Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Inequality Affects Us All

Inequality Affects Us All

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

At an event hosted by Synergos, an organization that helps leaders and partnerships change the systems that keep people in poverty, I spoke with a friend who is a senior executive at IBM. We discussed that businesses, particularly multi-nationals, need to understand that their greatest asset is their relationships with leaders from all sectors – including civil society activists – in the communities in which they provide goods or services. All too often, they simply think of their corporate citizenship – if they think of it at all – in the narrowest sense possible: a kind of side-bar philanthropy. Instead, they should be looking to create and sustain deep relationships with these advocates for social justice as key to their sustainable business model. Doing good will, in fact, be good for their business as they’ll have a healthy, well-educated, financially capable customer base and work force. We agreed that we needed to find a way to convey this need that most corporations don’t yet understand they have.

Frank Rich’s op-ed “The Rabbit Ragu Democrats” in the New York Times underscores how the main relationships businesses currently cultivate are with lobbyists who can press their pet concerns with government officials. His article is a cautionary tale of the adverse affects these highly lucrative relationships have, not only on the citizens who take a hit from policies that are against their best interests, but also, ultimately, on the very business leaders who pursued them. I just saw Michael Moore’s Capitalism: A Love Story which describes the phenomenal disparities of well-being among Americans and their access to the powers that affect their status. I have encouraged many to see the film. I explain that, even if they don’t agree with all of Moore’s conclusions, he exposes fundamental conditions about which we should engage in a vibrant discussion. Leaders from business, government and communities, along with the ordinary citizens who make the respective endeavors of these leaders possible, need to make a frank assessment of what will benefit all of us. The financial collapse and climate change are just two of the myriad inter-related global crises revealing that we sink or swim together.

I re-read Eric Klinenberg’s 2004 review “To Have and Have Not” in the Washington Post of Michael Marmot’s book,  The Status Syndrome that addresses many of the issues highlighted in Moore’s film. Klinenberg writes, “Extreme status disparities and social segregation at the national level undermine public health, whereas relative equality, social cohesion and strong public education systems promote collective well-being.” Marmot’s opening chapter “Some Are More Equal than Others” starts with a quote by W. Somerset Maugham: “Of all the hokum with which this country [America] is riddled the most odd is the common notion that it is free of class distinctions.” When the majority globally, and even many in our rich nation, are lacking the most basic needs, we all pay the price. To grasp that extreme disparity adversely affects all of us, not just those who have the least, is not rocket science. As has happened historically – the Roman Empire, Louis XIV France – the many without anything seeing the few with so much can rise up in anger and bring down seemingly rock-solid societies.

We see this happening at one end of the spectrum already: I was in DC at the same time when the “birthers,” “tenthers,” and “tea-partiers” were there. While I disagree with what they stand for and am particularly alarmed by the vitriol with which they convey their beliefs, I am proud to live in a country where everyone has the freedom to express their opinion. I also understand that part of their anger is fueled by them not seeing the tangible benefits in their own lives of political policies. As someone who has spent four decades working to create positive, sustainable, profitable change, I hope that those who fall more at my end of the political spectrum will exercise their right to promote social justice. I don’t believe this is just a “liberal feel-good” aspiration, but instead a basic necessity for everyone’s survival: those engaged in commerce and political leadership need it as much as those who really are feeling the pinch. Depriving many so that a few can benefit is never sustainable.

Powered by

About nadinehack

  • Doug Hunter

    I don’t understand the supposed benefit of ‘relative equality’. I’d rather make $30K next to a guy that makes $1billion than make $15K next to everyone else who makes $15K. How does what someone else has or earns effect me?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    It doesn’t, Doug. It’s a standard fallacy of the anti-capitalist elite. They don’t understand the realities of living on a limited income or how much more $10,000 means to someone earning $30K a year than it does to them.

    Dave

  • Ruvy

    Equality isn’t necessarily a good thing. But what is positively evil and poisonous in any society is a vast disparity in wealth and income.

  • Ruvy

    That said, it is a lot easier to talk about “the simple life” and “equality” than to actually live it and make it work.

  • http://mizbviewsfromthetower.blogspot.com Jeanne Browne

    Brava, Ms. Hack! An important article with truthful and valuable things to say. I was watching a news report recently in which it was explained that in the 60s and 70s, the ratio of CEO compensation to that of average workers was 40 to 1 – substantial, but not unreasonable, since it may be assumed that the CEO contributes significantly more to the company’s progress and profitability than the mail room clerk. But now, and growing steadily since the 90s, that ratio is well over 500 to 1. That’s a disaster for both the company and the nation. This kind of disparity is what makes it increasingly impossible for ordinary working folks to live in NYC, for example, and why those earning six figures really have no idea what it means to live on a low 5-figure fixed income. I understand that in a society that rewards imagination, initiative and enterprise, and punishes those with minimal skills who make minimal effort, there will be rich people and poor people. But there used to also be a thriving middle class in this country, and that has been and continues to change radically, as a small portion of the middle catapult into the rich category, and the rest, the majority of the middle, slowly sink (or quickly dive) into poverty or damn close to it. Such disparity inspires both rage and indifference and creates a climate in which the rich and poor are literally disgusted by each other. The problem is that while resenting the rich, the poor still aspire to their status. No one feels good about making a good, modest, but totally adequate living anymore: it’s all about being at the top of the heap or dirt under its feet. Vast inequity is fueling greed, dishonesty, envy, contempt, and a fatal lack of concern for The Other. I think you’ve made a very strong case for these ideas, Nadine, and, once again, I don’t understand why some people view this as a)confusing or b)a political football. This is just what’s so, and it ain’t good.

  • STM

    I disagree on some counts with the anti-capitalist notion of equality. Getting NEARER to equality is the key. The working man or woman gets to share a bigger slice of the corporate pie; universal health care, everyone gets the same and pays in proportion to what they earn, but the care MUST be good and come with an option to private, etc.

