Words to live by...
"How beautiful it is to do nothing, and to rest afterward."
[Spanish Proverb]
(The right to looseness has been officially given)
"Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders," wrote Ludwig von Mises, "no one is relieved of his share of responsibility by others. And no one can find a safe way for himself if society is sweeping towards destruction. Therefore everyone, in his own interest, must thrust himself vigorously into the intellectual battle."
Apparently, the crossword puzzle that disappeared from the blog, came back.
I came across an article, an opinion piece, lamenting how the Republican Congress has cut (by $36 a month) the food stamp program. I started to wonder how much they'd have to cut when there is no more money? When the government finally spends so much that it can no longer pay the interest on the debt. That day is coming.
In our homes, we do not spend more than we take in for decades. We cut expenses, we tighten our belts, we buy cheaper cuts of meat, we buy fewer (or no) new clothes clothes and start mending what we can, we cut back across the board; kids lose out on allowances, parents start packing lunches for work, credit cards are cut up or hidden.
But if the government tries to do it, all heck breaks loose.
As I was reading John Stossel's column yesterday, I felt the germ of an idea. Not having any antiseptic soap or lotion on hand, it multiplied and became this piece of babble.
Stossel's column is entitled "Privatize Everything" but it is really about organ donationselling. He segues into organ selling from observations of lackadaisical attitudes on the part of government workers and the plight of hopeful organ recipients. His observations on these seem right on the money, as we often say. Which brings up the etymology of that idiom:
According to sportsidioms.com, term "right on the money" or "dead on the money" comes from archery.
For prize competitions in a coin would be set at the middle of the target and the archer whose arrow landed closest to the coin would take the coin as the prize.
Therefore right on the money would mean the center of the target (dead center).
(according to http://askville.amazon.com/Whatt-origin-expression-money/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=13856391)
Idioms are things which often "go without saying" yet we say them anyway, don't we? I often related "idioms" to "idiots"... don't ask me why.
To get back to Stossel's column (so I can wrap this up, hopefully), it is apparent that he trusts the market to not become like government. I do not. I am more pessimistic. Consider retail outlets, such as department stores. Ideally, workers in them should be motivated by job insecurity and the hope of advancement (in pay or status) to be courteous and helpful. But we all know that doesn't work all that well. It takes more than vague incentive or threat, these must be clear and believable. And they aren't. Every job has the opportunity for "just getting by" and workers who gravitate toward that. After all, standards are fixed, it would be cruel to change them often.
Legalizing organ selling would not stop the black market. At least, in my humble opinion. Black markets in just about everything exist everywhere and for just about everything. And they will continue to exist because they offer profit without taxation. Once the concept of income tax (essentially, a tax on earning income), the incentive to avoid such taxation was born. Excise taxes are much older and a significant portion of a population has always wished to avoid them, rebellions begin in response to them, after all. And government will always seek to (as the private business owner does) to maximize revenue. This means it would tax the sale of organs (possibly twice.. as an excise tax and as an income tax on the profit) and trigger a black market. Or, rather, an expansion of said black market.
As Einstein once said: In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.
So, the day of sweat (as it shall be called forever now) is over, the A/C is repaired, the bill (much bigger than I thought it would be) paid, and peace reigns once again in the household.
What amazed (and saddened and appalled) me was the cost of the refrigerant. We use something called R-22. And it is not cheap. Not by a long shot.
And that is what was needed, 9 pounds of R-22 (I think it is measured in pounds) for my unit. But, first, the leak (which means the freon is now contributing to the depletion of the ozone...) needed to be found and repaired. Which it was. That was the cheapest and easiest part. In fact, I was not charged at all for that service.
A/C is pretty much mandatory here. Though I grew up without it. As I wrote yesterday, my family had no A/C until 1963 when we moved into a mobile home. Somehow, the heat and humidity did not bother me very much. But once you have A/C, you do not want to give it up.
I did not need it in San Diego. Because its climate is pretty much the equivalent of A/C anyway, especially if you live close to the beaches. As I moved inland (to the east), A/C and heat became important. But even then I did not use it much. When the temps are rarely above 80 or below 50, there isn't much need. Here, I rarely need heat but that does happen... mostly because I have become a wimp and cannot tolerate sub-50 degree periods (we do get those from time to time but only in the early morning hours in the winter).
But I will not think about that, that's for another day.
When my family moved to Florida, it was the mid-1950's, we had no air conditioning. In the summer, we basically sweltered. I don't recall it being so oppressive as to be intolerable. Of course, I was just a boy then and could tolerate a lot.
It wasn't until 1963, when we moved to Orlando, that we got A/C.
I am getting to relive those days of my early youth. My A/C stopped cooling the house yesterday. Which means that I will be spending a good part of today trying to get an A/C tech out to my house. And sweating.
Do you think we spend too much time and energy on celebrities? People often seem not to know who the vice-president is but can recognize Lady Gaga and Kim Kardashian, not to mention the "twerking" Miley Cyrus. Polling supports this.
There are those that say there is a serious effort to "dumb down" America. I don't think so. I think the American public has been a little ignorant for an awful lot of years. The more I read, the more I am sure that I am right. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot that I am unaware of, but I still think I know more than the average citizen.
Just today, I listened to a fellow golfer... who could give me the history of Bobbie Bowden (Florida State University football coach)... talk about the size of the guy's house and a rundown of his treatment by FSU. Why is that important? Ok, maybe he was just making conversation and I am over reacting.
And there are a lot of people who are aware of more than celebrity behavior. But there seems to be a lot more who are walking around in a bubble of their own making and oblivious to things outside it.
I am sure that none of you are this self absorbed.