish. But I’m also part English and part Canadian French (Cajun). I’m ready to fight, but I was never the type to start shit. Ultimately, I fini(sh)it. Needless to say, alcohol brings out the worst of people.
Ever notice after people have had a couple drinks, the inhibitions disappear? They do things and say things they would not normally do in a sober setting. The next day, the apologies come out. ‘They didn’t mean it.’ ‘They were drunk at the time.’ ‘They didn’t know what they were doing.’ Bullshit. While it may be a negative for the shit that is done or said while under the influence, LaFever considers it a positive because what he’s getting is the truth. Under the influence, people will express their true feelings. You want to know what someone really thinks about you, get them drunk. But, at the same time, be prepared to kick their ass. Because if they’re looking for a fight, the cheapshot is only a moment away. I like to look away but keep them in my peripheral. When the swing comes, it’s miles off the mark. And the lack of balance that accompanies alcohol consumption usually results in a fall to the floor. A definite negative, for sure.
Conspiracy Theories
I’m not up on any, relative to alcohol. What I know is what I see. What I see is a billion-dollar business. A billion-dollar business run by a few corporations with a huge amount of clout on Capitol Hill. What I see is a billion-dollar industry regulated and taxed by the US Government. What I don’t see is Prohibition ever happening again, as it did during the early 1900’s. The Government was smart. It saw a huge cash cow that could be regulated and controlled. It knew the consequences and dangers relative to the DUI aspect, and the physical dangers to the human body. Small price to pay. As fucked up as it is. Of course, there’s the legendary stories about the Kennedy patriarch (Joe) amassing his fortune and power running bootleg rum during the Prohibition. The Kennedy’s were no saints, that’s for sure.
LaFever’s use
For me, it’s simple. I know and understand my limitations. The primary reason is that if consumption goes too far, I’ll get sick. I don’t become belligerent or confrontational, unless confronted or provoked, of course. I’m a happy drunk. I don’t black out, as many others do. I simply throw up. Vomit. Puke. And I hate that. Worst feeling in the world. Like my insides want to be on my outsides. Beer, wine, and mixed drinks. Wine, I stay away from. Quick buzz, can’t drink more than one bottle. More importantly, hard to get up from in the morning. No hangovers, mind you. I never get hangovers. Hangovers happen to those who puke, and keep drinking, or black out. Hangovers are cuaed not by the alcohol, but the other ingredients. It’s the caramel coloring. No one gets hangovers after consuming the clear alcohols (vodka, gin, clear rum & tequila). It’s the bourbons, scotches, dark rums and colored tequilas that cause it. Oh, and the cheap shit. You know: the stuff the winos drink. Royal Gate. Wolfschmidt. You don’t see the Latin population drinking Cuervo. Yecch.
Domestic beer costs too much. A 40 of malt liquor runs $3.00 tops. That’s 3 1/3 beers. Or just over half a six-pack. More bang for your buck, if you ask me. Oh, by the way: I don’t have a license; therefore, I don’t drive. Nuff said.
Almost forgot. Ever notice that beer drinkers who drink a variety in addition to their favorite, never drink Coors. But those that drink Coors, drink one brand and one brand only, Coors Light. If you drink Coors, you might as well drink it standing in front of a toilet.
Cocaine
Positives
The only positive attributable to cocaine was for it’s initial use while it was still legal; that being during the 50’s, specifically, during the Korean War. My dad served in that war. Trucked supplies to the front line. Probably had no clue what his cargo was. I would find out later from a friend who also served his time there. Much older than me, obviously. He was in the medical unit. He was also a supplier of mine. Evidently, there were various numbing agents (novocaine, procaine) used for medical purposes, but for facial wounds, it was cocaine. I can’t remember the reasons why, but I do remember they made sense. At that time, its future use had yet to be discovered. He discovered it, though. Probably accidentally. Maybe he got punched in the nose, and used it to alleviate the pain, getting high in the process.
The only other positive was as an ingredient in the most popular soft drink in the world, Coca Cola. ‘Coca’ is the root word for cocaine, and the name of the plant from which cocaine is derived. ‘Cola’ comes from ‘kola’, or, the ‘kola nut’; the main ingredient before caffeine came on to the scene. Cocaine was outlawed in the early 70’s, and subsequently removed from Coca Cola. And kola nut was switched to caffeine due to it’s lower cost. By that time, it was pointless to change the name. It was a household staple. Now it is simply a misnomer. Coca Cola is now high fructose corn syrup (sugar), caffeine, carbonated soda water, food coloring.
Negatives
Definitely, the worst of the four. Even more than heroin. Heroin addicts can go a few days before their fix takes over. Cocaine users, abusers, no, addicts, need it daily. And they’ll do whatever it takes. At least for your average user. Some of us possess a higher level of discipline and have learned to keep it at bay, realizing and understanding the urge and some how, some way, do without until the resources become available to continue. Even worse, is the cooked, purified version of cocaine, known as freebase, and it’s current incarnation, crack.
Typical and common negatives are ‘the need for more’, also known as ‘fiending’, and extreme paranoia, in the form of irrational or misperceived thoughts of others’ thoughts and/or intentions, and the feeling of ‘being watched’. Of course, these negatives are amplified if cocaine is consumed in the form of crack. Cocaine in it’s purest form is the most dangerous drug in the world. Originally called ‘freebase’, it became ‘crack’ when it became readily available as a street drug. Named appropriately from the sound it makes when lit, a crackling sound. While ‘freebase’ was cocaine cooked back to it’s initial freeform, ‘crack’ maintained a certain amount of ‘cut’, as a result of a quick cook. ‘Freebase’ was common in the 70’s for those who wanted an immediate and stronger rush. But it was more short-lived than the standard venue of consumption (nasal cavity).
Conspiracy theories
The main one here is the one involving the US Government. Obviously, it isn’t the black community that’s bringing it into the country. Or any other racial communities. The theory is that it’s agencies of the USGovernment, operating on their own, targeting specific communities, knowing the result will be civil war and in-feuding, tearing the community apart. Why is it the black community is the only one that dwell in low-income housing, also known as ‘projects’? Some things never change. Today, the primary dealers are Mexican, but now it’s done as a business. They are not consumers of the product. They work for a living and support their families. It’s their clients/customers’ lives that are destroyed.
LaFever’s use
Only one comment. In the 90’s, I moved home with Mom twice because of it. And I’m not proud of it either. But like Neitchze says, “What doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger”. Now I’m strictly a beer drinker. Besides, it was always a scary and humbling situation watching others tweak on it.
Marijuana
Positives
Never has there been a more controversial drug than marijuana. Of all the illegal drugs out there, this one is the only one that is classified a misdemeanor. Why is that? But that should fall under the conspiracy section. First, the positives. Basically, all the positives for marijuana fall under the medical category. For anyone suffering from a variety of diseases, most notably, cancer, the biggest one of all, for which there is still no cure, marijuana seems to be the only thing that alleviates most of the side effects of the prescribed drugs for treatment, and chemotherapy.
Negatives
Same as cocaine, to a lesser degree. That being paranoia. Excess marijuana use has been known to cause paranoia in its use. That’s a given. Especially since most smoke to alleviate stress. Sounds contradictory, if you ask me. Which means use at work, a major source of stress. So it goes, the paranoia surfacing in the form of being discovered, or caught. What do you expect? Your eyes are red, and glassy? And the always-prevalent smiling/laughing disposition is a giveaway. The constant required effort to not be exposed, called ‘maintaining’, ends up taking all of your energy, causing stress in its own right. Not worth it.
Conspiracy Theories
The main one here is the US Government’s dilemma over involvement and regulation. Unlike cocaine, where they’re tagged as being indirectly responsible for its importation, they have no control over marijuana, as it is grown here. By small farmers and landowners. Too many to be tracked and recorded. Even now, there are clubs that exist, under the watchful eye of authorities, that distribute to members with medical clearance from their doctors, for reasons that are obvious, stated in the Positive section. Every once in awhile, there is a crackdown. I think it’s for good reason. Just like everything else in life that is allowed to run wild and free, the reins need to be pulled back. My best friend from high school has a brother who has an official member card that allows him to legally purchase marijuana at one of these clubs. He’s not sick. He’s not dying. He is why the clubs get raided on an infrequent basis.
For the most part, the US Government is still on the fence. It’s only a misdemeanor, so processing arrestees costs more than it’s worth. It is pretty much accepted that marijuana is not a drug that produces violent mood swings and provokes destruction on the part of the user. And while alcohol gives the user a feeling of invincibility, marijuana users tend to become more cautious in situations outside of their control. More like laidback, for sure.
The other, more prevalent, reason is the lack of the government’s ability to curtail production. If that were possible, it would be something they could control, and tax. After all, pot is also a billion-dollar industry. And the government hates that they’re not getting a piece of it. More like a chunk, if you ask me.
LaFever’s use
My first joint occurred out of town. Didn’t feel anything. Maybe it was shit. I didn’t know. I was a virgin. Not the second time. Had a joint I was saving for after work, but before one of my high school dances. Smoked it at the bus stop. By the time I got to the dance twenty minutes later, I was ripped. The school dean was at the front door. As usual, I was paranoid, not greatly, that I would be discovered. He knew I had come from my job. It was the last half hour of the dance. He never gave it a second thought. He was more sympathetic since I came from work and there for the last half hour. Working the bingo there on Monday nights also may have been a contributing factor. Bingo started as the Jesuits were finishing dinner in the back. They all drank wine. In large quantities. So, I guess alcohol is blessed.
That was the middle of my junior year. Smoked for the next three years. Mostly after work. Then before work. Then at lunch. I realized it was zapping my energy. Always tired. The end didn’t come in the form of a bust. There came a time where I kept forgetting where I left off on projects during work hours. I got burned out on it, pun intended. Quit cold turkey. It worked for a time, for creative reasons, and recreational purposes, but wasn’t to be. That was 25 years ago. But I can still see the case for legalization, albeit for medicinal purposes. With regulation, of course.
Tobacco
Positives
Which brings us to my most-hated vice, even more than cocaine, which is still consumed on occasion, but in moderation. Cigarettes. No. Positives? None whatsoever. Period.
Negatives
I’ve saved the worst for last. Where do I begin? Lung cancer. Emphysema. Secondhand conditions. Birth defects. Fires as a result of smokers’ falling asleep with lit cigarettes. Everything in the immediate surroundings smelling like smoke. Need I say more? Of course. Some say it’s worse than cocaine and heroine when it comes to addiction.
Conspiracy Theories
None that I know of, except for the power of the tobacco industry in keeping it legal, in spite of it’s detriment to our health. How is it that a ‘pack of smokes’ can have a disclaimer from the Surgeon General of the US on the side of the package, stating the dangers of consumption, and be readily and freely sold over the counter to the general public, and still be sued in court by consumers suffering from the same conditions stated by the Surgeon General on the pack itself, 30 years later, and win. Who hasn’t seen the old lady with the hole in her throat, to breath, as a result from throat cancer brought on by 30 years of smoking, and her taking a ‘drag’ from a cigarette, through that hole? Disgusting. Not one person has successfully sued an alcohol-producing company for damage to their liver or kidneys. Obviously, there’s more clout with the tobacco companies than there is with the alcohol companies. And more money to be made via taxes. It’s all over my head.
LaFever’s use
Not this time, folks. I saw it destroy my father. 45 years of use. Died at 60. Mom quit cold turkey after becoming gravely ill. I spent many a nights coming home from the clubs, taking off my clothes, reaking of tobacco smoke. Tried it once. Choked for five minutes. Became lightheaded. Glad I never started. That was it for me. My favorite bumper sticker: Kissing a smoker is like licking an ashtray.
Bottom Line:
This Four-Of-A-Kind is a Straight Flush. None of the positives outweigh the negatives. In spite of my consumption, I maintain this philosophy. I’m no saint, and don’t claim to be. As much as I hated it every time my dad would say these words, I knew they had meaning, and purpose, and would hold true for years to come:
“Do as I say, not as I do.”
Alcohol
Positives
Alcohol is only beneficial in small amounts. Wine is the most beneficial. Has to do with increasing the body’s HDL (high-density lipoprotein), the good cholesterol, thanks to a key ingredient call resveratrol. It helps one unwind from an otherwise-stressful day. It lowers inhibitions relative to shyness, enabling one to comfortably socialize better. But that’s a crutch in the long-term. From the constant urination resulting from use, it ‘keeps the pipes flowing’, alleviating any possible calcium deposit buildup, resulting in stones. But beyond two drinks, alcohol has the opposite effect.
Negatives
Where do I begin. #1 – Drinking and driving. Alcohol impairs judgment, slows reflexes, causes drowsiness, and turns the vehicle into a weapon of mass destruction. Driving is a privilege, not a right, as so many take for granted. For all the accidents that occur, and deaths that result, this is one that should be 0% tolerance. DUI: lose your license, lose your ride, and a free ride to jail. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.00.
Other negatives pale in comparison, but they exist, nonetheless. That would be the personality shift. For every person that benefits from a drink or two, socially speaking (the happy drunk), there are ten who become obnoxious, belligerent, loud, dominating, and an annoyance to everyone around them. The Irish are the worst. I know. It’s a blanket statement. But I’m a drinker. My malt liquor 40’s are my drink of choice. I’ve spent many a years at keggers, bars, clubs, etc. It’s the Irish that always start shit. I should know. I’m part Irish. But I’m also part English and part Canadian French (Cajun). I’m ready to fight, but I was never the type to start shit. Ultimately, I fini(sh)it. Needless to say, alcohol brings out the worst of people.
Ever notice after people have had a couple drinks, the inhibitions disappear? They do things and say things they would not normally do in a sober setting. The next day, the apologies come out. ‘They didn’t mean it.’ ‘They were drunk at the time.’ ‘They didn’t know what they were doing.’ Bullshit. While it may be a negative for the shit that is done or said while under the influence, LaFever considers it a positive because what he’s getting is the truth. Under the influence, people will express their true feelings. You want to know what someone really thinks about you, get them drunk. But, at the same time, be prepared to kick their ass. Because if they’re looking for a fight, the cheapshot is only a moment away. I like to look away but keep them in my peripheral. When the swing comes, it’s miles off the mark. And the lack of balance that accompanies alcohol consumption usually results in a fall to the floor. A definite negative, for sure.
Conspiracy Theories
I’m not up on any, relative to alcohol. What I know is what I see. What I see is a billion-dollar business. A billion-dollar business run by a few corporations with a huge amount of clout on Capitol Hill. What I see is a billion-dollar industry regulated and taxed by the US Government. What I don’t see is Prohibition ever happening again, as it did during the early 1900’s. The Government was smart. It saw a huge cash cow that could be regulated and controlled. It knew the consequences and dangers relative to the DUI aspect, and the physical dangers to the human body. Small price to pay. As fucked up as it is. Of course, there’s the legendary stories about the Kennedy patriarch (Joe) amassing his fortune and power running bootleg rum during the Prohibition. The Kennedy’s were no saints, that’s for sure.
LaFever’s use
For me, it’s simple. I know and understand my limitations. The primary reason is that if consumption goes too far, I’ll get sick. I don’t become belligerent or confrontational, unless confronted or provoked, of course. I’m a happy drunk. I don’t black out, as many others do. I simply throw up. Vomit. Puke. And I hate that. Worst feeling in the world. Like my insides want to be on my outsides. Beer, wine, and mixed drinks. Wine, I stay away from. Quick buzz, can’t drink more than one bottle. More importantly, hard to get up from in the morning. No hangovers, mind you. I never get hangovers. Hangovers happen to those who puke, and keep drinking, or black out. Hangovers are cuaed not by the alcohol, but the other ingredients. It’s the caramel coloring. No one gets hangovers after consuming the clear alcohols (vodka, gin, clear rum & tequila). It’s the bourbons, scotches, dark rums and colored tequilas that cause it. Oh, and the cheap shit. You know: the stuff the winos drink. Royal Gate. Wolfschmidt. You don’t see the Latin population drinking Cuervo. Yecch.
Domestic beer costs too much. A 40 of malt liquor runs $3.00 tops. That’s 3 1/3 beers. Or just over half a six-pack. More bang for your buck, if you ask me. Oh, by the way: I don’t have a license; therefore, I don’t drive. Nuff said.
Almost forgot. Ever notice that beer drinkers who drink a variety in addition to their favorite, never drink Coors. But those that drink Coors, drink one brand and one brand only, Coors Light. If you drink Coors, you might as well drink it standing in front of a toilet.
Cocaine
Positives
The only positive attributable to cocaine was for it’s initial use while it was still legal; that being during the 50’s, specifically, during the Korean War. My dad served in that war. Trucked supplies to the front line. Probably had no clue what his cargo was. I would find out later from a friend who also served his time there. Much older than me, obviously. He was in the medical unit. He was also a supplier of mine. Evidently, there were various numbing agents (novocaine, procaine) used for medical purposes, but for facial wounds, it was cocaine. I can’t remember the reasons why, but I do remember they made sense. At that time, its future use had yet to be discovered. He discovered it, though. Probably accidentally. Maybe he got punched in the nose, and used it to alleviate the pain, getting high in the process.
The only other positive was as an ingredient in the most popular soft drink in the world, Coca Cola. ‘Coca’ is the root word for cocaine, and the name of the plant from which cocaine is derived. ‘Cola’ comes from ‘kola’, or, the ‘kola nut’; the main ingredient before caffeine came on to the scene. Cocaine was outlawed in the early 70’s, and subsequently removed from Coca Cola. And kola nut was switched to caffeine due to it’s lower cost. By that time, it was pointless to change the name. It was a household staple. Now it is simply a misnomer. Coca Cola is now high fructose corn syrup (sugar), caffeine, carbonated soda water, food coloring.