    Of course, getting a bigger slice of the pie means trade-offs, since it’s the workers who earn all the money for the big corporations in the first place. I up my productivity, earn them more money, they give me more. But to keep me happy, they have to pay me a decent wage in the first place, provide first-world and safe working conditions, have legislation in place that means I can’t be sacked on the whim of, say, someone who doesn’t like my hair-do, and respect my right to a) belong to a union (or not) b) withdraw my labour and c) try the first option of having disputes settled through mitually agreeable industrial abritration in the courts.

    That’s Oz (and there’s that socialism Dave, which I prefer to call community).

    And one thing I noticed in the US that I don’t see quite as much down here in Oz is the huge gap between rich and poor.

    Sure, there’s still a gap … but overall, it’s become like one giant middle class, where families who, say, have three people working blue-collar jobs in the one family will have a combined, very large disposable income.

    But the truth is, it doesn’t work without private enterprise.

    And as Dave and I have both witnessed, real equality doesn’t exist even in those countries claiming to base their entire political system upon it.

    I’m talking about the old Soviet Union especially, which was among the most class-conscious of any countries I’ve ever been to.

    While my views might be very left of Dave’s, they aren’t what I’d call namby-pamby liberal.

    I still; believe in a fair day’s pay fopr a fair day’s work.

    It’s just the amount of pay compared to what my boss earns – and what I consider a fair day’s pay on that basis – that’s the issue.

    And rather than everyone earning $15k, most people should be earning $100k if others are getting around on huge salaries.

    Basic maths: The head of a corporation that could run itself is on, let’s say, $30 million, and most of his workers are earning between $40k and $100K.

    Take some of his, still leave him or her and their mates in the boardroom with nice fat salaries and top-of-the-range cars, big houses, boats, etc and divvy the rest up among the workers.

    When you’re the CEO of a big corporation on huge dollars anyway, there’s a point at which more money means nothing.

    So share it with those who help make the profits for your shareholders.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I don’t think the notion of arriving at “equality” is the right way of looking at the issue, Stan. It is rather that for many people, the idea of accumulating wealth is inseparable from creating inequalities.

    So your example and the situation in Oz is instructive, because it show that growth is possible under conditions where sharing wealth (rather than creating impoverishment) is a viable and winning idea.

    If there’s fairness, the resulting “inequalities” should never be an issue. We wouldn’t even think of them as such.

  • Doug Hunter

    “If there’s fairness, the resulting ‘inequalities’ should never be an issue. We wouldn’t even think of them as such.”

    Many people don’t now. There is political power to be had in convincing people and selling them on class warfare though, so I don’t see it ending anytime soon.

    If you (not you specifically Roger, anyone reading this) think being a CEO is easy and that they are overpaid then I would suggest you try and become one yourself and let us know how that works out.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Perhaps we are creating a situation which breeds “class warfare.” Many politicians no doubt bank on this idea – which isn’t to say they have to dream it up: the conditions abound, so that those who want to see a divergence of interests between the haves and the have-nots may not need much persuading.

    It wasn’t always so. One could argue that even the labor-management disputes of old weren’t over the discrepancy in pay but improving the workers’ lot. Envy used not to be an American trait.

    So the recent abuses in the corporate and financial world, and the change in America’s corporate culture, have certainly contributed to the antagonism, and the CEO’s image has definitely plummeted.

    Whether this is reversible, I have no idea. Meanwhile, the CEO has become his own worst enemy.

  • Doug Hunter

    “so that those who want to see a divergence of interests between the haves and the have-nots may not need much persuading.”

    Sometimes they do. I’d have to go back to the archives but I remember a few liberal articles questioning why they couldn’t ‘get people to vote what is in their own best interest’. The answer of course is because those people aren’t buying the idea that someone else owes them something. Their class hatred and envy has not grown enough to suspend their natural sense of fairplay.

    As for the bad corporate culture, the financial industry and corporate excesses would have destroyed those unsustainable habits naturally were it not for corporate welfare from the government, something I don’t advocate. Perhaps a crop of more reasonable businessmen could have picked up the pieces, we’ll never know now.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It will be interesting to see whether we can experience business renaissance in the West given that the governments have made it point to exercise tighter control. The financial industry certainly can’t serve as a model.

    I do see the possibility of something like that occurring but only in the high-tech industry – which is fine with me because they’ll be the leader and the driving force of all the economy. And then, who knows? It might spread.

    I don’t think that corporate welfare has played that much of a part in what had happened in the finance industry. It was a runaway train, in my opinion. (I’m not talking about bailouts and the government enabling afterwards.)

  • Doug Hunter

    #11

    I was speaking of the government’s action after the fact. I think prudent government regulation should have deflated this crisis before it happened or enabled a softer landing. From my limited perspective, it seems that companies ‘too big to fail’ should not be allowed to function as private entities. I don’t know that they were ‘too big to fail’ in the first place but assuming that was true they should have been broken up or otherwise dealt with beforehand. If an entire industry of smaller not too big players goes down and a bailout is felt to be the best option at least you can choose to let the worst offenders fail first rather than basing your decision on size. Some of the worst offenders got bailed out this go round while some semi-responsible entities went bankrupt from getting caught in the wake.

    And please, although I don’t think you would do it, don’t give me the line about how Democrats have been for regulation all along. Not all regulations are created equal and doozies like requiring banks to loan a certain percentage to low income customers likely even contributed to the situation. Just because I think the majority of red tape, regulation, and even laws in this country aren’t worth the paper they’re written on doesn’t mean I don’t believe in any law or regulation.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “Some of the worst offenders got bailed out this go round while some semi-responsible entities went bankrupt from getting caught in the wake.”

    Right. So nobody had learned their lesson, and we’ve only rewarded irresponsible behavior.

  • http://maryannecarter.com/ Mary Anne

    Wow – what a great discussion this post has generated! I think that there will always be a great disparity between the “haves” and the “have-nots.”
    Equality is a great ideal, but I think that it will never happen. Life is never fair.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    “Inequality Affects Us All”.

