BAIL OUT!!!

I should have figured the House was Jewish. As per the stereotype, they’re all focused on their money.

What the F#$% are our "Representatives" doing taking a day off from work for Rosh Hashanah? WTF?! Yesterday, the phags in the Legislative Branch voted down a "bailout bill" to help sustain the American Economy.

I was actually surprised at who voted what - I thought, for sure, the Republicans would vote for this, since it is their party's President that is calling for it. But oh, nay nay - Republicans voted against it 65-133, and Democrats voted 140-95 for it. 67% Reps against, 60% Dems for it.

However, I am split on it - on the one hand, I agree with the writers of a Time magazine article "Let Risk-Taking Financial Institutions Fail", which says:

Let the poorly managed, overly risk-taking financial institutions fail! Always remember that Wall Street and the real economy are not the same thing.

I agree - companies that are stupid enough to make poor lending decisions should be allowed to weed themselves out of the marketplace. It's the cleansing of the gene-pool...survival of the fittest. That's how the free market works - you have equal opportunity to be successful or to fail epically. Let it happen.

On the other hand, I agree with Jim Marshall (D-GA), in his "Commentary: America can't go cold turkey on credit". I too have thought about how an economy with government intervention should work. He says that he has:

...studied ways to make sure they don't get into trouble in the first place -- and drag all of us down with them.

In my opinion, I am pro-capitalism...and also pro-socialism - but within balance. I believe that companies should not extend credit to individuals in cases that their total credit equals or surpasses 50% of their yearly earnings. (In my individual case, my credit-line EQUALS or EXCEEDS what I make in a year. I know that I am currently negative about 75% of my annual salary and have put a stop to it, and have been doing everything I can to reverse it.) Of course, companies are greedy and will extend credit with no regard to the individual's over-all ability to pay. It seems that credit checks only take into account their ability to pay as if this were the only loan they had taken out.

Therefore, the Government should step in, and set a lower limit to the amount of credit that companies overall should be able to extend to a particular individual. This would have to be in the form of a regulated government division dedicated to the extension of credit. Companies would have to borrow their money from the government initially and be liable to the government if they default.

This bottom limit for how far an individual (and even company, or parent company as a rollup of all subsidiaries) can go into debt will prevent this kind of economic failure that ripples throughout the American economy, and into the Global economy.

That is a very Socialist concept, but the pro-capitalist part is next. While it would be acceptable for the Government to help prevent failure, it should not inhibit success. The Government should not attempt to set an upper barrier to limit the amount of success that an individual or business can attain - to a point. Let me explain...

A person goes into business - after 30 years becomes one of the most wealthy businesses in the nation, and then retires or is laid off - either good or bad, for better or worse, and receives a Golden Parachute. That Parachute should be the result of an equation - an equation that takes into account the Value of the Company, the Profit the Company generates on average during the years the individual has been in that position, and the unpaid Debt the Company has acquired during the individual's time in that position.

If you have a company that is thriving, doing well...and turns a profit, but has a nearly equal unpaid debt - the package the CEO or individual leaves with will be less than if they had no unpaid debt. If the company is on its way out, like Enron was, the CEO would either leave with nothing, or OWE money, depending on the equation.

There needs to be a reformation of how the economy works, because right now it does not work...at least not to the Main Street economist - the person that sits in a cubicle all day, living pay-check to pay-check, wondering if it's going to be a $10 grocery week, or a $50 grocery week. Sure the concepts may sound Socialist, but if applied correctly, is it really all that bad?

It might be if you're a greedy CEO, counting on that extra $200m package deal when you retire.

Cubicles

You know what I hate about working in a cubicle environment? It’s not so much the beige walls, or the fluorescent lighting, or really even the isolationist atmosphere it creates (although that is not preferred). Instead it’s the perceived perception of solitude.

When people are in a cube, they become unaware of everyone else around them, and thus find themselves feeling at liberty to carry on with their daily routines as if they were the only one in the office.

Case in point: there is a coworker of mine that does not have the friendliest personality a person could have, mixed with a “not-my-problem-so-fix-it” attitude, and a general negative disposition in general for anyone from which she has to request a service who does not respond immediately and to her liking.

This only gets to be a problem around lunch time, when it becomes “off-the-clock” time for her. She retrieves her lunch food items from a local restaurant, and returns with them to her desk, and then proceeds to handle her personal business via the company’s customer-service phone lines.

I’m sure this wouldn’t be a problem if she would handle it quietly – but that is not what happens. Every day it’s an argument/conflict with another company’s customer service rep on the phone, while the rest of us are trying to work. Normally it has something to do with her kids, and personal business...but it’s always uncomfortable to hear.

Because of this, we all know more than we want to know about her family life, and it’s fairly stressful (at least to me) to have to hear someone argue with someone else on the other end of the phone – when everything could be resolved if she would not be such a bitch to them!

I’ve asked about it, and apparently it’s not that big a problem yet – but I disagree. If I can hear her in my cubicle, I’m sure other people in her department – Customer Service – who have people on the phone can hear her also…as well as the customers, possibly.

My take on it is: if you have personal business – either handle it quietly, or go find a payphone/cell phone to use outside the building. I know she has a cell phone of her own, because she has called the warehouse in the mornings to come unlock the door. Go out to the warehouse, or out back behind the building, and handle your bitchyass business there. No one else in the office wants to hear about how your kids can’t get a doctor’s appointment, or how you can’t afford to pay them when you DO get an appointment.

Shit, woman. You’re not the only person in the office.

And change, it did...

I left my job at Texas Wesleyan at the end of June. June turned out to be historically the longest period of time that I have been employed and paid, while working as few days as possible. I used up all my sick days, since I wouldn't get paid for them, and I used the 3 paid summer vacation days they gave us. That was about 2.5 weeks worth of time off, which means I only worked about 11 days that month, but got paid for the whole thing.

I started my new job in Plano June 30, and have been doing it ever since. It's going on 2.5 months now, and things are looking pretty good. I've gotten to explore the parts of a server that the folks at the last job wouldn't let me, due to permissions...I've been instrumental in helping release the latest version of the website, and developing new technologies for the next version. And in general, I've gotten to be creative and not replace printer toners doing it.

I'm not a very big fan of riding the train - or at least I wasn't. But I've found ways to get around that. I now get TV on my cell phone, so I can watch MSNBC on the ride in, coffee in-hand, and get my news. I've also picked up listening to podcasts again, since my commute is about 1.5 hours one-way. I can cover a lot of information during that time.

But while I'm not a fan of having to ride the train, and rely on their scheduling (which has gotten better, since they added two buses to my routes), I *am* a fan of only having to fill up my gas tank every two weeks now. I save a shitton of gas by riding the train.

I also have been saving a shitton of money since I started packing my lunch. For a while there, I went out to lunch with some coworkers to get in with people on the inside, but for the past month, I've stopped using my credit cards, since they were all maxed out, and have been bringing my lunch. Not only does this save on expenses, but also gives rise to weight loss. I'm shooting for 220 or less by Christmas when I have to go visit my mother for the first time in 5 years...I don't want to be a fatty when I go, and am hoping I get to take my girlfriend, who ever she may be at the time.

I have to go to bed at 10:00 or as close to that as possible however, since I have to get up at 5:00am in order to get ready and pack a lunch, to get to the train on time. Otherwise, I have to drive, and that kills 1/3 of the gas tank, plus the wasted allocated fare for the train ticket.

Things are starting to look up finally...and I've taken control of all the spiraling my life was doing this summer. Now it's time to sleep.

Peace