Negatives
Definitely, the worst of the four. Even more than heroin. Heroin addicts can go a few days before their fix takes over. Cocaine users, abusers, no, addicts, need it daily. And they’ll do whatever it takes. At least for your average user. Some of us possess a higher level of discipline and have learned to keep it at bay, realizing and understanding the urge and some how, some way, do without until the resources become available to continue. Even worse, is the cooked, purified version of cocaine, known as freebase, and it’s current incarnation, crack.
Typical and common negatives are ‘the need for more’, also known as ‘fiending’, and extreme paranoia, in the form of irrational or misperceived thoughts of others’ thoughts and/or intentions, and the feeling of ‘being watched’. Of course, these negatives are amplified if cocaine is consumed in the form of crack. Cocaine in it’s purest form is the most dangerous drug in the world. Originally called ‘freebase’, it became ‘crack’ when it became readily available as a street drug. Named appropriately from the sound it makes when lit, a crackling sound. While ‘freebase’ was cocaine cooked back to it’s initial freeform, ‘crack’ maintained a certain amount of ‘cut’, as a result of a quick cook. ‘Freebase’ was common in the 70’s for those who wanted an immediate and stronger rush. But it was more short-lived than the standard venue of consumption (nasal cavity).
Conspiracy theories
The main one here is the one involving the US Government. Obviously, it isn’t the black community that’s bringing it into the country. Or any other racial communities. The theory is that it’s agencies of the USGovernment, operating on their own, targeting specific communities, knowing the result will be civil war and in-feuding, tearing the community apart. Why is it the black community is the only one that dwell in low-income housing, also known as ‘projects’? Some things never change. Today, the primary dealers are Mexican, but now it’s done as a business. They are not consumers of the product. They work for a living and support their families. It’s their clients/customers’ lives that are destroyed.
LaFever’s use
Only one comment. In the 90’s, I moved home with Mom twice because of it. And I’m not proud of it either. But like Neitchze says, “What doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger”. Now I’m strictly a beer drinker. Besides, it was always a scary and humbling situation watching others tweak on it.
Marijuana
Positives
Never has there been a more controversial drug than marijuana. Of all the illegal drugs out there, this one is the only one that is classified a misdemeanor. Why is that? But that should fall under the conspiracy section. First, the positives. Basically, all the positives for marijuana fall under the medical category. For anyone suffering from a variety of diseases, most notably, cancer, the biggest one of all, for which there is still no cure, marijuana seems to be the only thing that alleviates most of the side effects of the prescribed drugs for treatment, and chemotherapy.
Negatives
Same as cocaine, to a lesser degree. That being paranoia. Excess marijuana use has been known to cause paranoia in its use. That’s a given. Especially since most smoke to alleviate stress. Sounds contradictory, if you ask me. Which means use at work, a major source of stress. So it goes, the paranoia surfacing in the form of being discovered, or caught. What do you expect? Your eyes are red, and glassy? And the always-prevalent smiling/laughing disposition is a giveaway. The constant required effort to not be exposed, called ‘maintaining’, ends up taking all of your energy, causing stress in its own right. Not worth it.
Conspiracy Theories
The main one here is the US Government’s dilemma over involvement and regulation. Unlike cocaine, where they’re tagged as being indirectly responsible for its importation, they have no control over marijuana, as it is grown here. By small farmers and landowners. Too many to be tracked and recorded. Even now, there are clubs that exist, under the watchful eye of authorities, that distribute to members with medical clearance from their doctors, for reasons that are obvious, stated in the Positive section. Every once in awhile, there is a crackdown. I think it’s for good reason. Just like everything else in life that is allowed to run wild and free, the reins need to be pulled back. My best friend from high school has a brother who has an official member card that allows him to legally purchase marijuana at one of these clubs. He’s not sick. He’s not dying. He is why the clubs get raided on an infrequent basis.
For the most part, the US Government is still on the fence. It’s only a misdemeanor, so processing arrestees costs more than it’s worth. It is pretty much accepted that marijuana is not a drug that produces violent mood swings and provokes destruction on the part of the user. And while alcohol gives the user a feeling of invincibility, marijuana users tend to become more cautious in situations outside of their control. More like laidback, for sure.
The other, more prevalent, reason is the lack of the government’s ability to curtail production. If that were possible, it would be something they could control, and tax. After all, pot is also a billion-dollar industry. And the government hates that they’re not getting a piece of it. More like a chunk, if you ask me.
LaFever’s use
My first joint occurred out of town. Didn’t feel anything. Maybe it was shit. I didn’t know. I was a virgin. Not the second time. Had a joint I was saving for after work, but before one of my high school dances. Smoked it at the bus stop. By the time I got to the dance twenty minutes later, I was ripped. The school dean was at the front door. As usual, I was paranoid, not greatly, that I would be discovered. He knew I had come from my job. It was the last half hour of the dance. He never gave it a second thought. He was more sympathetic since I came from work and there for the last half hour. Working the bingo there on Monday nights also may have been a contributing factor. Bingo started as the Jesuits were finishing dinner in the back. They all drank wine. In large quantities. So, I guess alcohol is blessed.
That was the middle of my junior year. Smoked for the next three years. Mostly after work. Then before work. Then at lunch. I realized it was zapping my energy. Always tired. The end didn’t come in the form of a bust. There came a time where I kept forgetting where I left off on projects during work hours. I got burned out on it, pun intended. Quit cold turkey. It worked for a time, for creative reasons, and recreational purposes, but wasn’t to be. That was 25 years ago. But I can still see the case for legalization, albeit for medicinal purposes. With regulation, of course.
Tobacco
Positives
Which brings us to my most-hated vice, even more than cocaine, which is still consumed on occasion, but in moderation. Cigarettes. No. Positives? None whatsoever. Period.
Negatives
I’ve saved the worst for last. Where do I begin? Lung cancer. Emphysema. Secondhand conditions. Birth defects. Fires as a result of smokers’ falling asleep with lit cigarettes. Everything in the immediate surroundings smelling like smoke. Need I say more? Of course. Some say it’s worse than cocaine and heroine when it comes to addiction.
Conspiracy Theories
None that I know of, except for the power of the tobacco industry in keeping it legal, in spite of it’s detriment to our health. How is it that a ‘pack of smokes’ can have a disclaimer from the Surgeon General of the US on the side of the package, stating the dangers of consumption, and be readily and freely sold over the counter to the general public, and still be sued in court by consumers suffering from the same conditions stated by the Surgeon General on the pack itself, 30 years later, and win. Who hasn’t seen the old lady with the hole in her throat, to breath, as a result from throat cancer brought on by 30 years of smoking, and her taking a ‘drag’ from a cigarette, through that hole? Disgusting. Not one person has successfully sued an alcohol-producing company for damage to their liver or kidneys. Obviously, there’s more clout with the tobacco companies than there is with the alcohol companies. And more money to be made via taxes. It’s all over my head.
LaFever’s use
Not this time, folks. I saw it destroy my father. 45 years of use. Died at 60. Mom quit cold turkey after becoming gravely ill. I spent many a nights coming home from the clubs, taking off my clothes, reaking of tobacco smoke. Tried it once. Choked for five minutes. Became lightheaded. Glad I never started. That was it for me. My favorite bumper sticker: Kissing a smoker is like licking an ashtray.
Bottom Line:
This Four-Of-A-Kind is a Straight Flush. None of the positives outweigh the negatives. In spite of my consumption, I maintain this philosophy. I’m no saint, and don’t claim to be. As much as I hated it every time my dad would say these words, I knew they had meaning, and purpose, and would hold true for years to come:
“Do as I say, not as I do.”
The Power Of (nnon)Sense
God, how I love opening a paper with a paradox. Senses and powers. One is a part of all of us, the other, few and far between. One is taken for granted, and when lost, feel inferior, yet the remainder of the senses are thus heightened. The other, gifts, even though some consider it a curse, and go mad over time as a result of not being able to adapt to these gifts. Of course, I’m referring to our “senses” and “powers”.
Let’s start on our most basic, primal, physical level. The five basic senses. Sight, hearing, taste, smell and touch. Everyone, for the most part, are born with these traits. Simple, and basic. Many, for a variety of reasons, be them hereditary or environmental, have one or more senses evolve to a higher level. Advanced, yes, but not necessarily to that of a power. Remember: the “powers” are grounded in the mind. As in ‘mind over matter’. Heightened senses develop over time, but aren’t recognized immediately until the level of awareness is established years later. Examples: the ability of a wine connoisseur or food critic to determine the premium vs. average palatiability of food or drink. Or the advanced techniques of a masseuse in relation to touch. Or the hearing abilities of musicians. Considered gifts, but not to the level of “powers”.
Senses vs. powers. We’ve established the five senses. But what are the powers? While numerous, the ones that come to mind immediately, are ESP and telekinesis. Extra-Sensory Perception being the ability to read others’ thoughts. Telekinesis, the ability to move objects. Obviously, ESP would be the one to drive someone mad, by its very nature. Very few have these abilities. And, for obvious reasons, can never, ever, reveal themselves without running the risk of persecution and/or being outcast.
Then there is the Sixth Sense. The sense that tells us the future. What happens next. Whether it’s within a few seconds, minutes, or hours; days, even years. This one differs in every case. Take “MASH” for example: the character “Radar” could hear the choppers seconds before they arrived, hence the nickname “Radar”. Appropriate, yes. But inconsistent. Why he didn’t “know” any other time was never incorporated into the series. Most unfortunate. It could have added so much more to the show. Then again, he wasn’t a major player in the cast, so his “powers” were never used to their advantage. But could have during a final episode during any particular season. The irony here is that it is referred to as a “sixth sense”, but seen as a “power”, since most don’t exhibit it. But wait, there’s more. If ESP and telekinesis are powers, and not really considered senses due to the abilities exhibited, this “sixth sense” should also be classified as a power.
LaFever believes the real sixth sense we all possess, is on a level that is spiritual in nature. And not even a “sixth sense”, but a “seventh sense”. And not a “power” either. LaFever believes the “sixth sense” rests one level up, on the emotional plane, that being common sense. When we “know better”, from knowledge and previous experience as it relates to what is pefceived as right or wrong, ethically, morally, etc. The seventh sense, subsequently rests one level higher, on the spiritual level, that being “intuition”. Knowing what’s about to happen, but only due to previous experiences, and not for sure, as in Radar’s case, combined with common sense. This “intuition” is more commonly known as, “a gut feeling”. You’ve been there, done that. Others refer to it as your “conscience”. Even more so, there are those who consider this sense as that of the Word Of God. God as your conscience. At a location you shouldn’t be surprised to hear: the heart. How existential.
LaFever has it figured out, though. Five physical senses (sight, hearing, taste, smell, and touch), one emotional sense (common sense) as #6, and one spiritual sense (intuition) as #7. Sounds a lot like dimensions. First dimension is a point, second is a straight line, third adds depth. All on a physical plane. Enter the fourth and fifth dimension – time and space. A whole ‘nother paper, for sure. But for now . . .
LaFever leaves you with this zen riddle:
“Why do those with special “powers”, “sense” things others do not?”
Let’s start on our most basic, primal, physical level. The five basic senses. Sight, hearing, taste, smell and touch. Everyone, for the most part, are born with these traits. Simple, and basic. Many, for a variety of reasons, be them hereditary or environmental, have one or more senses evolve to a higher level. Advanced, yes, but not necessarily to that of a power. Remember: the “powers” are grounded in the mind. As in ‘mind over matter’. Heightened senses develop over time, but aren’t recognized immediately until the level of awareness is established years later. Examples: the ability of a wine connoisseur or food critic to determine the premium vs. average palatiability of food or drink. Or the advanced techniques of a masseuse in relation to touch. Or the hearing abilities of musicians. Considered gifts, but not to the level of “powers”.
Senses vs. powers. We’ve established the five senses. But what are the powers? While numerous, the ones that come to mind immediately, are ESP and telekinesis. Extra-Sensory Perception being the ability to read others’ thoughts. Telekinesis, the ability to move objects. Obviously, ESP would be the one to drive someone mad, by its very nature. Very few have these abilities. And, for obvious reasons, can never, ever, reveal themselves without running the risk of persecution and/or being outcast.
Then there is the Sixth Sense. The sense that tells us the future. What happens next. Whether it’s within a few seconds, minutes, or hours; days, even years. This one differs in every case. Take “MASH” for example: the character “Radar” could hear the choppers seconds before they arrived, hence the nickname “Radar”. Appropriate, yes. But inconsistent. Why he didn’t “know” any other time was never incorporated into the series. Most unfortunate. It could have added so much more to the show. Then again, he wasn’t a major player in the cast, so his “powers” were never used to their advantage. But could have during a final episode during any particular season. The irony here is that it is referred to as a “sixth sense”, but seen as a “power”, since most don’t exhibit it. But wait, there’s more. If ESP and telekinesis are powers, and not really considered senses due to the abilities exhibited, this “sixth sense” should also be classified as a power.
LaFever believes the real sixth sense we all possess, is on a level that is spiritual in nature. And not even a “sixth sense”, but a “seventh sense”. And not a “power” either. LaFever believes the “sixth sense” rests one level up, on the emotional plane, that being common sense. When we “know better”, from knowledge and previous experience as it relates to what is pefceived as right or wrong, ethically, morally, etc. The seventh sense, subsequently rests one level higher, on the spiritual level, that being “intuition”. Knowing what’s about to happen, but only due to previous experiences, and not for sure, as in Radar’s case, combined with common sense. This “intuition” is more commonly known as, “a gut feeling”. You’ve been there, done that. Others refer to it as your “conscience”. Even more so, there are those who consider this sense as that of the Word Of God. God as your conscience. At a location you shouldn’t be surprised to hear: the heart. How existential.
LaFever has it figured out, though. Five physical senses (sight, hearing, taste, smell, and touch), one emotional sense (common sense) as #6, and one spiritual sense (intuition) as #7. Sounds a lot like dimensions. First dimension is a point, second is a straight line, third adds depth. All on a physical plane. Enter the fourth and fifth dimension – time and space. A whole ‘nother paper, for sure. But for now . . .
LaFever leaves you with this zen riddle:
“Why do those with special “powers”, “sense” things others do not?”
For Sale
Sales. Marketing. Synonyms? Or similarities. For every person that says they are different, albeit similar, there’s someone that says they are one and the same. To answer that question, all you have to do is look at any company that sells something, whether it’s a product or service. There’s a Marketing Department, and then there’s a Sales Division. Department vs Division. Sounds similar, huh? A Department consists of a team of individuals working together for one cause. A Division is made up of individuals working independently, for the cause of the company, but ultimately, for one’s own survival; also, the combination of several departments. Not all Divisions are like this, though. But the Sales Division is self-explanatory – divide being the root word here.
Marketing – the art of advertising a product or service to a particular section of the public via media outlets such as printed ads, television commercials, and the internet, among others. Nothing is sold. Only brought to the attention of the buyer. Sales, on the other hand, is the hands-on connection to the buyer and the attempt to actually sell the product or service, either directly, or through some sort of barter or trade for other products or services.
I love Marketing, but I hate Sales. It’s a personal thing. And not because I can’t sell. Nooo, it’s because I hate selling. Unless it’s something I can get behind 100%. Which is the wrong reason to go into Sales. Unless you plan to sell the same thing for the rest of your life. How many in Sales believe in their product or service 100%? Most in Sales are in Sales because they can sell. What they’re selling doesn’t matter. And that leads to you not mattering. And that’s the part I hate. Trying to sell you something you either don’t have, thought you didn’t need, and probably want. Their livelihood depends on it. Their commission check at the end of the month depends on it.
I’ve done both, briefly, so I suppose it would be easy for a veteran to point out the inconsistencies in my theories. Maybe. But most of my experience is in Purchasing, in the corporate sector, as the buyer/customer. I’ve heard every line, angle and approach there is. My answers come quick and unexpected. The best example I can give you, which is my usual general response, is when office supply and toner companies come calling.
First and foremost, the selling point has always been pricing. No exception. I’ve yet to receive a call where anything was being offered other than better pricing. And the first thing I always reply with is I have contract pricing. They know what this is and I know they know this, but they always say they can beat my supplier by 20%. I always reply, “Of course you can. You weren’t paying attention. You can beat my supplier’s prices by 20% assuming I’m paying retail cost. I just told you I have contract pricing. You’re insulting my intelligence. Contract pricing is 25% below retail.”
As expected, their response is always to the effect of, ‘don’t you want to save your company money?’ Always. But what salespeople fail to realize is that pricing is negotiable, service is more important. If you can match or beat my supplier’s prices, all I have to do is go to my supplier and request a lower price. And I’ll get it.
The difference here is service, which is what they’ll never understand, considering how many times I’ve had to explain it to them. If the service is superior, why change. Especially for pricing that can be renegotiated any time. If the service is just good, that’s okay. Issues will always arise, but if they are taken care of expeditiously, there’s still no need to change. That’s a part of the service area: crisis management. The other important factor here is the amount of time, energy, cost and training to switch to another company. Remember: if it’s a national account, chances are, all offices are linked together. Even after explaining all this, they usually still push their pricing, I simply hang up. They just don’t get it.
Or do, but don’t let on, and almost always go back to pricing. My favorite laugh is when they throw in the line, “Give us the chance and you won’t be sorry.” As if that’s a guarantee. If I switch from what I have and know to something I’ve never known, I guarantee you, I will be sorry.
Click. Click. Boom.