    Now there’s an ironic title if ever I saw one!

  • Baronius

    Doug, you’re right. Inequality doesn’t affect anyone.

    A multimillionaire spends all his savings on a Rembrandt. He decides to clean it using Windex and steel wool. In a few moments, his wealth drops from 100x mine to exactly equal to mine. In what way am I affected?

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    A multimillionaire spends all his savings on a Rembrandt. He decides to clean it using Windex and steel wool. In a few moments, his wealth drops from 100x mine to exactly equal to mine. In what way am I affected?

    He’s forced to sell his company, which happens to employ you, and the new owners decide to absorb the business into their own corporate structure and fire everyone.

  • zingzing

    “He’s forced to sell his company, which happens to employ you, and the new owners decide to absorb the business into their own corporate structure and fire everyone.”

    making him, once again, 100x richer than you, which means, everything stayed the same! everyone suffers equally! equality for all!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Dreadful,

    You failed to mention the most important thing – the Rembrandt is ruined.

    Apparently, Baronius mustn’t care for art, especially not for Rembrandt’s nudes.

  • http://delibernation.com/blog/3 Silas Kain

    A multimillionaire spends all his savings on a Rembrandt. He decides to clean it using Windex and steel wool. In a few moments, his wealth drops from 100x mine to exactly equal to mine. In what way am I affected?

    The multimillionaire files an insurance claim, collects millions, and YOUR insurance premiums go up.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    That’s greater crime, I’d say, than the Rape of the Sabine Women.

  • Doug Hunter

    “A multimillionaire spends all his savings on a Rembrandt. He decides to clean it using Windex and steel wool.”

    It was just a nickels worth of raw materials all along. A Rembrandt is only ‘valuable’ as long as everyone else agrees it is, just another form of currency much like lighting a $100 bill ablaze. If the wealthy person had instead bought an asset such as a Saudi oilfield and set the wells ablaze then you’d have a different scenario.

  • zingzing

    “If the wealthy person had instead bought an asset such as a Saudi oilfield and set the wells ablaze then you’d have a different scenario.”

    bonfire! hippies! total social destruction!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You’re a philistine, Doug Hunter. Join hands with Baronius and do a savage dance around the bonfire. Zing will orchestrate.

  • zingzing

    na na na na
    na na na na
    hey hey hey
    goodbye

    everybody

    bluuurgh.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I sometimes wonder what’s so terrible about trying to make people more equal by raising up the poor rather than by hammering down the rich.

    Dave

  • STM

    I agree … and I’m a leftie. Is this going to be the only the only thing we agree upon, old boy?????

    It’s already a big cake. Let’s make it bigger and share the bloody thing.

    All the failed (and horrific) experiments prove one thing: stable democracy, rule of law, freedom of speech and free-market capitalism will raise the standard of the average worker every time.

    Provided that the worker is given some genuine protections aimed at raising up his or her standard of living.

  • STM

    Of course, I don’t believe in the basic and unregulated theory of “trickle-down” economics. however.

    That’s just an excuse for the rich to get richer whilst screwing the employee – who does most of the work in creating the profits in the first place.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    The whole idea of “trickle-down” economics is a misconception. The real essence of the concept is that in order to do business you need to have some concentration of capital. It doesn’t matter how that capital gets concentrated – inherited money, forming a partnership or even a worker-owned collective. But something has to bring the money together to make a business happen.

    So having government policies which disperse money or take it out of the economy and thus undermine the concentration of capital makes it more difficult to create new business ventures, create new jobs and grow the economy.

    In an expanding and dynamic economy everyone benefits, from the worker paid a higher wage because he has more job options to the small businessman who wants to expand and can get the investors he needs. That’s the environment which we want to create and which is sometimes described incorrectly as “trickle down.”

    I’d rather call it dynamic capitalism. And it’s very different from the monopolistic capitalism which we’ve seen too much of in recent years.

    dave

  • STM

    Dave: “So having government policies which disperse money or take it out of the economy and thus undermine the concentration of capital”.

    Dave, I don’t agree … that money ends up in the hands of workers, who then spend it, thus keeping other people in jobs.

    In this case of course. I’m talking about regulation that’s sets decent wages and working conditions.

    We have that in this country, and 100-year tradition of it so that those decisions WON’T only be in the hands of employers. Accord is the key … and we’ve got the lowest unemployment rate of any developed western economy during the Global Financial Crisis, and the only economy that’s grown during that period and not gone into recession.

    Granted, the ground’s full of iron ore still being bought by everyone (I reckon it’s more valiable than oil in the long term). But this system of accord, arbitration, collective bargaining and fair work and pay ptactices that are all regulated must have something going for it, especially when it comes to sharing all that dough around.

    Plus, it means were all happy little Vegemites :)

    The only problem is, we’re going so good the bastards just put interest rates up 25 basis points.

    I think that’s too early a call.

    None of us are out of the woods yet, not by a long shot.

    I just hope that in your neck of the woods, they DO apply some regulations to the lunatics who nearly brought the entire global economy crashing to the ground.

    We can’t afford another go like that.

  • Baronius

    I’m not a Philistine. With our current technology, we can record and reproduce any piece of art. The Rembrandt in question was unique only as an object of wealth, not as an object of art.

    The millionaire bought it out of his savings. He has no need to sell off his company. No insurance company is going to reimburse him for a ruined painting that inexplicably smells like ammonia.

    The best answers came from Dave and STM. Wealth can be gained or lost, and the change in inequality doesn’t affect me.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Baronius. You ARE displaying your philistinism, or commodity fetishism, since material wealth is your modern day idol.

    Works of arts are intangible and not reducible to dollars and cents. As such, they belong to all humanity. That’s what museums are for.