Marketing – the art of advertising a product or service to a particular section of the public via media outlets such as printed ads, television commercials, and the internet, among others. Nothing is sold. Only brought to the attention of the buyer. Sales, on the other hand, is the hands-on connection to the buyer and the attempt to actually sell the product or service, either directly, or through some sort of barter or trade for other products or services.
I love Marketing, but I hate Sales. It’s a personal thing. And not because I can’t sell. Nooo, it’s because I hate selling. Unless it’s something I can get behind 100%. Which is the wrong reason to go into Sales. Unless you plan to sell the same thing for the rest of your life. How many in Sales believe in their product or service 100%? Most in Sales are in Sales because they can sell. What they’re selling doesn’t matter. And that leads to you not mattering. And that’s the part I hate. Trying to sell you something you either don’t have, thought you didn’t need, and probably want. Their livelihood depends on it. Their commission check at the end of the month depends on it.
I’ve done both, briefly, so I suppose it would be easy for a veteran to point out the inconsistencies in my theories. Maybe. But most of my experience is in Purchasing, in the corporate sector, as the buyer/customer. I’ve heard every line, angle and approach there is. My answers come quick and unexpected. The best example I can give you, which is my usual general response, is when office supply and toner companies come calling.
First and foremost, the selling point has always been pricing. No exception. I’ve yet to receive a call where anything was being offered other than better pricing. And the first thing I always reply with is I have contract pricing. They know what this is and I know they know this, but they always say they can beat my supplier by 20%. I always reply, “Of course you can. You weren’t paying attention. You can beat my supplier’s prices by 20% assuming I’m paying retail cost. I just told you I have contract pricing. You’re insulting my intelligence. Contract pricing is 25% below retail.”
As expected, their response is always to the effect of, ‘don’t you want to save your company money?’ Always. But what salespeople fail to realize is that pricing is negotiable, service is more important. If you can match or beat my supplier’s prices, all I have to do is go to my supplier and request a lower price. And I’ll get it.
The difference here is service, which is what they’ll never understand, considering how many times I’ve had to explain it to them. If the service is superior, why change. Especially for pricing that can be renegotiated any time. If the service is just good, that’s okay. Issues will always arise, but if they are taken care of expeditiously, there’s still no need to change. That’s a part of the service area: crisis management. The other important factor here is the amount of time, energy, cost and training to switch to another company. Remember: if it’s a national account, chances are, all offices are linked together. Even after explaining all this, they usually still push their pricing, I simply hang up. They just don’t get it.
Or do, but don’t let on, and almost always go back to pricing. My favorite laugh is when they throw in the line, “Give us the chance and you won’t be sorry.” As if that’s a guarantee. If I switch from what I have and know to something I’ve never known, I guarantee you, I will be sorry.
Click. Click. Boom.
The Golden Rule
“He who has the gold, makes the rules.” Nothing could be more truthful today than this old adage. Then again, even more so today, it isn’t who has the most gold, but who pulls the purse strings. Money and power. With money, comes a certain degree of power. With power, money is secondary. But, damn, if you have both…imagine the possibilities, or damage…
Obviously, the first impression here is that this is about politics. Nah. Too deep and complex for LaFevre to delve into. Too many issues. Too many speculations, and conspiracies. Not worth the stress. Hell, LaFevre is a liberal arts major, not poli-sci. Although politics is a major playground, for sure. You can play your game wherever, but Capitol Hill is where you aspire to. Definitely the “A” division. Other industries occupying the “A” division would be the military complex and corporate sector. Everywhere else is “minor league”.
I had a difficult time grappling with how to construct the grid that would define the titles in each of the categories. Do I arrange them side-by-side? Top to bottom? Bottom to top? Frustrating. Some can’t even be put aside others. Both feet first, I always say. Here goes…
Government (democracy):
President, Vice-President, Congress, Governor, Mayor, Supervisor/City Council. There are numerous other posts at the federal, state and local levels, such as administrators, directors, and managers. All others are associates and assistants.
Government (monarchy):
King/Queen/Emperor, Prince/Princess, Prime Minister/Premier, Parliament. Ancient honorable mention: Pharoah (gotta love that title). The difference today between the monarchy and democracy is that the kings and emperors are classified as figureheads (although some presidents are, as well). While power remains intact, rule is actually governed by the next in line – the prime minister, premier, and in some cultures, majority rule by a congressional/parliamentary body. This ensures no one person has complete control. More often than not, 2/3 of the majority is enough to override a higher authority. Keeps athe balance of power.
Exceptions exist, though. Certain countries with kings in power, are still ruled by the kings themselves (ie. Arab emirates and some African countries). Then there are the dictators who rule without rules, or the possibility of overrule.
Military:
General, Colonel, Major, Captain, Lieutenant, Corporal, Sergeant, Private. I left out the tweeners because they are obvious and do not need to be listed here (ie. sergeant-major, lieutenant general). Of course, I’m using the US list. It varies in other countries. Other military hierarchies are common in countries where the military rule as a dictatorship. In this case, they are simply whatever their military rank is (usually general). They took over by force rather than by a vote of the people. They don’t deserve an official government title, and are merely referred to as dictators. Not exactly a title to be revered by.
Corporate:
Chairman, board of directors, CEO/President, executive VP/Managing Directors, senior VP/Directors, assistant/associate VP’s. The rest are administrators, managers, supervisors, specialists, and coordinators.
Of the three, it is the corporate title that should be taken with a grain of salt. At least the majority that sit in middle management. Take, for example, Vice President. In the corporate sector, “vice president” don’t mean shit. Everyone is a “vice president”. If you’re a “vice president” as a result of reaching a certain quota or income for the firm, in general, or for tenure, you’re just like everyone else. No voting privileges. No benefit from corporate profits. No stock options. Talk to me when you reach “senior” or “executive” vice president. Until then…
The other title similar in nature but holding more water is “director”. There are two types of “directors”. Members of a “board of directors” that govern a publicly-traded company, and the “directors” of a private company, who hold a stake in that company. The difference: the “board of directors” are elected to that board by a vote of the shareholders. As is often the case, free seats are given to the shareholders with the highest stake in the company. So these “directors” are appointed by the shareholders while the “directors” of a private company “buy in” to the company. Sort of like employee-owned, but not exactly. Not anyone can just do that. You have to be selected to do so. I’m just happy I get a bonus.
Other sectors
Martial Arts:
Chinese Sifu/Japanese Sensei/Korean Shidoshi, instructors, students. Pretty cut & dry in the dojo. There are differences though, but only in color. For example, the martial arts titles are in their colors, representing levels or advancement from beginner, to intermediate, and advanced. Most of the Chinese kung fu styles don’t use a belt system. The top post is sifu. Their theory is you never stop learning. You move from style (or animal) to another. I’ve attended three kung fu schools. Two were traditional, one was contemporary. The difference here is, the traditional ones don’t teach for monetary gain (profit). And gaining acceptance is through an intermediary. The contemporary school is run as a business, and for profit. In order to do so, a belt system is installed, similar to that of Japan and Korea.
My third kung fu school’s belt system was as follows: yellow, yellow w/green stripe, green, green w/red stripe, red, red w/brown stripe, brown, brown w/black stripe, black. That’s eight levels. And four years. Karate, from Japan, only has six – white, yellow, green, blue, brown, black, but takes the same amount of time (each level took longer to attain). Tae Kwon Do (and others) from Korea, had eight – white, yellow, orange, green, blue, purple, brown, black. Two extra colors, same amount of time. Some theorize adding extra levels and shortening the duration, kept the students involved and in attendance. I found it was more about the money. You attended a certain number of classes, and advanced, whether you knew the forms and moves or not. Those who excelled at a quicker pace, were not advanced accordingly, to keep others from becoming disenchanted. The more things differ, the more they are the same (LaFevre variation).
Organized crime:
Boss, Under-Boss, Capo (captain), crew. We can’t forget one of the oldest title structures existing today simply because their whole network is based on illegal franchises. Nonetheless, they operate in the same fashion as the top three. And in many cases, in tandem. But for all intent and purposes, for what I know, uh, I’m invoking “omerta”. I know nothing. Fuggettaboutit.
Religion:
Pope, Cardinal, Archbishop, Bishop, Monsignor, Reverend/Father, Brother, Sister (nun). One of the oldest in existence today. Older than OC, in fact. And possibly just as corrupt. As evident by its history. The Catholic Church. No one group has killed more people in the name of God over the last 2000 years than The Catholic Church. But this isn’t a piece on history. It’s about titles. Which brings me to the final level.
Spiritual/Other-Worldly:
Allah, God, Yahweh. I only know three. I put them in alphabetical order to avoid confrontation and offense. You know the first and last would have a problem with this order. Well, if the last one didn’t start with a “Y”, then it wouldn’t be last, would it? So be it. (Besides, who would you rather NOT piss off, the followers of the first, or the followers of the last?)
Of course, gold, for gold’s relation to the golden rule, is manipulated to represent more than it’s actual value. Just like DeBeers does with the world’s diamond supply. It’s been obvious for centuries, the power brokers, the movers and shakers, the ones behind the scenes, are the true puppetmasters pulling all the strings. It is these individuals that put those into power, and subsequently, remove them from power, lending credence to the conspiracy connotations, without actually proving it. We’ll never know if the figurehead is a player in the process, or not. And given the obvious, penultimate excuse called: deniability.
Honorable Mentions:
Head Honcho, Head Cheese, Big Cheese, Big Kahuna, Top Dog, Top Banana, kingpin, Grand Poobah, The Man… (nice how they all just fell in line)
LaFevre’s favorite is this, but more along the lines of someone who thinks they are, but in reality:
“You think you’re hot shit on a silver platter;
but you’re really cool diarrhea on a paper plate.”
Obviously, the first impression here is that this is about politics. Nah. Too deep and complex for LaFevre to delve into. Too many issues. Too many speculations, and conspiracies. Not worth the stress. Hell, LaFevre is a liberal arts major, not poli-sci. Although politics is a major playground, for sure. You can play your game wherever, but Capitol Hill is where you aspire to. Definitely the “A” division. Other industries occupying the “A” division would be the military complex and corporate sector. Everywhere else is “minor league”.
I had a difficult time grappling with how to construct the grid that would define the titles in each of the categories. Do I arrange them side-by-side? Top to bottom? Bottom to top? Frustrating. Some can’t even be put aside others. Both feet first, I always say. Here goes…
Government (democracy):
President, Vice-President, Congress, Governor, Mayor, Supervisor/City Council. There are numerous other posts at the federal, state and local levels, such as administrators, directors, and managers. All others are associates and assistants.
Government (monarchy):
King/Queen/Emperor, Prince/Princess, Prime Minister/Premier, Parliament. Ancient honorable mention: Pharoah (gotta love that title). The difference today between the monarchy and democracy is that the kings and emperors are classified as figureheads (although some presidents are, as well). While power remains intact, rule is actually governed by the next in line – the prime minister, premier, and in some cultures, majority rule by a congressional/parliamentary body. This ensures no one person has complete control. More often than not, 2/3 of the majority is enough to override a higher authority. Keeps athe balance of power.
Exceptions exist, though. Certain countries with kings in power, are still ruled by the kings themselves (ie. Arab emirates and some African countries). Then there are the dictators who rule without rules, or the possibility of overrule.
Military:
General, Colonel, Major, Captain, Lieutenant, Corporal, Sergeant, Private. I left out the tweeners because they are obvious and do not need to be listed here (ie. sergeant-major, lieutenant general). Of course, I’m using the US list. It varies in other countries. Other military hierarchies are common in countries where the military rule as a dictatorship. In this case, they are simply whatever their military rank is (usually general). They took over by force rather than by a vote of the people. They don’t deserve an official government title, and are merely referred to as dictators. Not exactly a title to be revered by.
Corporate:
Chairman, board of directors, CEO/President, executive VP/Managing Directors, senior VP/Directors, assistant/associate VP’s. The rest are administrators, managers, supervisors, specialists, and coordinators.
Of the three, it is the corporate title that should be taken with a grain of salt. At least the majority that sit in middle management. Take, for example, Vice President. In the corporate sector, “vice president” don’t mean shit. Everyone is a “vice president”. If you’re a “vice president” as a result of reaching a certain quota or income for the firm, in general, or for tenure, you’re just like everyone else. No voting privileges. No benefit from corporate profits. No stock options. Talk to me when you reach “senior” or “executive” vice president. Until then…
The other title similar in nature but holding more water is “director”. There are two types of “directors”. Members of a “board of directors” that govern a publicly-traded company, and the “directors” of a private company, who hold a stake in that company. The difference: the “board of directors” are elected to that board by a vote of the shareholders. As is often the case, free seats are given to the shareholders with the highest stake in the company. So these “directors” are appointed by the shareholders while the “directors” of a private company “buy in” to the company. Sort of like employee-owned, but not exactly. Not anyone can just do that. You have to be selected to do so. I’m just happy I get a bonus.
Other sectors
Martial Arts:
Chinese Sifu/Japanese Sensei/Korean Shidoshi, instructors, students. Pretty cut & dry in the dojo. There are differences though, but only in color. For example, the martial arts titles are in their colors, representing levels or advancement from beginner, to intermediate, and advanced. Most of the Chinese kung fu styles don’t use a belt system. The top post is sifu. Their theory is you never stop learning. You move from style (or animal) to another. I’ve attended three kung fu schools. Two were traditional, one was contemporary. The difference here is, the traditional ones don’t teach for monetary gain (profit). And gaining acceptance is through an intermediary. The contemporary school is run as a business, and for profit. In order to do so, a belt system is installed, similar to that of Japan and Korea.
My third kung fu school’s belt system was as follows: yellow, yellow w/green stripe, green, green w/red stripe, red, red w/brown stripe, brown, brown w/black stripe, black. That’s eight levels. And four years. Karate, from Japan, only has six – white, yellow, green, blue, brown, black, but takes the same amount of time (each level took longer to attain). Tae Kwon Do (and others) from Korea, had eight – white, yellow, orange, green, blue, purple, brown, black. Two extra colors, same amount of time. Some theorize adding extra levels and shortening the duration, kept the students involved and in attendance. I found it was more about the money. You attended a certain number of classes, and advanced, whether you knew the forms and moves or not. Those who excelled at a quicker pace, were not advanced accordingly, to keep others from becoming disenchanted. The more things differ, the more they are the same (LaFevre variation).
Organized crime:
Boss, Under-Boss, Capo (captain), crew. We can’t forget one of the oldest title structures existing today simply because their whole network is based on illegal franchises. Nonetheless, they operate in the same fashion as the top three. And in many cases, in tandem. But for all intent and purposes, for what I know, uh, I’m invoking “omerta”. I know nothing. Fuggettaboutit.
Religion:
Pope, Cardinal, Archbishop, Bishop, Monsignor, Reverend/Father, Brother, Sister (nun). One of the oldest in existence today. Older than OC, in fact. And possibly just as corrupt. As evident by its history. The Catholic Church. No one group has killed more people in the name of God over the last 2000 years than The Catholic Church. But this isn’t a piece on history. It’s about titles. Which brings me to the final level.
Spiritual/Other-Worldly:
Allah, God, Yahweh. I only know three. I put them in alphabetical order to avoid confrontation and offense. You know the first and last would have a problem with this order. Well, if the last one didn’t start with a “Y”, then it wouldn’t be last, would it? So be it. (Besides, who would you rather NOT piss off, the followers of the first, or the followers of the last?)
Of course, gold, for gold’s relation to the golden rule, is manipulated to represent more than it’s actual value. Just like DeBeers does with the world’s diamond supply. It’s been obvious for centuries, the power brokers, the movers and shakers, the ones behind the scenes, are the true puppetmasters pulling all the strings. It is these individuals that put those into power, and subsequently, remove them from power, lending credence to the conspiracy connotations, without actually proving it. We’ll never know if the figurehead is a player in the process, or not. And given the obvious, penultimate excuse called: deniability.
Honorable Mentions:
Head Honcho, Head Cheese, Big Cheese, Big Kahuna, Top Dog, Top Banana, kingpin, Grand Poobah, The Man… (nice how they all just fell in line)
LaFevre’s favorite is this, but more along the lines of someone who thinks they are, but in reality:
“You think you’re hot shit on a silver platter;
but you’re really cool diarrhea on a paper plate.”
In more ways than one. Actually, there’s only two. If there are others, they are certainly dwarfed by these two. #1 – out of stock, and #2 – going back on your word for the benefit of the quick payday, monetary, or otherwise. Also known as CAPITALISM. One, we tolerate temporarily, however unfortunate. The other, intolerable, through a betrayal of trust. This brief overview is about #2.
There are enough books on this subject to fill not just a shelf, but an aisle. And the majority of those books are filled with references to studies, statistics, and instances that occurred. Even more prevalent are the anecdotes and philosophies espoused, to explain to everyone how and why things are the way they are. Repunzel never had it so easy.
But I digress. This is not exactly about selling out. It’s about ‘supply & demand’. I simply used ‘sold out’ as a title because it was catchy, but even more so, ‘sold out’ is what happens when people take advantage of the ‘supply & demand’. They go hand-in-hand. All under the guise of CAPITALISM.
Capitalism. The art of making money. Originally, by any means necessary. Under the watchful eyes of Government. If one entity grew too large, for whatever reason, some by illegal means, laws were enacted to even the playing field. One way entities dominated was by hording supply to increase demand because of a perceived deficit. The smaller the supply combined with a higher demand, resulted in a higher price. Simple enough. It’s the standard formula ‘capitalism’ was based on. Unfortunately, the stronger some became, the weaker others became. ‘Supply & demand’ became ‘sellers & buyers’. Rich and poor. Albeit speculative, you can bet Government got a piece of the action. The biggest entity of this practice, and still dominates to this day, without so much as a whimper, is DeBeers. The world’s largest diamond merchant, headquartered in South Africa. They sit on the world’s largest supply of diamonds, but only release a small amount at a time, which keeps the demand high, and for a higher price. The ultimate example of market domination. We’re still a long way off on ‘monopoly law’ on a world scale. They continue to rule untouched and unscathed. Use this piece of economic dominance the next time someone is expecting a diamond as a gift. (Sorry ladies.)
Why is it said these days the ‘middle class’ is disappearing? Is it possible the ‘middle class’ make up those who are ‘buyers’ AND ‘sellers’? Caught between a rock and a hard place? Buying on a small scale and selling at a mark-up in order to stay ahead? And in the process, being undercut because the larger entities are producing and selling in bulk, at a lower price, putting the small business, out of business? Capitalism? Or legal indirect extortion?
Politics play a major role. A small business attempting to open a store in a particular neighborhood, is subject to permit approval by the business community in that neighborhood, along with several homeowners’ associations surrounding that neighborhood, and local government agencies. Most of the disputes these days has to do with ‘chain-stores’. And the businesses teaming with the homeowners’ associations wield absolute power. How? Pressure on District Supervisors and City Council members. What’s at stake? Profits. Translated: Capitalism. Not to mention some of the politicians have investments at stake, whether it be their businesses nearby, or membership in those HOA’s. Sounds like a conflict-of-interest to me.
Even as we speak (2008), oil prices are at an all-time high, resulting in an unprecedented $4.00 per gallon at the pump (June, 2008), and going up. A direct result of the price of oil being imported into the US. Gas station franchise owners are your classic example of ‘middle class’. They are charged higher prices by the oil companies, and, in order to stay ahead, for the purpose of profit, the cost is passed on to the consumer. Did you know the cost of a liter (approximately a quart) of fuel in the Middle East is 12c? That’s 50c a gallon. At the source. The US supply is drying up. There’s even a proposal to free up reserves in the Alaskan territory that have been off-limits all this time. Same goes for off-shore drilling in the Pacific ocean off the West Coast, putting the protected marine life at stake. Capitalism.
But this should come as no surprise to the average ‘joe’ up on current events. Everyone and their mother complain about the rising costs. They see the documented record profits enjoyed by the oil companies. And everyone wonders how they still profit from the rising prices? Uh, welcome to “Capitalism 101”.
They’ve always profited greatly. When oil import prices go up, the price for fuel goes up. The question is, why is the oil import price going up? Production hasn’t slowed. Could it be the science reports about oil drying up around the world are fueling (pun intended) a backlash now? Does control of imports from foreign countries play into it? And, brace yourself, is the knowledge that the US is the largest consumer of oil/fuel in the world, have an effect on the price, bottom line? Capitalism, baby.
The ‘trickle-down-theory’ used by Reagan in the 80’s to explain his economics was, in reality, the definition of ‘supply & demand’. Same goes for every item you buy on the shelf, wherever you shop. When the manufacturer’s cost rises, due to raw goods diminishing, rather than absorb the loss, the price goes up to make up the difference. The next in line (wholesaler) subsequently raises their price to the retailer, who already marks up the price, but now even higher, to the consumer. We, as the consumer, always pay in the end. Funny how it starts as a trickle in the beginning, but ends up a waterfall when it reaches us.
Bottom line: If I ran Chevron or Exxon, the price would be the same. Supply & demand. The US is filled with gas-guzzling machines. Parking is dwindling. The dependency on fuel is at excessive proportions. People will pay, no matter what. And there’s not a goddamn thing anyone can do about it. And do you know what that’s called, when you suck it up, swallow your pride and realize that it is what it is, and ‘government’ can’t do anything, even though they’re profiting as well?
C A P I T A L I S M
There are enough books on this subject to fill not just a shelf, but an aisle. And the majority of those books are filled with references to studies, statistics, and instances that occurred. Even more prevalent are the anecdotes and philosophies espoused, to explain to everyone how and why things are the way they are. Repunzel never had it so easy.
But I digress. This is not exactly about selling out. It’s about ‘supply & demand’. I simply used ‘sold out’ as a title because it was catchy, but even more so, ‘sold out’ is what happens when people take advantage of the ‘supply & demand’. They go hand-in-hand. All under the guise of CAPITALISM.
Capitalism. The art of making money. Originally, by any means necessary. Under the watchful eyes of Government. If one entity grew too large, for whatever reason, some by illegal means, laws were enacted to even the playing field. One way entities dominated was by hording supply to increase demand because of a perceived deficit. The smaller the supply combined with a higher demand, resulted in a higher price. Simple enough. It’s the standard formula ‘capitalism’ was based on. Unfortunately, the stronger some became, the weaker others became. ‘Supply & demand’ became ‘sellers & buyers’. Rich and poor. Albeit speculative, you can bet Government got a piece of the action. The biggest entity of this practice, and still dominates to this day, without so much as a whimper, is DeBeers. The world’s largest diamond merchant, headquartered in South Africa. They sit on the world’s largest supply of diamonds, but only release a small amount at a time, which keeps the demand high, and for a higher price. The ultimate example of market domination. We’re still a long way off on ‘monopoly law’ on a world scale. They continue to rule untouched and unscathed. Use this piece of economic dominance the next time someone is expecting a diamond as a gift. (Sorry ladies.)
Why is it said these days the ‘middle class’ is disappearing? Is it possible the ‘middle class’ make up those who are ‘buyers’ AND ‘sellers’? Caught between a rock and a hard place? Buying on a small scale and selling at a mark-up in order to stay ahead? And in the process, being undercut because the larger entities are producing and selling in bulk, at a lower price, putting the small business, out of business? Capitalism? Or legal indirect extortion?
Politics play a major role. A small business attempting to open a store in a particular neighborhood, is subject to permit approval by the business community in that neighborhood, along with several homeowners’ associations surrounding that neighborhood, and local government agencies. Most of the disputes these days has to do with ‘chain-stores’. And the businesses teaming with the homeowners’ associations wield absolute power. How? Pressure on District Supervisors and City Council members. What’s at stake? Profits. Translated: Capitalism. Not to mention some of the politicians have investments at stake, whether it be their businesses nearby, or membership in those HOA’s. Sounds like a conflict-of-interest to me.
Even as we speak (2008), oil prices are at an all-time high, resulting in an unprecedented $4.00 per gallon at the pump (June, 2008), and going up. A direct result of the price of oil being imported into the US. Gas station franchise owners are your classic example of ‘middle class’. They are charged higher prices by the oil companies, and, in order to stay ahead, for the purpose of profit, the cost is passed on to the consumer. Did you know the cost of a liter (approximately a quart) of fuel in the Middle East is 12c? That’s 50c a gallon. At the source. The US supply is drying up. There’s even a proposal to free up reserves in the Alaskan territory that have been off-limits all this time. Same goes for off-shore drilling in the Pacific ocean off the West Coast, putting the protected marine life at stake. Capitalism.
But this should come as no surprise to the average ‘joe’ up on current events. Everyone and their mother complain about the rising costs. They see the documented record profits enjoyed by the oil companies. And everyone wonders how they still profit from the rising prices? Uh, welcome to “Capitalism 101”.
They’ve always profited greatly. When oil import prices go up, the price for fuel goes up. The question is, why is the oil import price going up? Production hasn’t slowed. Could it be the science reports about oil drying up around the world are fueling (pun intended) a backlash now? Does control of imports from foreign countries play into it? And, brace yourself, is the knowledge that the US is the largest consumer of oil/fuel in the world, have an effect on the price, bottom line? Capitalism, baby.
The ‘trickle-down-theory’ used by Reagan in the 80’s to explain his economics was, in reality, the definition of ‘supply & demand’. Same goes for every item you buy on the shelf, wherever you shop. When the manufacturer’s cost rises, due to raw goods diminishing, rather than absorb the loss, the price goes up to make up the difference. The next in line (wholesaler) subsequently raises their price to the retailer, who already marks up the price, but now even higher, to the consumer. We, as the consumer, always pay in the end. Funny how it starts as a trickle in the beginning, but ends up a waterfall when it reaches us.
Bottom line: If I ran Chevron or Exxon, the price would be the same. Supply & demand. The US is filled with gas-guzzling machines. Parking is dwindling. The dependency on fuel is at excessive proportions. People will pay, no matter what. And there’s not a goddamn thing anyone can do about it. And do you know what that’s called, when you suck it up, swallow your pride and realize that it is what it is, and ‘government’ can’t do anything, even though they’re profiting as well?
C A P I T A L I S M
(Un)Necessary Evil
What's in a name, you say? What is going on with all the corporate sponsorships?! Everything has a company name on it now. It's only a matter of time before Joe Robbie Stadium and Wrigley Field fall prey to the corporate raiders.
Even as we speak, the Golden Gate Bridge is in danger of corporate interference. Okay, so we invite their investments to keep our costs down. Eventually it goes up. And forget about the concession stands. It's just like the movie theater. The ticket sales, just like the movie theatre box office proceeds, go to the team (box office goes to the film company). The stadium, like the theater, makes its money at the concession stand. The hot dogs and sodas are their bread and butter. (Wah. Wah. Wah.)
Unless you encounter a situation such as what we have here in San Francisco; namely PacBell Park. It's currently AT&T Park, even though it used to be SBC Park, I still call it PacBell Park. Why? Because it was PacBell that made the investment for construction. I'll be the first to admit they deserve to have their name on it. Not SBC. Or AT&T. Why? Because SBC bought PacBell, who were soon bought by AT&T. SBC and AT&T did not invest in it. But if you can't call it SBC or AT&T Park, what do you call it? PacBell no longer exists.
I even flipped out when my NASCAR Cup Series changed from Winston to Nextel. Of course, then I realized Winston was a sponsor as well. And a cigarette, no less. I guess I should be glad, since I'm a non-smoker. So, we have to sorta live with the name changes every two years. I can't even remember what Candlestick Park was called, in between 3COM and Monster. I remember it was a dot.com company. And they went out of business 6 months after. And their name was on every cup holder in the park. All 35,000. I still call it the Stick, though.
That's all you have to remember, folks. Take the corporate money, and call it whatever you want. That's what's important. Heyyyyy...batter batter batter batter batter, swing batter...he cannot, he cannot, he cannot, a' swing batter...
Even as we speak, the Golden Gate Bridge is in danger of corporate interference. Okay, so we invite their investments to keep our costs down. Eventually it goes up. And forget about the concession stands. It's just like the movie theater. The ticket sales, just like the movie theatre box office proceeds, go to the team (box office goes to the film company). The stadium, like the theater, makes its money at the concession stand. The hot dogs and sodas are their bread and butter. (Wah. Wah. Wah.)
Unless you encounter a situation such as what we have here in San Francisco; namely PacBell Park. It's currently AT&T Park, even though it used to be SBC Park, I still call it PacBell Park. Why? Because it was PacBell that made the investment for construction. I'll be the first to admit they deserve to have their name on it. Not SBC. Or AT&T. Why? Because SBC bought PacBell, who were soon bought by AT&T. SBC and AT&T did not invest in it. But if you can't call it SBC or AT&T Park, what do you call it? PacBell no longer exists.
I even flipped out when my NASCAR Cup Series changed from Winston to Nextel. Of course, then I realized Winston was a sponsor as well. And a cigarette, no less. I guess I should be glad, since I'm a non-smoker. So, we have to sorta live with the name changes every two years. I can't even remember what Candlestick Park was called, in between 3COM and Monster. I remember it was a dot.com company. And they went out of business 6 months after. And their name was on every cup holder in the park. All 35,000. I still call it the Stick, though.
That's all you have to remember, folks. Take the corporate money, and call it whatever you want. That's what's important. Heyyyyy...batter batter batter batter batter, swing batter...he cannot, he cannot, he cannot, a' swing batter...
Like A Rainbow
We all learned from childhood that when you use all the crayons, it comes out black. So, most people assume black was the combination of all colors and white was the absence of all colors, since the paper was white before it was colored. All evidence to the contrary. And the teachers should have explained this back then, to keep this misinformation from lasting as long as it did.
The color spectrum originated from, and is based on, light. No, not the light on your desk or hanging from your ceiling. That’s artificial light. More on that later, for enlightenment purposes only and mostly for those working indoors, predominantly the office environment.
Light is the combination of all colors. Each color has a specific frequency, like radio waves, that travel through our atmosphere. This is why the sky appears blue. I know what you’re thinking; where did that come from? For some reason that only expert scientists know, but I understand in a limited capacity, is that our atmosphere, for all the things it does and is responsible for, most notably, giving us the ability to breathe, and I’m certainly thankful for, is made up of certain properties which allow it to do what it does best, among other things, but for our issue at hand, is that only the lowest frequency is able to pass through. Each frequency is represented by a different color. The lowest frequency is blue, thus the blue sky.
Back to light. You need proof? Look at the title. The rainbow itself. A fantastic illusion of light, created by a mixture of warm and cold fronts, clouds, fog, and smog, for what it’s worth, and any number of chemical gases rising from the earth, natural, and/or manmade. (Don’t ask where the pot-of-gold urban legend came from. I don’t have a clue. Google it.) Case in point: ever notice that when you see a rainbow, it is always at a distance? Never overhead. So, basically, you can never find or go to the end of the rainbow.
The term ‘rainbow’ has evolved and transcended it’s original meaning to that of something, anything, containing or possessing all of the primary and intermediate (secondary) colors. Another example uses a different element, yet achieves the same effect. Oil and water. Yeah, yeah, they don’t mix. I was born during the day, but not yesterday. Who hasn’t seen beside the curb or in a driveway, a rainbow in the puddle. It isn’t just water you’re looking at. That’s water and oil. It isn’t a rainbow in the rainbow sense, such as the one you see as a half-arc in the sky, but a mixture of the same colors. That puddle mixture creates a swirl of these colors. But oil and water? Oil is black and water is clear. The answer is light. The colors appear only when shed upon by light. If it’s foggy, nada. Nighttime? Uh, no.
The standard 8-piece crayon box is a masterpiece of modern science. It goes in order from primary to secondary to the next primary, with each secondary being the combination of the preceding primary and the next primary. What?? Red, orange, yellow, green, blue, black, brown purple. Red and orange becomes yellow. Yellow and blue becomes green. Blue and back to red becomes purple. Unfortunately, just like science, there is always a flaw, a discrepancy, that is never realized or understood, and left in as an extra. And written off. In this case, the two remaining colors are brown and black. (This may be why martial arts levels follow the same scheme, but because brown and black are out of order, and unrelated to any of the other colors, are place last in the curriculum. Ever notice that all of the belt systems start with white, proceed from the lightest to the darkest, and end in black?)
Back to the basic crayon set of 8. Why is black represented and not white? Because the page is white. Duh. The problem is, where the hell did brown come from. It can’t be a result of a combination of black and white, proportionately speaking. That would be various shades of silver and gray. As gross as it may sound, research on its origination very well may have started with…uh, shit. It doesn’t get any browner than that. And natural, too. Ecchh. (I’d hate to be the scientist doing research on that.)
I have a theory, though, that may shed some light, if it doesn’t explain it outright, but you can’t hold me to it. Going on the basis of colors changing based on the percentage of the mixture, combined with light, and the interpretation by our vision, which is an important factor I might add, brown is a combination of black and orange. Say what? Hear me out. I have a shirt that is black and orange. Yup. A simple shirt. But it’s not the shirt colors that are the key here, but the pattern involved. The shirt is primarily black, with tiny one-millimeter-wide orange diamonds. Up close, it’s black with little orange diamonds. But from afar, and at a passing glance, the shirt appears brown. See? This is where vision, or actually, the illusive aspect involved in the visionary interpretation of the color, gives the impression of a color other than what it actually is. Because of the pattern, the eye unconsciously blends the orange spots with the black background, resulting in the appearance of…brown.
I noticed it first while shopping and it caught my eye. Hey, brown. No wait. Looking closer, little orange diamonds on a black background. Did I just discover the color combination of brown? Even though there’s some scientific evidence that did so decades or centuries ago, that I had yet to be educated on? Hey, it is possible to discover something that’s already been discovered, if you have never seen or experienced it before. So, I decided to put it to the test. The test had to be under the same, or very similar, circumstances, as I had discovered it. By chance, with outside variables as a distraction. Up close and paying attention would not have worked. This research was based on the illusionary aspect.
For a two week period, I asked individuals, friends and strangers, in passing, off the cuff, and/or changing the subject during an extended conversation, to gauge a snap response, eliminating the possibility of an opportunity for a closer look, thus defeating the purpose of the desired effect and confirming the data as empirical, bringing the result of brown closer to fact rather than speculation, or that of an illusion. Nine times out of ten, the response was brown. Cooool.
So, light represents white, and is the combination of all colors and black is the absence of all colors, as in space. Or night. After all, if you can’t see, everything is black. Which makes me wonder? Why do people sweat over what color to paint the bedroom? If the primary use for the bedroom is sleep and sex (more sleep than sex, btw), then the color is a moot point. The light is out and the darkness is black!
Let’s delve briefly into the spectrum, in general. All colors, as infinite as it may seem, are combinations of the primary three; red, yellow and blue. Although if you’ve ever worked in a copy center, the colors are actually magenta, yellow and cyan. It could be these are the true colors, with a modicum of yellow added to magenta to get red, and the same amount of yellow added to cyan to get blue. Who knows. But this is how the color copier works. The colors I mentioned, magenta, yellow and cyan, are the colors of the toner. The machine then mixes to achieve a specific color as it is translated to paper. You can actually bring up the percentage configuration on the panel screen. Throws a huge monkey wrench into it all, doesn’t?