    The Rembrandt example, which I believe was your contribution to this discussion, is totally inappropriate for the context. Art is about aesthetic experiences, and transcends the vulgar notions of utility or equality (in spite of there being a market for it).

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    making him, once again, 100x richer than you, which means, everything stayed the same! everyone suffers equally! equality for all!

    it only stayed the same for him. you’re still fired. funny how that works.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You’re right there. There is somehow this asinine idea floating around that we’re not all interconnected, that the welfare or the poverty of one doesn’t affect anyone, that a man is an island.

    Another absurdity that follows from commodity fetishism and free-market enthusiasts.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    …Or the notion that resources are somehow limitless and that if everyone would only copy the actions of the wealthiest, then we would all be as wealthy as they are.

  • zingzing

    it should be noted that it was i who wrote the bit that cindy quoted above. so the absurdist intentions should be clear.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’m aware of that, zing, though I had to look it up. So yes, you have the credit.

    But Dreadful here is offering a needed corrective: there is no pie in the sky.

  • zingzing

    not looking for credit. just wanting to make sure that the intention was clear. that said, i could just write what i mean.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    I sometimes wonder what’s so terrible about trying to make people more equal by raising up the poor rather than by hammering down the rich. – Dave

    Where do the poor get their workforce to exploit?

    “[In The Power Elite (1956) C. Wright Mills quoted] Sophie Tucker (without either approval or disapproval in the context) ‘I’ve been rich and I’ve been poor, and believe me, rich is best.’ For a radical, the corollary of the this attitude is that it is not wealth that is wrong with America but poverty, and that what is reprehensible about the rich is not that they enjoy the good things of life but that they use their power to maintain a system which needlessly denies the same advantages to others.”–Paul M. Sweezy, “Power Elite and the Ruling Class,” Monthly Review, September, 1956

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    That’s OK. Stay cryptic because it’s your style. As long there’s Cindy and me, we’ll explicate your pearls of wisdom. And we shall cast them to the swine.

    Are you saying you’re only 35?

  • zingzing

    35? good god, no.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    zinger,

    i was half asleep reading that. subtlety wasted.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    lamo! yeah zing, i shall mutilate your absurdities and toss them into the trough.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, zing. If you’re dealing with the swine, the subtleties will always be wasted. So here am I, and Cindy, too, regurgitating it for you – for general consumption.

    The moral of the story, zing: don’t give them pâté when liverwurst will suffice.

  • Baronius

    Roger – You completely misunderstand.

  • Doug Hunter

    “He has no need to sell off his company.”

    Who cares if he did. Most critiques of capitalism come with some very obvious flaws, this scenario as well. Did the world magically and suddenly quit demanding the service his business provided?

    If not, then those jobs were replaced by similiar jobs somewhere else or the big corporation simply had higher efficiency (a good thing, less people required for the same result means more free time to develop art skills for the rest of us and replace that Rembrandt)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    A Rembrandt cannot be replaced, Doug. But you’re right about the virtue of capitalism is that it does give a certain freedom to starving artists to be creative. (We used to have art patrons before.)

    You might want to look up a novel by E. M Forster, Howard’s Way, where the issue you’re talking about is central. The link provided I believe offers the entire text online, but you do want to get the Penguin 2000 edition with an introduction by David Lloyd.

  • Doug Hunter

    #39

    Cindy, how do you define poverty? How the world defines it (at a level where you are starving in your own insect infested feces completely at the mercy of the elements) and how the US defines it (less than some fairly arbitrary income that describes a large range of situations) seems to indicate the word as it applies to us is just being used for it’s emotional appeal rather than to describe any objective state of being. Using the world definition the US eliminated poverty long ago.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I know you’re addressing this to Cindy, but I will butt in.

    I think your argument is specious. The idea of “relative poverty” is far more pertinent, because in our economic/political system, relative poverty implies lack of access to the fruits of culture and, consequently, an impoverished life.

    In fact, one could well think of a slave owner or a cattle baron saying to himself: as long as they’re fed and their bare physical needs are met, they’re OK.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    $39,

    Very good retort, Cindy.

  • Doug Hunter

    #49

    You fluffed it up well, but that is a very sad commentary on humanity. It’s not about reality it’s about perception and relativity which puts you between a rock and a hard place. You can never satisify people while inequality exists and you can never make people equal without draconian measures so we’re doomed to exist in permanent conflict.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    48 – Doug,

    I am not sure that distinction serves what I think about poverty. What is its aim?

    Life is a precious thing. There is plenty for all to enjoy. That is the bottom line. We have very little time here on this planet. I don’t propose to spend what I have left defending my brainwashers.

    Poverty is then, not having the means to take care of one’s basic needs when there is enough available to do so. No one should be homeless, hungry, lack medical or dental care.

    But here’s a better word to understand–impoverished. That I define as the state of a life spent promoting the propaganda that insures poverty.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I have never expressed the idea of equality (especially in the sense here discussed) as any kind of ideal. So it’s not I who is between the rock and the hard place.

    I’m quite ready to accept all manner of inequality: some are good at some things, others are not; and vice versa. Facts of life.

    Anyone who aspires to the kind of equality you’re talking about, or who deems it desirable, is a fool.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Doug,

    you can never make people equal without draconian measures

    You said something like that in another thread. You either didn’t see my questions or you preferred not to answer. But it leaves me still not understanding your reasoning along this line.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Doug is playing a devil’s advocate here. He’s more enlightened than at times he pretends to be. It’s his way of picking somebody else’s brains.

    That’s OK, Doug. I’ll play along for a while, but don’t abuse the ploy.

  • Doug Hunter

    #52

    I didn’t mean to offend or make you angry if I did. I just ask questions in order to get you to possibly view things another way or to get a response that will open a door for me. I think terms like ‘poverty’ get tossed around alot in these debates and I think it’s only reasonable to stop and ask ourselves every once in a while, what the hell are we truly talking about? The world is sometimes a bad place, but it’s relatively bad as Roger’s argument would indicate, and all you need is a different worldview to see it as a better place.