What it comes down to, basically, is ratios. 1:1 color ratio examples: red + yellow = orange, yellow + blue = green, red + blue = purple. How about 2:1 ratios: 2 red + 1 blue = violet, while 1 red + 2 blue = purple. Here’s some other examples of multiple ratios: 2 blue + 1 green = aqua but 1 blue + 2 green yields turquoise.
Society certainly has advanced in their color combination descriptions these days as they are attributed to the colors of fruits, vegetables and flowers. And why not?! They’re the most colorful things on the planet. And natural, too.
Carrot (red + orange), tangerine (orange + yellow), peach (orange + white), salmon (orange + pink), etc. How many other colors can you come up with that have orange in it? How about each of the other colors? Even variations of our black sheep color, brown: beige, tan, sand. Someone was thinking creatively by putting a positive spin on brown. What do they call it now? Earth tones. Niiice.
The color spectrum originated from, and is based on, light. No, not the light on your desk or hanging from your ceiling. That’s artificial light. More on that later, for enlightenment purposes only and mostly for those working indoors, predominantly the office environment.
Light is the combination of all colors. Each color has a specific frequency, like radio waves, that travel through our atmosphere. This is why the sky appears blue. I know what you’re thinking; where did that come from? For some reason that only expert scientists know, but I understand in a limited capacity, is that our atmosphere, for all the things it does and is responsible for, most notably, giving us the ability to breathe, and I’m certainly thankful for, is made up of certain properties which allow it to do what it does best, among other things, but for our issue at hand, is that only the lowest frequency is able to pass through. Each frequency is represented by a different color. The lowest frequency is blue, thus the blue sky.
Back to light. You need proof? Look at the title. The rainbow itself. A fantastic illusion of light, created by a mixture of warm and cold fronts, clouds, fog, and smog, for what it’s worth, and any number of chemical gases rising from the earth, natural, and/or manmade. (Don’t ask where the pot-of-gold urban legend came from. I don’t have a clue. Google it.) Case in point: ever notice that when you see a rainbow, it is always at a distance? Never overhead. So, basically, you can never find or go to the end of the rainbow.
The term ‘rainbow’ has evolved and transcended it’s original meaning to that of something, anything, containing or possessing all of the primary and intermediate (secondary) colors. Another example uses a different element, yet achieves the same effect. Oil and water. Yeah, yeah, they don’t mix. I was born during the day, but not yesterday. Who hasn’t seen beside the curb or in a driveway, a rainbow in the puddle. It isn’t just water you’re looking at. That’s water and oil. It isn’t a rainbow in the rainbow sense, such as the one you see as a half-arc in the sky, but a mixture of the same colors. That puddle mixture creates a swirl of these colors. But oil and water? Oil is black and water is clear. The answer is light. The colors appear only when shed upon by light. If it’s foggy, nada. Nighttime? Uh, no.
The standard 8-piece crayon box is a masterpiece of modern science. It goes in order from primary to secondary to the next primary, with each secondary being the combination of the preceding primary and the next primary. What?? Red, orange, yellow, green, blue, black, brown purple. Red and orange becomes yellow. Yellow and blue becomes green. Blue and back to red becomes purple. Unfortunately, just like science, there is always a flaw, a discrepancy, that is never realized or understood, and left in as an extra. And written off. In this case, the two remaining colors are brown and black. (This may be why martial arts levels follow the same scheme, but because brown and black are out of order, and unrelated to any of the other colors, are place last in the curriculum. Ever notice that all of the belt systems start with white, proceed from the lightest to the darkest, and end in black?)
Back to the basic crayon set of 8. Why is black represented and not white? Because the page is white. Duh. The problem is, where the hell did brown come from. It can’t be a result of a combination of black and white, proportionately speaking. That would be various shades of silver and gray. As gross as it may sound, research on its origination very well may have started with…uh, shit. It doesn’t get any browner than that. And natural, too. Ecchh. (I’d hate to be the scientist doing research on that.)
I have a theory, though, that may shed some light, if it doesn’t explain it outright, but you can’t hold me to it. Going on the basis of colors changing based on the percentage of the mixture, combined with light, and the interpretation by our vision, which is an important factor I might add, brown is a combination of black and orange. Say what? Hear me out. I have a shirt that is black and orange. Yup. A simple shirt. But it’s not the shirt colors that are the key here, but the pattern involved. The shirt is primarily black, with tiny one-millimeter-wide orange diamonds. Up close, it’s black with little orange diamonds. But from afar, and at a passing glance, the shirt appears brown. See? This is where vision, or actually, the illusive aspect involved in the visionary interpretation of the color, gives the impression of a color other than what it actually is. Because of the pattern, the eye unconsciously blends the orange spots with the black background, resulting in the appearance of…brown.
I noticed it first while shopping and it caught my eye. Hey, brown. No wait. Looking closer, little orange diamonds on a black background. Did I just discover the color combination of brown? Even though there’s some scientific evidence that did so decades or centuries ago, that I had yet to be educated on? Hey, it is possible to discover something that’s already been discovered, if you have never seen or experienced it before. So, I decided to put it to the test. The test had to be under the same, or very similar, circumstances, as I had discovered it. By chance, with outside variables as a distraction. Up close and paying attention would not have worked. This research was based on the illusionary aspect.
For a two week period, I asked individuals, friends and strangers, in passing, off the cuff, and/or changing the subject during an extended conversation, to gauge a snap response, eliminating the possibility of an opportunity for a closer look, thus defeating the purpose of the desired effect and confirming the data as empirical, bringing the result of brown closer to fact rather than speculation, or that of an illusion. Nine times out of ten, the response was brown. Cooool.
So, light represents white, and is the combination of all colors and black is the absence of all colors, as in space. Or night. After all, if you can’t see, everything is black. Which makes me wonder? Why do people sweat over what color to paint the bedroom? If the primary use for the bedroom is sleep and sex (more sleep than sex, btw), then the color is a moot point. The light is out and the darkness is black!
Let’s delve briefly into the spectrum, in general. All colors, as infinite as it may seem, are combinations of the primary three; red, yellow and blue. Although if you’ve ever worked in a copy center, the colors are actually magenta, yellow and cyan. It could be these are the true colors, with a modicum of yellow added to magenta to get red, and the same amount of yellow added to cyan to get blue. Who knows. But this is how the color copier works. The colors I mentioned, magenta, yellow and cyan, are the colors of the toner. The machine then mixes to achieve a specific color as it is translated to paper. You can actually bring up the percentage configuration on the panel screen. Throws a huge monkey wrench into it all, doesn’t?
What it comes down to, basically, is ratios. 1:1 color ratio examples: red + yellow = orange, yellow + blue = green, red + blue = purple. How about 2:1 ratios: 2 red + 1 blue = violet, while 1 red + 2 blue = purple. Here’s some other examples of multiple ratios: 2 blue + 1 green = aqua but 1 blue + 2 green yields turquoise.
Society certainly has advanced in their color combination descriptions these days as they are attributed to the colors of fruits, vegetables and flowers. And why not?! They’re the most colorful things on the planet. And natural, too.
Carrot (red + orange), tangerine (orange + yellow), peach (orange + white), salmon (orange + pink), etc. How many other colors can you come up with that have orange in it? How about each of the other colors? Even variations of our black sheep color, brown: beige, tan, sand. Someone was thinking creatively by putting a positive spin on brown. What do they call it now? Earth tones. Niiice.
No Time Like The Present
Time is constant. Wait, a variable. No, time is a constant in its variableness. And you can quote me on that. See, time moves. It doesn't stop. It follows the laws of the universe. Time bends, in the wake of dark energy, and electromagnetic fields. But in the end, it still in continuous motion.So why do we talk about the present? Because mankind has to give everything a name. The present is merely the future becoming the past. That is the name of the process given by mankind.
So you say, "Well, presently..."; that means what you are doing is "becoming the past". The past and the future are "fixed", meaning already-happened and about-to-happen, while the present is "becoming".Everything we think, say or do, becomes history instantly. Of course, if you think before speaking, as everyone should do, then thinking would be the present, really becoming the past, but what you are about to say, is the future. If you say you are going to do something, then speaking becomes the present, and subsequently the past, but what you are about to do is the future.Sooner or later, it's all in the past. So why dwell on it.For now, I'm history.Until then, which could be next week, tomorrow, in 20 minutes, or in a minute. We’ll never know.
So you say, "Well, presently..."; that means what you are doing is "becoming the past". The past and the future are "fixed", meaning already-happened and about-to-happen, while the present is "becoming".Everything we think, say or do, becomes history instantly. Of course, if you think before speaking, as everyone should do, then thinking would be the present, really becoming the past, but what you are about to say, is the future. If you say you are going to do something, then speaking becomes the present, and subsequently the past, but what you are about to do is the future.Sooner or later, it's all in the past. So why dwell on it.For now, I'm history.Until then, which could be next week, tomorrow, in 20 minutes, or in a minute. We’ll never know.
Today Is Yesterday's Tomorrow
Let’s get something straight. Is Sunday the end of the week? Because according to our calendars, Saturday is. For all intent and purposes though, and taking into consideration the predominant workweek that is ruled by corporate America is Monday through Friday, making Sunday the end of the week, we’ll go with Monday through Sunday.
Okay, let’s break it down. We’re going to criss-cross, so pay attention here. Today is Wednesday. Now before we go forward, let’s examine the past. Tuesday was yesterday and Monday was last Monday. Or is it this past Monday. Last Monday implies Monday from last week, and two days ago is still this week, making it this past Monday, according to individuals who I’ll call weeklies. Weeklies are individuals who think by the week rather than by the day. I don’t know about you, but I’m a daily. I think and live day-to-day, not week-to-week. (Technically, we live by the second because according to time, anything can happen at any given time, but that’s another paper.)
We’ve gone from living on a daily basis to a weekly basis. You could almost make a case for calling two days ago “last Monday”. The contractors will always contest it, though, by asking “do you mean this past Monday or last week”. All I have to say is “do you live by the day or by the week, because if it’s by the day, last Monday was two days ago.” If you insist it’s Monday from last week, you’re living by the week, not by the day. Notice if you say last Saturday/Sunday, people automatically think this past Saturday/Sunday. Why? Because our mindset has established Monday as the beginning of the week, so last Saturday/Sunday and this past Saturday/Sunday, although the same in this case, was last week. You can also substitute the term “weekend” in its place and it would have the same outcome.
Fast forward to tomorrow. That would be Thursday. Friday is this Friday, Saturday is this Saturday, and remember, we’re talking about a Monday-Sunday week, Sunday is this Sunday. So, where does that leave Monday. Not this past Monday or last Monday, but the one coming up. Is it next Monday, because it’s next week, or this Monday, because it’s the next Monday coming up. Depends on how you live your life – daily or weekly? Weeklies would say next Monday because it’s next week. Dailies would say this Monday because last Monday was this past Monday. Weeklies would counter with this Monday was this past Monday because it’s still the same week, so since this Monday coming up is next Monday, it’s next Monday. Why do we say a week from last Monday, when weeklies consider last Monday as the Monday from last week? Weeklies contradict themselves. Dailies get it right.
How do you live your life?
Okay, let’s break it down. We’re going to criss-cross, so pay attention here. Today is Wednesday. Now before we go forward, let’s examine the past. Tuesday was yesterday and Monday was last Monday. Or is it this past Monday. Last Monday implies Monday from last week, and two days ago is still this week, making it this past Monday, according to individuals who I’ll call weeklies. Weeklies are individuals who think by the week rather than by the day. I don’t know about you, but I’m a daily. I think and live day-to-day, not week-to-week. (Technically, we live by the second because according to time, anything can happen at any given time, but that’s another paper.)
We’ve gone from living on a daily basis to a weekly basis. You could almost make a case for calling two days ago “last Monday”. The contractors will always contest it, though, by asking “do you mean this past Monday or last week”. All I have to say is “do you live by the day or by the week, because if it’s by the day, last Monday was two days ago.” If you insist it’s Monday from last week, you’re living by the week, not by the day. Notice if you say last Saturday/Sunday, people automatically think this past Saturday/Sunday. Why? Because our mindset has established Monday as the beginning of the week, so last Saturday/Sunday and this past Saturday/Sunday, although the same in this case, was last week. You can also substitute the term “weekend” in its place and it would have the same outcome.
Fast forward to tomorrow. That would be Thursday. Friday is this Friday, Saturday is this Saturday, and remember, we’re talking about a Monday-Sunday week, Sunday is this Sunday. So, where does that leave Monday. Not this past Monday or last Monday, but the one coming up. Is it next Monday, because it’s next week, or this Monday, because it’s the next Monday coming up. Depends on how you live your life – daily or weekly? Weeklies would say next Monday because it’s next week. Dailies would say this Monday because last Monday was this past Monday. Weeklies would counter with this Monday was this past Monday because it’s still the same week, so since this Monday coming up is next Monday, it’s next Monday. Why do we say a week from last Monday, when weeklies consider last Monday as the Monday from last week? Weeklies contradict themselves. Dailies get it right.
How do you live your life?
Greener Patures
The next big thing. The biggest bandwagon to come around in decades. Why? Because it’s a cause, as well as an issue. But I’ve got news for you. You’re a day late and a dollar short. More than a day late and a few dollars short of millions if your goal is to make a difference. Because today, the only difference being made is your well-being. Makes you feel good to recycle that bottle or can, doesn’t it? “Well, geez, LaFeve, better late than never!” Uh, right.
You know ‘green’ has gone mainstream when companies get tax breaks for recycling efforts, not to mention the amount of contributions to environmental charities that are written off as tax-deductible, making it a for-profit move, since that really isn’t charity in the end, is it now? You know ‘green’ has gone mainstream when recycling becomes required, on a governmental and/or corporate level. San Francisco is leading the charge into the future. Why? Because San Francisco is passing laws to make sure you recycle. Recently, it was passed that if any of the recycling bins (blue, green & black) were visible from the street, meaning out on the sidewalk in front of homes and apartment buildings, owners will be fined $100. Make the effort to recycle, and get fined for leaving your bin at the curb. If that isn’t a hypocrisy, I don’t know what is.
Furthermore, there are now trash inspectors looking into people’s trash to see if there are efforts being made to recycle. If not, a notice is issued. No fines or citations. But you know that’s the next step. And all this time I thought it was a matter of conscience, and voluntary by nature. Now, it’s the law. And that’s just the ‘greening’ of the political landscape. Let’s take a look at what else is going on.
For the most part, I agree with the efforts, on an overall scale, as evident in smaller locations. That is how it works. But in a major metropolitan areas, I don’t think so. And SF is a perfect example to represent this environment in all major metropolitan areas, for one reason, and one reason only: entrepreneurs. I refer to them as entrepreneurs because, although many of them are of the homeless variety, many are simply doing it for the money. They serve a purpose, since the items are being recycled, but there’s money to made here. I live and work here in SF, and I see it everyday, in more ways than one.
Let’s start at home. I live in an apartment building. One black garbage bin for garbage. Remember: the blue one is for bottles, cans and paper, and the green is for compost, meaning food items. The black one is for non-recyclables. You know – plastic, and anything that isn’t glass, can, paper, or food. Which covers a lot of ground. The black one is at the bottom of a chute that runs from the top of the back stairwell to the ground floor. The blue one is out in the alley. And there is no green one. Some take there bottles down and set them next to the black bin, while others leave them near the chute on their floor. Does any of the glass end up being collected by the recycling truck on their pickup day? No. There’s nothing in the bin. There’s an old lady with a laundry basket who comes by on the one day the building janitor does his cleaning and mopping. He brings down all the glass left by the chute and she loads up her cart. Yes, it gets recycled, but not by the city. This same woman, and many others I see throughout the day, make it a part of their daily routine to go through neighborhood blue bins for glass and cans. Paper and cardboard recyclers have been doing it for years, going from supermarket to supermarket, corner store to corner store, picking up all the boxes emptied by the store, to be recycled for money.
Now, I don’t have a problem with this. It is being recycled, and someone is making money off it. Cool. That’s ‘capitalism’, and what America is based on. The problem with this scenario is, city government is requiring it, but they’re not making anything off of it. They’re exacerbating the problem, not helping it. If you’re homeless, you can eat from the green bin, recycle stuff for money from the blue bin, and use stuff to live on from the black bin. By having these bins available on the sidewalk, while some of it gets recycled, the majority of it is collected for profit. I am at a loss as to how the recycling division of the sanitary company supports its payroll if the majority of what is supposed to be recycled, is taken before they even get to it.
Here’s another scam that survives simply because the service they provide is legal. Copier and laser toner cartridges. Here is a market that thrives on the unsuspecting buyers/customers. I know. Purchasing has been one of my responsibilities in corporate America for 25 years. Not a week goes by I don’t receive a call from some fly-by-night, boiler room company trying to sell me remanufactured toner cartridges. Oh, they always say ‘not only are theirs better than the OEM’s (original from the manufacturer), but they hold more toner. Fine. But the fact remains, these remans, as they are affectionately referred to, as well as remaxes, they have been used and refilled. Plain and simple. It’s one of my favorite game to play with these scam artists when they say theirs holds more toner, yielding more output than the original, I tell them, “sure, but the cartridge you’re selling, has already run 5000 copies. You’ve refilled it with toner, but did you replace all the moving parts?” The silence is always deafening. I hang up immediately.
But there’s insult added to this injury. If you save the various cartridges used in your office, and try to cash in on the recycling factor, you only get pennies on the dollar. I have 8 different cartridges for 8 different laser printers in my office. The smallest costs me $60. And that’s an OEM (original from HP). The larger ones for the larger machines, I purchase a remanufactured version at a discount from my corporate supplier, and enjoy a slight discount, being a corporate account.