    I like hypotheticals and questions so I’ll leave you with another. If you talked to any random person 100 years ago and told them this, that they could live in a society (the modern US) with air conditioning and clean running water and sewer for all, where Polio and many other diseases were under control and medicine had allowed the average person to live to 75-80, that if they lost their job they would be paid for 2 years until they found another one, that dangerous jobsites and child labor had been outlawed, that if they were poor, or disabled, or trying to raise a child alone they would be taken care of with food vouchers, cash payments, housing assistance, etc., where education was offered to everyone, and every community had libraries of the masters, wonderful parks, easy and quick transporation between locales and indeed across the globe at moderate cost, and advanced communications and the internet even existed they would most probably think this a near Utopia.

    If those people might think our fair land a wonderful place why wouldn’t you?

    Since Roger wants to know, I’ll go ahead and tip my hand. If it can be established that our view of the ‘goodness’ or ‘badness’ of society is more closely tied to our attitude and outlook than to any objective measure, then what we have is not necessarily a need to improve our system, although that will continue unabated, it’s to improve the outlook of the people within it. I’ll leave it to you to establish who is working to promote a positive view of the world and who is devoted to tearing our perceptions down.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Now I get it, Doug. It’s all in the perception.

    So even the miserables of this world – Victor Hugo comes to mind – can be happy if their heart is aright and their sight fixed on the eternal good.

    Meanwhile, let the soothsayers tell us what a grand world we’re living in, because all is appearances and nothing is reality.

    Become a godly man, and Thou shall not want.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Hence the work cut out for the masters of this work: Let’s make all happy slaves.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    I didn’t mean to offend or make you angry if I did.

    No, I’m not offended or angry. Not in the least.

    all you need is a different worldview to see it as a better place

    That will be a tough sell, since I think that would fall under denial and rationalization, which I think are are two of the biggest problems that contribute to making the world a very terrible place for some people.

    How does changing my world view, to see things as better, for example, effect the daily reality of homelessness experienced by 1 in 50 (1.6 million) children in the US? I have seen people in positions of authority in hospitals and nursing homes treat people so badly that they lose their minds. And yet what they are doing isn’t even questioned as heartless–it’s considered normal. This is objective reality. I would consider pretending it isn’t, self-deception. It’s delusion to make objective reality into something it’s not.

  • Doug Hunter

    “Now I get it, Doug. It’s all in the perception.”

    Mostly, I think it’s somewhat of a parallel with what you have in Physics with relative motion. Your velocity is only detectable by relative comparison to some other body. Likewise, you can’t ‘feel’ anything while you’re moving steady yet you can certainly feel acceleration or change in velocity. (you can’t ‘feel’ yourself hurtling at thousands of MPH around the sun and through the galaxy but try slamming on your brakes and changing your speed just 5MPH)

    I think people’s perception of reality is a bit similiar, I don’t think average people have much sense of how good or bad they have it (velocity) but they can tell when they’re situation is changing for better or worse (acceleration) and they can make relative comparisons to other people.

    We may not agree on what speed society is going now, but that doesn’t change the fact that we both want to accelerate in roughly the same direction. I think there is some danger with having too negative a perception of the world, while that energy can be channeled towards positive change it can also foster much hatred and resentment which creates real problems and exacerbates existing ones… perception creating reality.

    As to Victor Hugo, I’m not sure how much of our perception is nature versus nurture. My mother always reminds me that I was an exceptionally happy and cheerful baby. I’ve been very positive ever since I can remember, long before I had any conception of politics or philosophy. My parents are particularly positive happy go lucky types as well so it could be learned or born into me. If, as Cindy states, it is simply a denial and rationalization technique, it was implanted in my so deeply and so early that I don’t think I’ll every uncover it (if I even wanted to).

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Doug,

    There is some sort of misunderstanding happening. Let me say, for now, I am not suggesting you or anyone else should be miserable. One can still be happy and positive without engaging in denial and rationalization.

    What about the examples of real people I gave above? How do you deal with those facts? What impact do they have on your reality? Some? None?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “I think there is some danger with having too negative a perception of the world, while that energy can be channeled towards positive change.”

    No disagreement there. One should be able to see the good and the bad.

    Still, you can’t just say everything is honky dory simply because YOU are congenitally happy. That’s too subjective. And when it’s used to justify an existing state of affairs, it’s either delusional or callous.

    Thus, a rich man can claim there’s nothing wrong with the world because he’s happy.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’ve told you, zing, never give up – especially not in baseball. Now you’ve got your wish and you can make the sports pundits – from the other side – eat their words.

    The Twins are in.

  • zingzing

    GO TWINS! what a damn game. on to new york! it’s too damn bad that i’m going on vacation. i’ll be in vegas and arizona for the series in ny. but we’ve won 17 out of our last 21 games. hottest team in baseball. meet the twinkies, ny.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    62 – Whew, thanks Roger. That puts it in a good way.

  • zingzing

    i’ve got three twins t-shirts and those things are going to be mighty stank a week from now.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Thanks, Cindy. Sorry I stole your line.

    Beware of those twinkies, zig. They made Dan White shot Harvey Milk and Willie Mosconi.

    The twinkies defense will not work the second time around.

    And enjoy your trip.

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Why are they called the Twins when there are nine of them?

    Why is there a team called the Mavericks?

    These and many other sporting mysteries to be answered on the Doc Dread Show, tonight at 10 (9 Central).

    (Why does Central get everything an hour earlier?)

  • zingzing

    “Why are they called the Twins when there are nine of them?”

    because of the twin cities. (minneapolis-st. paul.) and because they’re contrary.

    “Why is there a team called the Mavericks?”

    they all decided it so, then had an argument about it, and the only way out was to just go with the original suggestion.

    “(Why does Central get everything an hour earlier?)”

    they get it an hour later as well. funny how time works.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    The twins? Let’s see.

    The Gemini brothers, Romulus and Remus, Castor and Pollux. And you’re right, zing: they’re contrary.

    Don’t forget, though: the twinkie defense sucks.

  • Doug Hunter

    “How do you deal with those facts? What impact do they have on your reality? Some? None?”

    One of the side effects of my view is that by comparison everyone else seems very likely to complain or whine about stuff. After having hundreds of these experiences throughout my life I have become very skeptical of complaints, that is not to say I don’t believe real misery and problems exist, they do, it’s just my knee jerk reaction to question things. When people were complaining about how underpaid the military was I was celebrating my free medical and tax free food and housing payment, when someone complains about having to work at work I’m thinking how much faster time passes when you have work to do, when someone else is mad because they can’t take the Walmart scooters outside the store I’m just happy Walmart provides scooters for those with limited mobility in the first place. It can outwardly seem very heartless and rude but that’s not the intent.

    That’s why I ask for clarification on what is meant by poverty or even homelessness? I don’t automatically feel sorry for a family of four because they make less than $32K, I want to know details. The same goes for your statistic, I immediately want to know more about the precise situation of the kids they are counting. Do that have some sort of transitory housing? How many might be illegals in hiding? How did they arrive at this number? I certainly wouldn’t completely dismiss it, but my perception is that 5% of kids aren’t sleeping behind dumpsters or if they are they’re doing a bang up job of hiding it.

    I can’t tell you what I think about your statistic until I know precisely what it means. In any case 5% or .5%, no children should slip through the cracks and experience homelessness.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It’s interesting, though, when they had an alternative football league.

    So you had the Oakland Raiders and the Oakland Invaders, Doug Flutie quarterbacking. But you weren’t even born then, zingie.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I don’t know which skank stuck the late unlamented Washington Senators (aka Minnesota Twins, aka Twinkies) into this comment thread. May he rot in his dirty laundry!!

    I went to the standings in the American league (the perennial second best in American baseball) and discovered that the Twinkies are in 5th place – out of 14 teamas. Put a little differently, they never seem to break out of the middle of the pack – even in those rare years that they actually win the “World” Series.

    Next year the going will be even rougher – as the team seeks to trade its best talent for cheaper players, as fewer and fewer folks attend baseball games, and as its market gets smaller and smaller.

    Talk of inequality! Sticking a metro area of only 2.5 million or so with a “major league” team is a real burden they cannot possibly carry.

  • Doug Hunter

    “I’ve told you, zing, never give up – especially not in baseball.”

    Does this apply to Rangers fans, or just regular teams?

  • zingzing

    roger: “Don’t forget, though: the twinkie defense sucks.”

    actually, their fielding is top-notch. their pitching, however, is suspect. sometimes suspect, sometimes spectacular. but 17-4 for the past month? good enough for me.

    they did the job tonight. nathan’s inning was spectacular. runners at the corners, zero outs, and he gets out of that? damn. such a great game.

    ruvy: “in the American league (the perennial second best in American baseball)”

    you haven’t been around for the last decade, i guess. american league is dominant, and have been for a long time.

    “Next year the going will be even rougher – as the team seeks to trade its best talent for cheaper players, as fewer and fewer folks attend baseball games, and as its market gets smaller and smaller.”

    the first part is true… if we go deep, we’ll have players who want out to a bigger market, more money than we can afford. luckily, we’ve got next year wrapped up pretty well. it’s the year after that that’s a worry. as far as baseball’s marketability, it’s been an EXTREMELY profitable league since the lockout. more money than ever.

    “Sticking a metro area of only 2.5 million or so with a “major league” team is a real burden they cannot possibly carry.”

    yeah, sure. that’s why they’re opening a new stadium… the twins are by far the most successful small market team of the past decade. 5 out of the last 8 years, we’ve gone to the post season. but an outdoor stadium in minneapolis? what are they thinking? but, it will bring in more money. and baseball is making the loot.

    i can’t imagine a more wrong financial forecast than yours. totally off.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You mean Texas Rangers? I’m impartial to baseball teams (except when the Yankees are in the World Series). When they’re hot, they’re exciting.

    The Rangers had a decent team about 6 years back, or when Nolan Ryan still pitched. And so did the Astros, but now we’re talking two decades ago.

    If I were you, I’d follow the Oilers (Bum Phillips, remember him?) And of course the America’s team, when Tony Dorsett and Roger Staubach were still playing.

    That team had an impressive list of quarterbacks.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Zing,

    I was talking Dan White’s “twinkie defense.”

    And by the way, have you ever heard of Harmon Killebrew, Tony Oliva or Rod Carew?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    zing,

    It’s nice to hear that Minnesota is finally getting OUTDOOR basball again, and that the Metrodome can be retired to be a homeless shelter (if it hasn’t been knocked down).

    But who will be able to afford the tickets to go to the games?

    I’ve watched both National and American League baseball. There is just no question about it. The National League plays bettter ball – even if at present they seem to be losing to the American League – or is it possible that the guys in the American league actually learned how to move when standing at the base, instead of standing like statues?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    But I do miss the old Vikings stadium when they played Super Bowls either in the mud or at below 20 temperatures, when football was football.

  • zingzing

    roger: “I was talking Dan White’s “twinkie defense.””

    oh. yeah, that sucked.

    “And by the way, have you ever heard of Harmon Killebrew, Tony Oliva or Rod Carew?”

    dude.

    “the Metrodome can be retired to be a homeless shelter (if it hasn’t been knocked down).”

    well, they just got into the playoffs, so it’s around for at least another game. and the vikings still play there.