For awhile, I was stock-piling used, empty cartridges, utilizing the services of one of my vendor delivery persons carting all of them to the local recycling plant, to be reimbursed for the used cartridges. The smallest one ($60) yielded .50c. Half a buck. I kid you not. When I challenged the return, I was given the chart highlighting the breakdown for all of the cartridges I was attempting to recycle for money. So, you start with a brand new, HP laser printer cartridge for $60, that lists for $75/$80 dollars at a local retail store, and you get .50c back on the used, empty cartridge, and this same cartridge is cleaned and refilled and resold for $40, and you expect me to recycle for the good of the environment, when the environment is nowhere in the equation, and other people are making money on your good faith for recycling? Makes me want to puke. Even worse, you can’t recycle a ‘reman’ cartridge. Why? It can only be used twice. Recyclers only accept ‘OEM’s. No ‘remans’. “SOL”, as they say.
Plastic. The worse culprit of the world. Easiest and least expensive to produce, with a shelf life somewhere around a century, but no recycling aspect whatsoever. It’s why I don’t cut the six-pack rings when I’m done stocking the fridge. At one employer, an environmentally-conscious associate told me I was required to cut them, I said, “I’m required to stock. Cutting rings is an environmental issue that I was not informed of at the time of hire. If you want to cut them, be my guest”. It was an obvious power play, but I wasn’t going to get sucked in. I eventually left due to the amount of hassle with this person. I do the same thing now at my current location. After previous experience, I realized certain things and developed a theory, and a subsequent response, should another challenge involving the same issue arise. As usual, it did.
After the usual question of why the rings weren’t being cut, I gave the same reason that my responsibility was to stock, not to cut, rings, ‘for the environment’. The obvious response, of which I was prepared for, was that they end up in the ocean, trapping sea life in the process. Uh, yeah. “This stuff ends up more in landfill than it does in the sea.” The latest report shows the majority of the stuff that ends up in the sea, for the most part, ends up in the Pacific. And for some odd ecological, environmental reason, all of it is pulled, obviously due to natural forces at work, to a central location somewhere in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Somewhere between California and Hawaii, and due west from there. Dubbed the “garbage patch”, it is three times the size of Texas. It has been documented that over 75% of it is derived from land sources, through dumping, with the remaining 25% coming from air and seas sources.
Plastic. It can’t be recycled, so what better place than landfill, to fulfill a solid requirement to build on. Besides, what creature, or creatures, from the animal kingdom, thrive and survive in that environment? Rats and seagulls. I don’t know about you, but I think if there was one less rat or seagull in the world today due to being entangled in a plastic ring, we’d be better off.
I realize that sounds insensitive, but you have to remember this: I love the environment, and animals even more. If these creatures choose to spend their time in this environment, they’re just asking for trouble. People call pigeons flying rats. I disagree. They simply feed off what humans drop. It’s the seagulls that are the flying rats. They fight each other food, and are the true bottom-feeders. Seagulls are not predatory by nature, but will grab a pigeon if it’s hungry enough. Witnessed it first hand. I was fortunate enough one time, to come across a seagull who had a pigeon by the tail. I though the pigeon was already history, until he started flapping his wings. I moved in and the seagull moved away. The pigeon was too heavy for him to lift off, so I darted towards him, and he let go. The pigeon flew off. A saved life.
Seagulls nest on the roof of the building I work in. When the building engineers go up weekly to clear the nests, as they tend to block air conditioning and heating ducts, the gulls actually attack them. I have no respect for seagulls. So if we lose one or two, or fifty, from six-pack-ring strangulation, so be it. (For the record, I work with animal and environmental non-profits, so save your chastising for someone who deserves it. You’re preaching to the choir.)
As far as I’m concerned, I find it hard to believe we haven’t started dumping on the moon. Think about it. No oxygen, rendering it uninhabitable. The moon is useless. Makes you wonder why we really had to go there in the first place. Especially for what it costs to do so. It also explains why conspiracy theorists say we never went there at all. A hoax created in the desert. (Can you say Area 51?) Nonetheless, technology is more advance now. So why haven’t we made more trips to the moon, or even Mars?
All it would take is one global company to secure agreements from, basically, the majority of the free world, and then some, to transport all the world’s unrecyclables to the moon. Of course, the first assumption is that there is no gravity to keep it there. Uh, we wore gravity boots when there, meaning there is a small amount of gravity, otherwise, all the loose materials (moon dirt) would float away. Small price to pay. I see the pics everyday, submitted from around the world. You think the US has a trash problem? Check out the Far East. China, Philippines, and India. The rivers and lakes are piled high with refuse that children wade through for items that could be sold on the black market.
‘Green’ is big business. And Government and the corporate sector have begun requiring us to adhere to mandated programs, only to serve for political and monetary gain, overshadowing the benefits of the very reason it serves. It’s required today simply because of the abuse that permeated our society for decades, making it obligatory appears to be the only way to reverse the effects. Which defeats the whole purpose. Laws are passed on an issue that was originally voluntary, but because of the damage done for the past decades, it appears by making it obligatory, it will speed up the reverse effect. All I want to know is, how will it be enforced?
Who knows. Laws will be passed, policy will be established, notices/warnings will be issued, but basically, it comes down to you and me. We are the ones that have to make the effort. I say, “To the moon”. If that’s too close to home, put the shit on the shuttle that seems to orbit this planet for no real purpose, and shoot it out into space. No gravitational or centrifugal forces at work here. It ain’t coming back. And what better way to initiate contact with extra-terrestrial beings than to send our garbage out and have them come tell us to dump our shit on our own moon, not the rest of space. Either that, or they end life on Earth as we know it. Maybe we’d be better off starting over anyway. It’s been done before.
You know ‘green’ has gone mainstream when companies get tax breaks for recycling efforts, not to mention the amount of contributions to environmental charities that are written off as tax-deductible, making it a for-profit move, since that really isn’t charity in the end, is it now? You know ‘green’ has gone mainstream when recycling becomes required, on a governmental and/or corporate level. San Francisco is leading the charge into the future. Why? Because San Francisco is passing laws to make sure you recycle. Recently, it was passed that if any of the recycling bins (blue, green & black) were visible from the street, meaning out on the sidewalk in front of homes and apartment buildings, owners will be fined $100. Make the effort to recycle, and get fined for leaving your bin at the curb. If that isn’t a hypocrisy, I don’t know what is.
Furthermore, there are now trash inspectors looking into people’s trash to see if there are efforts being made to recycle. If not, a notice is issued. No fines or citations. But you know that’s the next step. And all this time I thought it was a matter of conscience, and voluntary by nature. Now, it’s the law. And that’s just the ‘greening’ of the political landscape. Let’s take a look at what else is going on.
For the most part, I agree with the efforts, on an overall scale, as evident in smaller locations. That is how it works. But in a major metropolitan areas, I don’t think so. And SF is a perfect example to represent this environment in all major metropolitan areas, for one reason, and one reason only: entrepreneurs. I refer to them as entrepreneurs because, although many of them are of the homeless variety, many are simply doing it for the money. They serve a purpose, since the items are being recycled, but there’s money to made here. I live and work here in SF, and I see it everyday, in more ways than one.
Let’s start at home. I live in an apartment building. One black garbage bin for garbage. Remember: the blue one is for bottles, cans and paper, and the green is for compost, meaning food items. The black one is for non-recyclables. You know – plastic, and anything that isn’t glass, can, paper, or food. Which covers a lot of ground. The black one is at the bottom of a chute that runs from the top of the back stairwell to the ground floor. The blue one is out in the alley. And there is no green one. Some take there bottles down and set them next to the black bin, while others leave them near the chute on their floor. Does any of the glass end up being collected by the recycling truck on their pickup day? No. There’s nothing in the bin. There’s an old lady with a laundry basket who comes by on the one day the building janitor does his cleaning and mopping. He brings down all the glass left by the chute and she loads up her cart. Yes, it gets recycled, but not by the city. This same woman, and many others I see throughout the day, make it a part of their daily routine to go through neighborhood blue bins for glass and cans. Paper and cardboard recyclers have been doing it for years, going from supermarket to supermarket, corner store to corner store, picking up all the boxes emptied by the store, to be recycled for money.
Now, I don’t have a problem with this. It is being recycled, and someone is making money off it. Cool. That’s ‘capitalism’, and what America is based on. The problem with this scenario is, city government is requiring it, but they’re not making anything off of it. They’re exacerbating the problem, not helping it. If you’re homeless, you can eat from the green bin, recycle stuff for money from the blue bin, and use stuff to live on from the black bin. By having these bins available on the sidewalk, while some of it gets recycled, the majority of it is collected for profit. I am at a loss as to how the recycling division of the sanitary company supports its payroll if the majority of what is supposed to be recycled, is taken before they even get to it.
Here’s another scam that survives simply because the service they provide is legal. Copier and laser toner cartridges. Here is a market that thrives on the unsuspecting buyers/customers. I know. Purchasing has been one of my responsibilities in corporate America for 25 years. Not a week goes by I don’t receive a call from some fly-by-night, boiler room company trying to sell me remanufactured toner cartridges. Oh, they always say ‘not only are theirs better than the OEM’s (original from the manufacturer), but they hold more toner. Fine. But the fact remains, these remans, as they are affectionately referred to, as well as remaxes, they have been used and refilled. Plain and simple. It’s one of my favorite game to play with these scam artists when they say theirs holds more toner, yielding more output than the original, I tell them, “sure, but the cartridge you’re selling, has already run 5000 copies. You’ve refilled it with toner, but did you replace all the moving parts?” The silence is always deafening. I hang up immediately.
But there’s insult added to this injury. If you save the various cartridges used in your office, and try to cash in on the recycling factor, you only get pennies on the dollar. I have 8 different cartridges for 8 different laser printers in my office. The smallest costs me $60. And that’s an OEM (original from HP). The larger ones for the larger machines, I purchase a remanufactured version at a discount from my corporate supplier, and enjoy a slight discount, being a corporate account.
For awhile, I was stock-piling used, empty cartridges, utilizing the services of one of my vendor delivery persons carting all of them to the local recycling plant, to be reimbursed for the used cartridges. The smallest one ($60) yielded .50c. Half a buck. I kid you not. When I challenged the return, I was given the chart highlighting the breakdown for all of the cartridges I was attempting to recycle for money. So, you start with a brand new, HP laser printer cartridge for $60, that lists for $75/$80 dollars at a local retail store, and you get .50c back on the used, empty cartridge, and this same cartridge is cleaned and refilled and resold for $40, and you expect me to recycle for the good of the environment, when the environment is nowhere in the equation, and other people are making money on your good faith for recycling? Makes me want to puke. Even worse, you can’t recycle a ‘reman’ cartridge. Why? It can only be used twice. Recyclers only accept ‘OEM’s. No ‘remans’. “SOL”, as they say.
Plastic. The worse culprit of the world. Easiest and least expensive to produce, with a shelf life somewhere around a century, but no recycling aspect whatsoever. It’s why I don’t cut the six-pack rings when I’m done stocking the fridge. At one employer, an environmentally-conscious associate told me I was required to cut them, I said, “I’m required to stock. Cutting rings is an environmental issue that I was not informed of at the time of hire. If you want to cut them, be my guest”. It was an obvious power play, but I wasn’t going to get sucked in. I eventually left due to the amount of hassle with this person. I do the same thing now at my current location. After previous experience, I realized certain things and developed a theory, and a subsequent response, should another challenge involving the same issue arise. As usual, it did.
After the usual question of why the rings weren’t being cut, I gave the same reason that my responsibility was to stock, not to cut, rings, ‘for the environment’. The obvious response, of which I was prepared for, was that they end up in the ocean, trapping sea life in the process. Uh, yeah. “This stuff ends up more in landfill than it does in the sea.” The latest report shows the majority of the stuff that ends up in the sea, for the most part, ends up in the Pacific. And for some odd ecological, environmental reason, all of it is pulled, obviously due to natural forces at work, to a central location somewhere in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Somewhere between California and Hawaii, and due west from there. Dubbed the “garbage patch”, it is three times the size of Texas. It has been documented that over 75% of it is derived from land sources, through dumping, with the remaining 25% coming from air and seas sources.
Plastic. It can’t be recycled, so what better place than landfill, to fulfill a solid requirement to build on. Besides, what creature, or creatures, from the animal kingdom, thrive and survive in that environment? Rats and seagulls. I don’t know about you, but I think if there was one less rat or seagull in the world today due to being entangled in a plastic ring, we’d be better off.
I realize that sounds insensitive, but you have to remember this: I love the environment, and animals even more. If these creatures choose to spend their time in this environment, they’re just asking for trouble. People call pigeons flying rats. I disagree. They simply feed off what humans drop. It’s the seagulls that are the flying rats. They fight each other food, and are the true bottom-feeders. Seagulls are not predatory by nature, but will grab a pigeon if it’s hungry enough. Witnessed it first hand. I was fortunate enough one time, to come across a seagull who had a pigeon by the tail. I though the pigeon was already history, until he started flapping his wings. I moved in and the seagull moved away. The pigeon was too heavy for him to lift off, so I darted towards him, and he let go. The pigeon flew off. A saved life.
Seagulls nest on the roof of the building I work in. When the building engineers go up weekly to clear the nests, as they tend to block air conditioning and heating ducts, the gulls actually attack them. I have no respect for seagulls. So if we lose one or two, or fifty, from six-pack-ring strangulation, so be it. (For the record, I work with animal and environmental non-profits, so save your chastising for someone who deserves it. You’re preaching to the choir.)
As far as I’m concerned, I find it hard to believe we haven’t started dumping on the moon. Think about it. No oxygen, rendering it uninhabitable. The moon is useless. Makes you wonder why we really had to go there in the first place. Especially for what it costs to do so. It also explains why conspiracy theorists say we never went there at all. A hoax created in the desert. (Can you say Area 51?) Nonetheless, technology is more advance now. So why haven’t we made more trips to the moon, or even Mars?
All it would take is one global company to secure agreements from, basically, the majority of the free world, and then some, to transport all the world’s unrecyclables to the moon. Of course, the first assumption is that there is no gravity to keep it there. Uh, we wore gravity boots when there, meaning there is a small amount of gravity, otherwise, all the loose materials (moon dirt) would float away. Small price to pay. I see the pics everyday, submitted from around the world. You think the US has a trash problem? Check out the Far East. China, Philippines, and India. The rivers and lakes are piled high with refuse that children wade through for items that could be sold on the black market.
‘Green’ is big business. And Government and the corporate sector have begun requiring us to adhere to mandated programs, only to serve for political and monetary gain, overshadowing the benefits of the very reason it serves. It’s required today simply because of the abuse that permeated our society for decades, making it obligatory appears to be the only way to reverse the effects. Which defeats the whole purpose. Laws are passed on an issue that was originally voluntary, but because of the damage done for the past decades, it appears by making it obligatory, it will speed up the reverse effect. All I want to know is, how will it be enforced?
Who knows. Laws will be passed, policy will be established, notices/warnings will be issued, but basically, it comes down to you and me. We are the ones that have to make the effort. I say, “To the moon”. If that’s too close to home, put the shit on the shuttle that seems to orbit this planet for no real purpose, and shoot it out into space. No gravitational or centrifugal forces at work here. It ain’t coming back. And what better way to initiate contact with extra-terrestrial beings than to send our garbage out and have them come tell us to dump our shit on our own moon, not the rest of space. Either that, or they end life on Earth as we know it. Maybe we’d be better off starting over anyway. It’s been done before.
The Continental Divide
Let's start with North and South America. Two continents separated by a small country called Panama. It also so happens to be halved by the Panama Canal; although I don't know for sure they were separated before or after the Canal was built, so there is a case for a continent not necessarily being separated from others by water. But if Panama's canal divides North and South America, then what continent is Panama technically in? If it is one and not the other, how can that be? Unless we change Panama to be North Panama and South Panama, two separate countries. Or is it both? If we can have dual citizenships, why can’t countries have dual continentship? (Yes, that’s a new word, according to the Book of LaFever).
I mean hell, North and South Vietnam, and North and South Korea are separate countries, but aren't separated by water. It certainly would be a first to have a country split in two, not just because of the Canal that runs through it, but because it also separates two continents! You heard it here first, folks, and that goes for Webster’s son-to-be new addition to its text - continentship.Here's another. We have the European continent, which includes Russia, also known as Eastern Europe, technically speaking, but most don't refer to it as that. Maybe we could call Russia, the North East, because that's what they are. Actually, they cross half way over, so Northeast would be considered a misnomer. We have the Middle East. Then there’s the Far East, and then Southeast Asia. Although Japan is farther south than Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Myanmar, etc., which are the ones considered Southeast Asia, but Japan is considered just Far East. Geographically, that is correct because it is farther east than the Southeast countries. How about the Philippines? Are they Far East, or Southeast Asia? I consider them Southeast. Russia is over Asia and beside Europe. Why is Russia considered Europe and not Asia? Because Russians are not Asian. Duh! Another example of two continents NOT separated by water.
Back to the Middle and Far East. Now I've had this argument with a former associate from Pakistan and my neighbor, who thought he was a geographical expert because world maps and atlases were a hobby of his. But if you hear me out, while you may not agree, you have to admit it, does makes sense. And that’s what LaFever is all about. Pointing out alternatives to the norm that make sense, and hopefully changing history in the process.