    “But who will be able to afford the tickets to go to the games?”

    they have some of the cheapest ticket prices in both football and baseball. can you afford $10 for a baseball game? or $40 for a football game…

    “I’ve watched both National and American League baseball. There is just no question about it. The National League plays bettter ball – even if at present they seem to be losing to the American League – or is it possible that the guys in the American league actually learned how to move when standing at the base, instead of standing like statues?”

    the american league has totally dominated the last 15 years of baseball. it doesn’t always end up that way in the world series, but the best teams don’t always make it there either. playoff baseball is a whole new season. that said, the level of competition in the american league is far better than in the national league. just look at inter-league play.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    And when the Yanks are on, there’s no beating them. By far the most successful franchise in baseball history.

    But also the richest market.

  • zingzing

    roger: “But I do miss the old Vikings stadium when they played Super Bowls either in the mud or at below 20 temperatures, when football was football.”

    damn right. when the north meant the north. the vikings are also butting up against the metrodome. so after this year (when they win the superbowl, of course,) they’re going to be even more against it. thing’s a relic. time to go outside.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Well Doug, I just wrote you a long comment with links and whatever, that failed to post. Maybe one day I learn to copy the comment before hitting post.

  • zingzing

    motherfuck the yankees. they snoozed into the playoffs and now they have the hottest team in baseball to deal with. maybe they’re rightfully confident, but maybe they’re just so much hot stuff. i welcome the yankees over anyone who actually had to work to get there. the twins are a machine right now.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Somehow I knew I was gonna get a violent reaction. But I tell you what. The Twins are on fire, so let the best man win.

    Fair enough?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    The way football is meant to be played – outdoors. Have you seen the old footages of the Army-Navy games? Exciting.

    Astroturf is for sissies (causes more injuries than the grass; besides, all of it is made in China, of hazardous materials), and for the tea-baggers of course.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Okay I reproduced it. Doug, you seem to be talking about complaints, while I am talking about suffering. I have personally witnessed people who were lucid quickly become psychotic based on the care they received. You are discussing inconveniences of shopping.

    I think you live in Texas, right? If you desire, you could easily go to personally discover the plight of homeless children. From an article in the Dallas News: Texas received the lowest ranking in the nation in a state report card on child homelessness released today by the National Center on Family Homelessness. Findings include:

    •Texas had 337,105 homeless children in 2006, including some Hurricane Katrina evacuees.
    •One in 20 Texas children does not know where he or she will get the next meal.
    •Less than one in four homeless children graduates from high school.
    •More than one in five Texas children are uninsured.
    •Texas has no long-term planning to address homeless children, according to the center.

    The data comes from a study that is available online in detail called State Report Card On Child Homelessness.

    More information from Homeless Families and Children, The 2007 National Symposium on Homelessness Research.

    A 6 minute video on the invisible homeless children in Sonoma County and their risks for associated problems, including gang membership.

    That portrait of children living behind dumpsters was disturbing. The next time you are out with your child in your car on a winter day, try imagining how you would feel if that were his home, and how he would feel.

  • Doug Hunter

    “Well Doug, I just wrote you a long comment with links and whatever, that failed to post. Maybe one day I learn to copy the comment before hitting post.”

    I have no idea why programmers of either this site or your web browser itself have not solved this problem. Everyone at some point in there internet experience (most multiple times) loses form data. I know many sites do store it on their end, so I must assume it’s too much of a performance hit for a site like BC or they would already implement it. The browsers should build a solution in, they already give us so many useless gadgets and toolbars and crap, one useful feature shouldn’t hurt too bad.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    You’re right, zing. I haven’t been around for almost a decade. The last live baseball game I saw was the Giants in San Francisco in 1998. And maybe the players in the game have actually learned to move around a bit more since they started the interleague play.

    When I mentioned to my wife that the Twins had made it to the playoffs, she got all excited (she’s a St. Paul girl). If they actually make it to the Series, I’ll be interested – but games are so fuckin’ hard to watch; a night game starting at 21:00 in Minneapolis starts at 04:00 in the morning here!

  • zingzing

    ah well, you missed a doozy tonight. one of the most incredible games i’ve ever seen. minnesota tied it in the 6th, detroit up in the eighth, min ties, detroit up in the 10th, min ties, some controversy, some wins missed by inches on either end, min finally wins. great pitching, great defense, great clutch hitting. just a masterpiece. a well earned win for the twins.

    i’m actually kinda glad i’ve got a flight out of nyc because a) i can’t afford to go to a game, and, b) i’d get beat up if i stayed here this week.

    GO TWINS!

  • zingzing

    i’m pretty sure joe nathan (min’s closer) had the bases loaded with one out. he managed to get out of it. and the twins were within milliseconds of a win in the 11th, but our runner got tagged out just before he reached the plate. and then there was a detroit player who got his jersey whiffed by a pitch with the bases loaded… if baseball has a marketing department, they ordered up this game.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    If baseball has a marketing department, they ordered up this game.

    Major League Baseball does have a marketing department, and they outsource some of the work to us. Every winter we here in Israel (those of us who speak passable English, like me) get to market season tickets all over the US and Canada. It would be great to be able to send a video of this game as a sample of what you miss when you don’t buy a season’s ticket – and what you could get to see if you buy….

  • Doug Hunter

    #87 Thanks for the links. I did manage after some searching to drill down to the methodology.

    What I found was this, because the organization you linked to was unhappy with the federal definition of homelessness (which is pretty close to what a normal person would envision at the word homeless in and out of shelters) they decided to expand it with the following categories:

    1) People living in trailer parks (offered no further explanation) = homeless

    2) People sharing a residence, i.e. young girl with baby moves back into grandma’s house = homeless.

    3) Kids awaiting foster care = homeless

    4) People in transitional housing = homeless

    That is what I was getting at. Why, every time when I follow to the bottom of these stats do I find they are lies or gross misrepresentations? When I get a stat on child homelessness I want a stat on child homelessness, not a stat on child homelessness + those in foster care + those in trailer parks + those living with grandma + those living in government provided transitional housing. I’m not arguing that those are great circumstances, just that they are in no way ‘homelessness’.