Ok, I know Pakistan, to some people, and most Pakistanis, is considered Far East. And so do atlases and maps. I don't and here's why. I also don't consider India the Far East, as well, which many might think is stretching a bit far. But if you think about it, Pakistan is above and to the left of India. Pakistan's neighbors are Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan. I classify Pakistan as Middle East, along with the others. Looks aren't everything, but in this case, a big part, along with their faith, which is Muslim, and their geographical location. There's 3 different reasons right there. And how about this: Pakistan is an acronym for the regions coined in 1933, 14 years before the country came into existence. Those regions are: Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir and Sind PAKS. A Cambridge student (Choudary Rahmat Ali) added the suffix “stan”, meaning “land of”, and threw in an extra “I” to make it easier to pronounce. So the “a” in Pakistan stands for Afghania. Sounds Middle Eastern to me.India on the other hand, has a mix of Hindu, Muslim, and Buddhism. We all know Buddhism is divided up into various sects throughout the Far East (Tibetan, Chan for the Chinese, and Shinto, Rinzai and Tendai for the Japanese), but the Hindu people are a completely different breed from Asian. If Buddhism is the only tie that connects it the Far East, it's because all of the Asian Buddhist sects started with a man named Boddhidarma, a Hindu priest, who ventured east and trained a sickly group of monks in China, who eventually came to be known as Shaolin.
So what would you call India? How about the Central East. If Pakistan wants to consider themselves Central East, fine. I still think they’re Middle East. Russia would go under North East. And the former Russian republics would go to Eastern Europe. Or, Europe, in general. India should go by just India. Russia doesn’t go by Europe, although that’s their region. India stands alone, not in the Asian region. Hell, they have their own ocean.
If it's all about geography, then it should be about where all of them are situated. Whatever religion or faith you are, or whatever country you're fighting with over borders, is a moot point (see Pakistan/India). Somewhere along the way, the continents were named as such for the regions that occupied them, and had to include them, so now those peoples lay claim to the continent’s name rather than the region’s name.Take Kashmir, for instance. Now there's a can of worms. Both Pakistan and India lay claim to it. And they've been fighting over it forever. But if you take out the faith and appearance factor, and concentrate on just its geographical location, where would you put it? Could it be Middle East - it's east of Pakistan. Could it be Central East - it's north of India. Could it be European - it's south of Europe. My god, what do we do with Kashmir? Sell it to the US?
And then there is African. Must be difficult to be known as African if you’re from Egypt, Libya or Morocco. Why is Libya considered Middle East when they’re in Africa?
I mean hell, North and South Vietnam, and North and South Korea are separate countries, but aren't separated by water. It certainly would be a first to have a country split in two, not just because of the Canal that runs through it, but because it also separates two continents! You heard it here first, folks, and that goes for Webster’s son-to-be new addition to its text - continentship.Here's another. We have the European continent, which includes Russia, also known as Eastern Europe, technically speaking, but most don't refer to it as that. Maybe we could call Russia, the North East, because that's what they are. Actually, they cross half way over, so Northeast would be considered a misnomer. We have the Middle East. Then there’s the Far East, and then Southeast Asia. Although Japan is farther south than Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Myanmar, etc., which are the ones considered Southeast Asia, but Japan is considered just Far East. Geographically, that is correct because it is farther east than the Southeast countries. How about the Philippines? Are they Far East, or Southeast Asia? I consider them Southeast. Russia is over Asia and beside Europe. Why is Russia considered Europe and not Asia? Because Russians are not Asian. Duh! Another example of two continents NOT separated by water.
Back to the Middle and Far East. Now I've had this argument with a former associate from Pakistan and my neighbor, who thought he was a geographical expert because world maps and atlases were a hobby of his. But if you hear me out, while you may not agree, you have to admit it, does makes sense. And that’s what LaFever is all about. Pointing out alternatives to the norm that make sense, and hopefully changing history in the process.
Ok, I know Pakistan, to some people, and most Pakistanis, is considered Far East. And so do atlases and maps. I don't and here's why. I also don't consider India the Far East, as well, which many might think is stretching a bit far. But if you think about it, Pakistan is above and to the left of India. Pakistan's neighbors are Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan. I classify Pakistan as Middle East, along with the others. Looks aren't everything, but in this case, a big part, along with their faith, which is Muslim, and their geographical location. There's 3 different reasons right there. And how about this: Pakistan is an acronym for the regions coined in 1933, 14 years before the country came into existence. Those regions are: Punjab, Afghania, Kashmir and Sind PAKS. A Cambridge student (Choudary Rahmat Ali) added the suffix “stan”, meaning “land of”, and threw in an extra “I” to make it easier to pronounce. So the “a” in Pakistan stands for Afghania. Sounds Middle Eastern to me.India on the other hand, has a mix of Hindu, Muslim, and Buddhism. We all know Buddhism is divided up into various sects throughout the Far East (Tibetan, Chan for the Chinese, and Shinto, Rinzai and Tendai for the Japanese), but the Hindu people are a completely different breed from Asian. If Buddhism is the only tie that connects it the Far East, it's because all of the Asian Buddhist sects started with a man named Boddhidarma, a Hindu priest, who ventured east and trained a sickly group of monks in China, who eventually came to be known as Shaolin.
So what would you call India? How about the Central East. If Pakistan wants to consider themselves Central East, fine. I still think they’re Middle East. Russia would go under North East. And the former Russian republics would go to Eastern Europe. Or, Europe, in general. India should go by just India. Russia doesn’t go by Europe, although that’s their region. India stands alone, not in the Asian region. Hell, they have their own ocean.
If it's all about geography, then it should be about where all of them are situated. Whatever religion or faith you are, or whatever country you're fighting with over borders, is a moot point (see Pakistan/India). Somewhere along the way, the continents were named as such for the regions that occupied them, and had to include them, so now those peoples lay claim to the continent’s name rather than the region’s name.Take Kashmir, for instance. Now there's a can of worms. Both Pakistan and India lay claim to it. And they've been fighting over it forever. But if you take out the faith and appearance factor, and concentrate on just its geographical location, where would you put it? Could it be Middle East - it's east of Pakistan. Could it be Central East - it's north of India. Could it be European - it's south of Europe. My god, what do we do with Kashmir? Sell it to the US?
And then there is African. Must be difficult to be known as African if you’re from Egypt, Libya or Morocco. Why is Libya considered Middle East when they’re in Africa?
United We Stand
Unions. Now there’s a double-edged sword, not to mention a double-standard representation. The double whammy. The first thing that comes to my mind are the first words spoken by the actor Willem Dafoe in the film “Light Sleeper”. A critically-acclaimed film that did well at the box office, but when brought up in conversation, the usual response is ‘huh?’ The reason I remember it so well is because of the irony of the opening segment mirroring reality itself. I was the manager of The Vogue Theater at the time. A 215-seat, half-art house, half-commercial theater, as part of the mammoth United Artists chain. At least it was, back in the 90’s, until the 8-screen AMC 1000 opened a few blocks down and the 16-screen Sony Metreon at 4th & Mission, years later. The films that played there were either independent films or films that had run at other first-run theaters initially, and moved there because of continued residuals, or as an obligation to the movie studio. This was, and probably still is, a standard practice between Hollywood studios and theater chains across the country. Huge backroom stuff.
It was Labor Day weekend (celebrating labor, of course – how’s that for more irony in a paper on unions). “Light Sleeper” opened on that Friday. Got a rave review in the SF Chronicle (man out of his chair). I guess the powers-that-be at United Artists didn’t think it would do well, deciding to open it at a local 200-seat house. How could they know. Every show sold out all three days. Lines around the corner throughout the day and into the night. Taxing all the staff. Fortunately, I had experience as the House Manager at the 4-screen UA Galaxy Theater on Sutter & Van Ness. At the time, that was the premier theater in the area. We survived. Popcorn everywhere.
I know, too much information. But that’s the LaFever Way. It’s all about the story. Isn’t there something at least a tad enjoyable knowing the details leading up to the reason and/or subject matter at hand about to be discussed here? That’s what tangents are for. As long as you don’t drift onto another tangent like in “Tron”. Getting back to where we belong, which is the opening line in “Light Sleeper”.
“Labor Day Weekend. Union movement. Now there’s a contradiction in terms.”
- Willem Dafoe in “Light Sleeper”
That’s right. It’s unions, not women, that we can’t live with, or live without. Worked back in the day. But not today. While much of this may be biased, obviously, I guarantee you, it is definitely based on direct experiences (more than once), and observations (crossing lines to get to work). You may disagree, and for good reason, and you have that right. But it is pointless to argue, since it isn’t a matter of right or wrong. It’s subjective in nature, and where you stand, united or not, should not be challenged, unless you’re directly involved, and then, only vocally. Rule Number One: [karate] for defense only. Rule Number Two: first learn Rule Number One.
What follows is one man’s views, based on empirical evidence established by experience and first-hand observations, confirmed by conversations with those caught up in the whirlwind that is the “strike” and indirectly, as a result of the effects on the immediate work surroundings, that being a disruption of a number of areas relative to building services provided. So, without further ado…
My first exposure to “union labor” was indirect, but first-hand. Dad was a member of the ‘printing pressman’s union’. Running the monster printing presses at the San Francisco Chronicle. This wasn’t your average copier or printing press at your local neighborhood printer. I walked through the place many times. For a daily circulation of 500,000 papers, you had to have presses of mammoth proportions. The paper roles attached to these presses, looked like King Kong’s toilet paper, literally. The presses ran continuously. Even with ear plugs, he still went deaf in his 50’s. (Then again, he didn’t wear earplugs at home, to protect and drown out the yelling and screaming of us kids). I vaguely remember times of labor negotiations. We were too young to understand, and Mom & Dad didn’t want to worry us. It was a management thing. The only real power management has, in its daily use, is the power of information. That is, the power to withhold it until they feel you’re ready to hear it. ‘Nother story. (See the white paper titled Relatively Speaking. You won’t be disappointed.)
Fast forward to Dad’s untimely passing at the young age of 60. Product of an earlier age. When men working in blue-collar jobs, combined with the excessive drinking and smoking due to the physical and mental toll the work took on the body, resulted in an early demise. For the record, Dad didn’t drink. Mom was in charge. He was a Scorpio, she was a Taurus. Mom would never have allowed it. But the smoking was what did him in. 45 years of it. He passed at 60 years of age. Two years before retirement. Put in 30 years there. Model employee. And a union member. Common back then. Unheard of today. Except for those who started 20-30 years ago. The only exception is if you find a good employer. (A really, really good employer. And no union. Like where I’m currently at. Sweet.)
The processing of papers came next, as with all situations involving a death in the family. Maybe not as much as today, involving IRA’s, estates, investments, pensions. Back then, it was mostly about pensions. That’s what unions were mostly about. And second only to monthly dues. Mom filed for Dad’s pension benefits, as she was the beneficiary. A no-brainer. SF Chronicle denied her claim. Motherfuckers. Sorry. But you get the point. 30 years of loyalty, without incident. Dad was loved by everyone. Did the union step in to assist? No. Mom had to hire an attorney. It took only one letter to the Chron to approve the claim. Corporate America is cold. I know. I’ve been a part of it for 25 years. At the lowest level (again, see Relatively Speaking). They will deny you every time to see if they can get away with it; until they’re challenged, at which time they usually give in. If you don’t, they win. And the unions? Obviously, they weren’t going to spend any time or money defending a dead man. Not a good way to start in showing me the benefits of union labor.
Of course, that would change in high school. American History. At least in regards to the original motivation and reasoning behind the creation, foundation and purpose of unions. But hey, that’s what schools are for – education. It was a film shown in class as part of American History’s part on unions. It starred actor Sylvestor Stallone – “F.I.S.T.”, one of his earliest endeavors. Stood for ‘federation of interstate truckers’. A story loosely based on Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters, that began in the 50’s. Two decades later, actor Jack Nicholson was tapped to reprise the role as Hoffa in the film of the same name (Hoffa), a variation of the same theme, rather than a reprisal as previously mentioned. It was on a grander scale, mostly sensationalizing the triumphs and pitfalls of Hoffa himself, with excellent performances by Nicholson, Danny DeVito as his lifelong sidekick, and Armand Assante as the partner representing the ‘mafia’ influence. I liked it. But at the same time, I preferred “F.I.S.T.” It was more realistic, especially after I saw it again last year, and after I had seen “Hoffa”. Nothing had changed. “F.I.S.T.” still rules. Recommended viewing, for sure.
What these two films did, in all their glory and in spite of certain inconsistencies and exaggerations, was deliver on why, and in some ways how, the necessity for organized labor came to be. Upper-class (white-collar) and lower-class (blue-collar) have been separated for centuries. They are simply a civilized term to represent the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’. Plain and simple. Somewhere along the way, the ‘have-nots’ realized their numbers were greater than the ‘haves’. Long before the official ‘union’ came to be, the ‘have-nots’ organized to overthrow the ‘haves’. Happened all the time. Kingdoms and governments fell on a regular basis. And always when the ‘haves’ ruled by fear. History lesson for today.
Back to the present. The 50’s were a tumultuous time. The Depression that started in 1929, was still affecting the economy all the way up until the 50’s, and was about to come to a head. Riots occurred just trying to find work. One of the largest groups of blue-collar workers were the truckers. Certain individuals realized the strength, not just in the shear number of workers, but of the work itself – that being the transportation of everything, down the street and across the country. If someone were to have the resources, charisma, and of course, the balls, to organize this group, they would have a certain level of bargaining power for better pay and benefits. If not, a work stoppage would occur, costing the company a shitload of money. Even more so if they were publicly-traded on the stock exchange, which wasn’t exactly in the best of shape at that time.
Hoffa may not have started the ‘union’ juggernaut, but he was obviously responsible for organizing all of the local union outlets that were already in place, but had no power to negotiate effectively. Besides, if a local went on strike, there were plenty of others to take their place. If all were organized, the companies were ‘up the creek without a paddle’. Hoffa knew this. Unfortunately, there will always be others who want to get in on the profits. The illegal entities (organized crime). They know what they’re doing. If they have the muscle, they move in. In this case, they didn’t. So they used a different tactic. Support. And worked their way in that way. This area is obviously way over my head, so anything more would be speculation, so I won’t go there, continuing on as it refers to my world. Funny how poetic ‘organized labor’ and ‘organized crime’ are when mentioned in the same sentence.
The creation and consolidation of union labor during the 50’s served a purpose. It guaranteed a decent wage on which the worker could live, benefits during a time of misfortune, and support from the union in crisis situations. It was all about the family. And unions embraced that. (It wouldn’t happen until decades later that the family foundation would ultimately be exploited, or ignored outright.) Terms were determined and agreed-upon for a certain period of time, in the form of a contract, with an expiration date, at which time a new contract would be negotiated, upgrading wages and benefits to keep in line with the economy’s rising costs of goods and services, or what is commonly-referred-to-today as, ‘inflation’.
It worked, and worked well, with other industries following suit. But only worked in certain industries that were responsible for the overall economic infrastructure. ‘White-collar’ was out of the question. They were ‘a-dime-a-dozen’. And the ones in charge. No, if you look around, the majority of your unions are primarily ‘blue-collar’. Why? Because the work is ‘lower- to middle-class’. Support and infrastructure work, by nature. First, you have the Teamsters, the largest of them all, representing the trucker, shipping everything from gasoline to teddy bears to materials used by other workers represented by unions. Perfect synergy. If they strike, nothing gets delivered. The Longshoremen, the second largest, running the docks in every port in the country. If they strike, nothing gets loaded on or off the ships that carry everything not shipped by truck. More synergy. And smart thinking. Power in numbers. Then there’s the service industry. This one today may not have the highest numbers, but wield the most leverage when it’s time for negotiations. They cover the country’s hotels, restaurants, transportation, police and fire services, sanitation, schools, airlines, electrical and mechanical contractors, and even non-profits (go figure). It’s the non-profit sector that I had my direct experience with. We’ll come back this for general purposes later on, as this is where unions fail in their purpose and tactics in the economy today.
Which brings us to my direct connection to the ‘union’ establishment and my involvement. The Jewish Community Center network. Let me start by saying this has to do with unions, not employers. So this is not a knock on the Jewish Community Center. All evidence to the contrary. It was one of my more respectable employers and fun places to work. I lived five blocks away so the commute was a moot point. It was the largest of all the community centers in the Bay Area, so they kept me busy. And most importantly, they respected me and my skills, hiring me even though I was not Jewish. How’s that for an equal opportunity employer.
The problem here, well, at least, not in the beginning, was that the non-exempt staff were required to join the local union of service employees. ‘Exempt’ is a more recent term, representing management, also known as white-collar, and upper-class, due to position status, compensation, and decision-making powers that go with it. At the same time, and for good reason, it also has to do with Accounting and HR standards and practices as it relates to budgeting, and the number of hours performed on-the-job. Management tend to spend more than the standard 40-hour workweek in the office. Overtime would cripple the bottom line, considering their overall annual salary, so as compromise to this, compensation is classified as ‘exempt’, meaning additional income is not earned in the event of overtime. Their higher salaries make up for this discrepancy. And, of course, they are not, or required to, join any union as it pertains to their industry or profession. Everyone else? If you want the job, you join the union.
When this happened, back in 1988, I realized for the first time, after what I had seen before, that the reason and purpose of the ‘union’ had become nothing more than a way to profit from its heritage, at the expense of the employer AND the worker. More on that later. So, here I was. Joining the union to get the job. Didn’t matter. Even though I knew I would never see the dues being deducted from my check. Hey, I didn’t interview with the union. I interviewed with the SFJCC. The union probably was responsible for the compensation structure for the position, based on market rates. But any employer can figure that out. Even me. For a mailroom position, architects and engineers pay the worse, at the bottom of the scale. In the middle, insurance, accounting, and attorneys, with investment houses paying the best. I know. I’ve worked for all of them. Attorneys are the worst because, even though they pay in the middle, the workload is more than any other industry, also requiring more overtime than any other industry. No thank you. What I couldn’t figure out was why a non-profit community center was represented by a union.