    The truth is bad enough, there’s no need to add to it. I have theories as to why individually people do this and why these organizations do this (try and make things appear worse than they are) and if you read my comments all together I bet a picture will begin to emerge. If not, it must wait for another time as we’ve now hijacked another thread. Maybe it’s something to continue in Roger’s big thread.

  • zingzing

    ruvy: “It would be great to be able to send a video of this game as a sample of what you miss when you don’t buy a season’s ticket – and what you could get to see if you buy….”

    of course, it wasn’t a regular “season” game. it was the 163rd game of the season for both, as they were tied at the end of the regulation 162nd. this was a playoff game. supposedly, 350,000 people tried to get tickets for this game. now, that’s only 10 times the amount of people they average, but in a city that size, that’s 1 in every 8 or so people, including babies, wanted to go.

    oh lawdy, how i’d love to invade the bronx with a homer hanky. and a baseball bat.

  • http://www.leavingthelandofwoo.com Bob Lloyd

    I had a wry smile when I thought about the title and the consequences of the recent banking crisis in which governments around the world, hurried to provide rescue packages for the bankers who gambled and lost. They didn’t lose themselves of course, because the governments bailed them out. The people who lost out are working people who will now be expected to pay for the crisis with job losses, higher productivity for less pay, public sector cuts, increased taxation, etc.

    When we talk about inequality and class attitudes we ought to explode the myth that the interests of these CEOs and financial tycoons are in any way the same as those who work for a living. The latter provide the profits and despite the fact that those profits fund industry, that’s a financial dependency, not an identity of interests.

    The recent crisis shows above all that the interests between the people working in the offices and factories have interests that are very different from the speculative accumulation of the bosses of big financial instutitions. We are all encouraged to think that the interests of the company are the same as our interests – how long does it take for us to wake up?

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Yay Bob!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Why then do you take up for the Big Pharma?

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    we’ve now hijacked another thread

    We have? This thread is about inequality. Homeless children is not a thread hijack, imo. But feel free to move the discussion, if you are interested in replying.

    Have you ever been a foster child or worked with them? I have worked with and known foster children and actually spent one horrifying night as one. Foster care is mostly a nightmare for a child. And personally I would have preferred sleeping behind a dumpster than spending that one night.

    I believe that homeless children they referred to were living in campgrounds not permanent trailer parks. (correct me if I am wrong) Living with ‘other people’, while sometimes good, often puts a strain on a family. Particularly when those offering assistance don’t really want to be offering it. It’s easy to imagine these scenarios as okay, when you don’t have experience with them. But their statistics demonstrate that the failure to graduate from high-school and other factors apply to these children regardless of inclusion of the scenarios you personally don’t favor.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, ain’t that interesting?

    And compare this now with Baronius’s panic – see his latest comment – about the virus spreading to contaminate all of BC.

    It looks like an alternative “power center” is coming into play and it disturbs the usual relations. So much the better.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    He didn’t take up for Big Pharma. Did you read his article carefully? He held Big Pharma in proper skepticism. He took up for scientific evidence of efficacy.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, yes and no. I’m almost ready to take it back except for two points:

    1) “The FDA is there precisely to address these pressures and maintain patient safety.” (This is a lame statement.)

    2) In the most recent article on science, it’s not clear until the very end what the object of the article is about. It starts out with the most crude positivist account of science – long discredited, BTW – so it looks like it’s a strawman’s argument. Only at the very end, one learns that the argument is directed against proponents of alternative medicine.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    #93,

    Actually, Doug, it’s not such a bad idea. You do have some interesting ideas which could benefit from a more rigorous scrutiny, and we should be able to focus on the issue at hand and hopefully get to the bottom of it.

    There’s a point, besides, beyond which too many participants, in any discussion, sets into effect the law of diminishing returns (like too many cooks in the kitchen, you might say).

    I believe the limit is seven (7). There are some studies (Peter Drucker may be one source). And there’s of course Plato’s Symposium, “intellectual feast,” roughly speaking, where the guests were also limited to some such number.

  • Baronius

    Roger, what are you talking about?

    For a year now, you and Cindy have been carrying on a conversation that ran through (and against) the threads all over BC Politics. Now, you’ve taken up a thread of your own, and I applaud it. I’m glad to see the “virus” contained.

    When El B teased you about your persistence in carrying on a personal conversation on the American Pie thread rather than via email, I defended it.

  • Doug Hunter

    Cindy #98 I’m on to you guys takeover of BC.

    Anyway, all of those scenarios are, or certainly can be, bad. I’ve seen the living with extended family thing have the appearance of working out very well and I’ve seen it tear families apart. The link I found had no additional definition of when to consider living in a trailer ‘homeless’. I would assume you’re right for the campgrounds, it bet some of those sleazy pay by the week outfits count as well.

    My intention has never been to set out to prove that the world is perfect or flawless and that is especially the case in regards to homeless children. We originally started down this path speaking of perspective and point of view. If, and I’m not pointing at you specifically, you hear that 5% of the children are homeless and you’re imagining traditional homelessness living in boxes and behind dumpsters, then you should be ecstatic to know that this is not always the case. Some of those counted as ‘homeless’ have homes with extended family or in foster care programs or in government provided housing or in crappy trailers already.

    I searched the web for definitions of ‘homeless’ and virtually none of the general definitions would have included any of those subcategories mentioned above. I know the people behind expanding the definition only have the best of intents at heart, but for all practical purposes they’re lying. Do the ends always justify the means? I think this gets back to a previous comment where I questioned who would have the incentive to paint a negative view of the world and why. (and inversely who would be spinning things positive)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Baronius,

    I was only kidding. I don’t believe I attacked you in any way. And you’re right, now we have a room all our own, and with a view, besides.

    And I don’t mind voyeurs. (I don’t know about Cindy, though.)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Good show, Doug. Let’s have a revolution.

  • STM

    “the Doc Dread Show”

    Is this fair dinkum, and if so, is it on BC radio??

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    ‘Fraid not, Stan, but it is all over the map.

    :-p