Six months later, I would be enlightened, but not surprised, and unchallenged when I stood my ground. Contracts were up and in the negotiation process. I was approached as part of a standard practice by union delegates to ascertain my intentions in regards to a possible strike, if negotiations broke down. Uh, no. Why, they asked. I said I was required to join to get the job. I have no love for unions. They don’t serve their purpose today as they did when they came to be back in the day. If you go on strike, I will continue to come to work. You cannot stop me. If you try to when I approach the line to gain entrance to my job, I won’t be responsible for my actions. Obviously, they were shocked, but weren’t about to test me. All that could be done was use the matter of ‘support’ at a later date; that being lack of in any situation involving me. So be it. I worked alone. They needed me more than I needed them. And I told them this. Even more, management loved me. Nothing happened, though. After that, the others feared me. For no good reason. Nonetheless, this showed exactly how unions operate in society today. Turning one another against each other. Wasn’t fair. And they didn’t care.
And now for today’s unions. First of all, Teamsters and Longshoremen are a moot point. They are so strong and powerful, they get whatever they want, no matter what. Then there’s the police and fire unions. While that’s all in good, the issue isn’t their compensation and benefits, but their services they perform. These are the most vital of services to the economic infrastructure that should never be allowed to strike. Never. No exception. Then there are the areas that are low-paying across the board, that necessitated the formation of a union. Airlines, restaurants, schools, hotels, etc. And this is where the problems begin, and the demise of the reason and purpose unions were created in the first place.
The problem is not with the workers not getting paid enough, or not receiving enough benefits. The contracts are signed semi-annually, annually, and bi-annually. Everyone who has a job, applied for that job, and accepted that job, knowing the salary and benefits before starting that job. Everyone goes to work everyday, putting in their time, without question. All they know is what they know. And everything’s cool. Until the time comes for contract negotiations and renewal.
It is only at that time the workers are told by the union what they aren’t getting, what they are entitled to, and what they should be getting, and the only wait to get it is to strike. The union bargains for more, and when the employer rejects the offer as too high, for good reason, the unions tell the workers they are being treated unfairly. Did they do so anytime during the year while everyone was going to work everyday without any knowledge of unfairness on the part of the employer? No. Unions wait right up until contracts are about to expire, garner support from all of the workers, and use the threat of a strike as leverage to secure their demands from the employers. A cheap ploy practiced by all unions today. Defeats every purpose designed by the original union blueprint.
Out on the line, workers are led by union reps like sheep. Once the contract is signed, everything is back to normal. Work as usual. Did anyone quit their job? No. Did anyone on the strike line receive full pay from the dues they’ve been paying all this time? No. They receive a percentage. Certainly not enough to live on for an extended period of time. The rest goes to the union officials’ pay. And that’s the bottom line, folks. Unions using the workers in a deceptive and manipulative way to raise their own income at the expense of the workers, knowing full well the workers just want to work, but will follow them without pause.
LaFever says this: you interviewed for the job. You received the employee kit, outlining pay, benefits, and policies. If it’s union, whatever. But you know what you’re getting into. That’s what the ‘hire packet’ is for. If you have a complaint, step up now, not at negotiation time. If you wait until the contract is expiring, you have no one else to blame but yourself. If I were the employer during a strike, I would hire anyone who applied, and qualified, and let all the union people go.
It was Labor Day weekend (celebrating labor, of course – how’s that for more irony in a paper on unions). “Light Sleeper” opened on that Friday. Got a rave review in the SF Chronicle (man out of his chair). I guess the powers-that-be at United Artists didn’t think it would do well, deciding to open it at a local 200-seat house. How could they know. Every show sold out all three days. Lines around the corner throughout the day and into the night. Taxing all the staff. Fortunately, I had experience as the House Manager at the 4-screen UA Galaxy Theater on Sutter & Van Ness. At the time, that was the premier theater in the area. We survived. Popcorn everywhere.
I know, too much information. But that’s the LaFever Way. It’s all about the story. Isn’t there something at least a tad enjoyable knowing the details leading up to the reason and/or subject matter at hand about to be discussed here? That’s what tangents are for. As long as you don’t drift onto another tangent like in “Tron”. Getting back to where we belong, which is the opening line in “Light Sleeper”.
“Labor Day Weekend. Union movement. Now there’s a contradiction in terms.”
- Willem Dafoe in “Light Sleeper”
That’s right. It’s unions, not women, that we can’t live with, or live without. Worked back in the day. But not today. While much of this may be biased, obviously, I guarantee you, it is definitely based on direct experiences (more than once), and observations (crossing lines to get to work). You may disagree, and for good reason, and you have that right. But it is pointless to argue, since it isn’t a matter of right or wrong. It’s subjective in nature, and where you stand, united or not, should not be challenged, unless you’re directly involved, and then, only vocally. Rule Number One: [karate] for defense only. Rule Number Two: first learn Rule Number One.
What follows is one man’s views, based on empirical evidence established by experience and first-hand observations, confirmed by conversations with those caught up in the whirlwind that is the “strike” and indirectly, as a result of the effects on the immediate work surroundings, that being a disruption of a number of areas relative to building services provided. So, without further ado…
My first exposure to “union labor” was indirect, but first-hand. Dad was a member of the ‘printing pressman’s union’. Running the monster printing presses at the San Francisco Chronicle. This wasn’t your average copier or printing press at your local neighborhood printer. I walked through the place many times. For a daily circulation of 500,000 papers, you had to have presses of mammoth proportions. The paper roles attached to these presses, looked like King Kong’s toilet paper, literally. The presses ran continuously. Even with ear plugs, he still went deaf in his 50’s. (Then again, he didn’t wear earplugs at home, to protect and drown out the yelling and screaming of us kids). I vaguely remember times of labor negotiations. We were too young to understand, and Mom & Dad didn’t want to worry us. It was a management thing. The only real power management has, in its daily use, is the power of information. That is, the power to withhold it until they feel you’re ready to hear it. ‘Nother story. (See the white paper titled Relatively Speaking. You won’t be disappointed.)
Fast forward to Dad’s untimely passing at the young age of 60. Product of an earlier age. When men working in blue-collar jobs, combined with the excessive drinking and smoking due to the physical and mental toll the work took on the body, resulted in an early demise. For the record, Dad didn’t drink. Mom was in charge. He was a Scorpio, she was a Taurus. Mom would never have allowed it. But the smoking was what did him in. 45 years of it. He passed at 60 years of age. Two years before retirement. Put in 30 years there. Model employee. And a union member. Common back then. Unheard of today. Except for those who started 20-30 years ago. The only exception is if you find a good employer. (A really, really good employer. And no union. Like where I’m currently at. Sweet.)
The processing of papers came next, as with all situations involving a death in the family. Maybe not as much as today, involving IRA’s, estates, investments, pensions. Back then, it was mostly about pensions. That’s what unions were mostly about. And second only to monthly dues. Mom filed for Dad’s pension benefits, as she was the beneficiary. A no-brainer. SF Chronicle denied her claim. Motherfuckers. Sorry. But you get the point. 30 years of loyalty, without incident. Dad was loved by everyone. Did the union step in to assist? No. Mom had to hire an attorney. It took only one letter to the Chron to approve the claim. Corporate America is cold. I know. I’ve been a part of it for 25 years. At the lowest level (again, see Relatively Speaking). They will deny you every time to see if they can get away with it; until they’re challenged, at which time they usually give in. If you don’t, they win. And the unions? Obviously, they weren’t going to spend any time or money defending a dead man. Not a good way to start in showing me the benefits of union labor.
Of course, that would change in high school. American History. At least in regards to the original motivation and reasoning behind the creation, foundation and purpose of unions. But hey, that’s what schools are for – education. It was a film shown in class as part of American History’s part on unions. It starred actor Sylvestor Stallone – “F.I.S.T.”, one of his earliest endeavors. Stood for ‘federation of interstate truckers’. A story loosely based on Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters, that began in the 50’s. Two decades later, actor Jack Nicholson was tapped to reprise the role as Hoffa in the film of the same name (Hoffa), a variation of the same theme, rather than a reprisal as previously mentioned. It was on a grander scale, mostly sensationalizing the triumphs and pitfalls of Hoffa himself, with excellent performances by Nicholson, Danny DeVito as his lifelong sidekick, and Armand Assante as the partner representing the ‘mafia’ influence. I liked it. But at the same time, I preferred “F.I.S.T.” It was more realistic, especially after I saw it again last year, and after I had seen “Hoffa”. Nothing had changed. “F.I.S.T.” still rules. Recommended viewing, for sure.
What these two films did, in all their glory and in spite of certain inconsistencies and exaggerations, was deliver on why, and in some ways how, the necessity for organized labor came to be. Upper-class (white-collar) and lower-class (blue-collar) have been separated for centuries. They are simply a civilized term to represent the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’. Plain and simple. Somewhere along the way, the ‘have-nots’ realized their numbers were greater than the ‘haves’. Long before the official ‘union’ came to be, the ‘have-nots’ organized to overthrow the ‘haves’. Happened all the time. Kingdoms and governments fell on a regular basis. And always when the ‘haves’ ruled by fear. History lesson for today.
Back to the present. The 50’s were a tumultuous time. The Depression that started in 1929, was still affecting the economy all the way up until the 50’s, and was about to come to a head. Riots occurred just trying to find work. One of the largest groups of blue-collar workers were the truckers. Certain individuals realized the strength, not just in the shear number of workers, but of the work itself – that being the transportation of everything, down the street and across the country. If someone were to have the resources, charisma, and of course, the balls, to organize this group, they would have a certain level of bargaining power for better pay and benefits. If not, a work stoppage would occur, costing the company a shitload of money. Even more so if they were publicly-traded on the stock exchange, which wasn’t exactly in the best of shape at that time.
Hoffa may not have started the ‘union’ juggernaut, but he was obviously responsible for organizing all of the local union outlets that were already in place, but had no power to negotiate effectively. Besides, if a local went on strike, there were plenty of others to take their place. If all were organized, the companies were ‘up the creek without a paddle’. Hoffa knew this. Unfortunately, there will always be others who want to get in on the profits. The illegal entities (organized crime). They know what they’re doing. If they have the muscle, they move in. In this case, they didn’t. So they used a different tactic. Support. And worked their way in that way. This area is obviously way over my head, so anything more would be speculation, so I won’t go there, continuing on as it refers to my world. Funny how poetic ‘organized labor’ and ‘organized crime’ are when mentioned in the same sentence.
The creation and consolidation of union labor during the 50’s served a purpose. It guaranteed a decent wage on which the worker could live, benefits during a time of misfortune, and support from the union in crisis situations. It was all about the family. And unions embraced that. (It wouldn’t happen until decades later that the family foundation would ultimately be exploited, or ignored outright.) Terms were determined and agreed-upon for a certain period of time, in the form of a contract, with an expiration date, at which time a new contract would be negotiated, upgrading wages and benefits to keep in line with the economy’s rising costs of goods and services, or what is commonly-referred-to-today as, ‘inflation’.
It worked, and worked well, with other industries following suit. But only worked in certain industries that were responsible for the overall economic infrastructure. ‘White-collar’ was out of the question. They were ‘a-dime-a-dozen’. And the ones in charge. No, if you look around, the majority of your unions are primarily ‘blue-collar’. Why? Because the work is ‘lower- to middle-class’. Support and infrastructure work, by nature. First, you have the Teamsters, the largest of them all, representing the trucker, shipping everything from gasoline to teddy bears to materials used by other workers represented by unions. Perfect synergy. If they strike, nothing gets delivered. The Longshoremen, the second largest, running the docks in every port in the country. If they strike, nothing gets loaded on or off the ships that carry everything not shipped by truck. More synergy. And smart thinking. Power in numbers. Then there’s the service industry. This one today may not have the highest numbers, but wield the most leverage when it’s time for negotiations. They cover the country’s hotels, restaurants, transportation, police and fire services, sanitation, schools, airlines, electrical and mechanical contractors, and even non-profits (go figure). It’s the non-profit sector that I had my direct experience with. We’ll come back this for general purposes later on, as this is where unions fail in their purpose and tactics in the economy today.
Which brings us to my direct connection to the ‘union’ establishment and my involvement. The Jewish Community Center network. Let me start by saying this has to do with unions, not employers. So this is not a knock on the Jewish Community Center. All evidence to the contrary. It was one of my more respectable employers and fun places to work. I lived five blocks away so the commute was a moot point. It was the largest of all the community centers in the Bay Area, so they kept me busy. And most importantly, they respected me and my skills, hiring me even though I was not Jewish. How’s that for an equal opportunity employer.
The problem here, well, at least, not in the beginning, was that the non-exempt staff were required to join the local union of service employees. ‘Exempt’ is a more recent term, representing management, also known as white-collar, and upper-class, due to position status, compensation, and decision-making powers that go with it. At the same time, and for good reason, it also has to do with Accounting and HR standards and practices as it relates to budgeting, and the number of hours performed on-the-job. Management tend to spend more than the standard 40-hour workweek in the office. Overtime would cripple the bottom line, considering their overall annual salary, so as compromise to this, compensation is classified as ‘exempt’, meaning additional income is not earned in the event of overtime. Their higher salaries make up for this discrepancy. And, of course, they are not, or required to, join any union as it pertains to their industry or profession. Everyone else? If you want the job, you join the union.
When this happened, back in 1988, I realized for the first time, after what I had seen before, that the reason and purpose of the ‘union’ had become nothing more than a way to profit from its heritage, at the expense of the employer AND the worker. More on that later. So, here I was. Joining the union to get the job. Didn’t matter. Even though I knew I would never see the dues being deducted from my check. Hey, I didn’t interview with the union. I interviewed with the SFJCC. The union probably was responsible for the compensation structure for the position, based on market rates. But any employer can figure that out. Even me. For a mailroom position, architects and engineers pay the worse, at the bottom of the scale. In the middle, insurance, accounting, and attorneys, with investment houses paying the best. I know. I’ve worked for all of them. Attorneys are the worst because, even though they pay in the middle, the workload is more than any other industry, also requiring more overtime than any other industry. No thank you. What I couldn’t figure out was why a non-profit community center was represented by a union.
Six months later, I would be enlightened, but not surprised, and unchallenged when I stood my ground. Contracts were up and in the negotiation process. I was approached as part of a standard practice by union delegates to ascertain my intentions in regards to a possible strike, if negotiations broke down. Uh, no. Why, they asked. I said I was required to join to get the job. I have no love for unions. They don’t serve their purpose today as they did when they came to be back in the day. If you go on strike, I will continue to come to work. You cannot stop me. If you try to when I approach the line to gain entrance to my job, I won’t be responsible for my actions. Obviously, they were shocked, but weren’t about to test me. All that could be done was use the matter of ‘support’ at a later date; that being lack of in any situation involving me. So be it. I worked alone. They needed me more than I needed them. And I told them this. Even more, management loved me. Nothing happened, though. After that, the others feared me. For no good reason. Nonetheless, this showed exactly how unions operate in society today. Turning one another against each other. Wasn’t fair. And they didn’t care.
And now for today’s unions. First of all, Teamsters and Longshoremen are a moot point. They are so strong and powerful, they get whatever they want, no matter what. Then there’s the police and fire unions. While that’s all in good, the issue isn’t their compensation and benefits, but their services they perform. These are the most vital of services to the economic infrastructure that should never be allowed to strike. Never. No exception. Then there are the areas that are low-paying across the board, that necessitated the formation of a union. Airlines, restaurants, schools, hotels, etc. And this is where the problems begin, and the demise of the reason and purpose unions were created in the first place.
The problem is not with the workers not getting paid enough, or not receiving enough benefits. The contracts are signed semi-annually, annually, and bi-annually. Everyone who has a job, applied for that job, and accepted that job, knowing the salary and benefits before starting that job. Everyone goes to work everyday, putting in their time, without question. All they know is what they know. And everything’s cool. Until the time comes for contract negotiations and renewal.
It is only at that time the workers are told by the union what they aren’t getting, what they are entitled to, and what they should be getting, and the only wait to get it is to strike. The union bargains for more, and when the employer rejects the offer as too high, for good reason, the unions tell the workers they are being treated unfairly. Did they do so anytime during the year while everyone was going to work everyday without any knowledge of unfairness on the part of the employer? No. Unions wait right up until contracts are about to expire, garner support from all of the workers, and use the threat of a strike as leverage to secure their demands from the employers. A cheap ploy practiced by all unions today. Defeats every purpose designed by the original union blueprint.
Out on the line, workers are led by union reps like sheep. Once the contract is signed, everything is back to normal. Work as usual. Did anyone quit their job? No. Did anyone on the strike line receive full pay from the dues they’ve been paying all this time? No. They receive a percentage. Certainly not enough to live on for an extended period of time. The rest goes to the union officials’ pay. And that’s the bottom line, folks. Unions using the workers in a deceptive and manipulative way to raise their own income at the expense of the workers, knowing full well the workers just want to work, but will follow them without pause.
LaFever says this: you interviewed for the job. You received the employee kit, outlining pay, benefits, and policies. If it’s union, whatever. But you know what you’re getting into. That’s what the ‘hire packet’ is for. If you have a complaint, step up now, not at negotiation time. If you wait until the contract is expiring, you have no one else to blame but yourself. If I were the employer during a strike, I would hire anyone who applied, and qualified, and let all the union people go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)