MORNING
Six or so months ago, I posted here some photos of the framework of an unknown object being constructed near Gulfstream. Here is what is looks like, almost finished. Pegasus, the winged horse, and I think I can be forgiven for not guessing it. Of course, the city immediately planted trees that block the view. This is Florida, where there is a foofaraw about feeding the homeless. All the stupid people think Ft. Lauderdale is against feeding the homeless.
This addresses the old problem of whether or not “we” are in this “together”. The answer is, emphatically, “No.”. “We” do not all have to “do our bit” to make the system work. I grew up in a family that got this wrong, always saying it was all or nothing. Sorry, world, there is a third option. It’s called leave the other guy alone, or live and let live. Leave me out of your calculations, which are mostly sick and twisted anyway.
This situation in economics is called the “free rider syndrome”. A few people build the lighthouse, but then everybody else uses it for free. Unfortunatedly, the system sides with the builders and imposes a fee upon everyone else, including those who never use the lighthouse and, all too often, those who oppose the lighthouse. And it encourages graft amongst lighthouse builders who quickly learn they can pad the payroll. And worse, the only way to collect such taxes is by methods inimical to personal privacy.
My position is simple, although I recognize the individual situation is far from simple. It is, again, leave the other guy alone. Let those who build the lighthouse shoulder the cost of free riders on their own, as a cost of doing business their way. If they don’t like it, let them innovate, let them improve. But public subsidy amounts to giving them a free ride. User-pay is the lesser of two evils and therefore should be the primary choice.
That's because suffering is zero-sum, you can’t alleviate the total by spreading it around. Those who think otherwise are not your friends, nor are they "fellow Americans". Canadians maybe, but that's why most Canadians are such highly-respected respected millionaires and such. What I say, of course, means only in reasonable circumstances, not in life or death situations. Not you bail faster because the hole is in your end of the boat. I will never consider it natural for those few who suffer badly to wish, much less force, it onto others. Suffering is the only way some people learn.
Put another way, if those who need a lighthouse think it is too expensive, then in my opinion they don't need it near badly enough. Especially since they have so much free time on their hands they can start worrying about what other people are doing. Right, Patsie?
[Author's note: "free rider syndrome" is an accounting term, but it is used mainly by politicians and accountants. You can never know it exactly, but the costs can be calculated. I dislike any type of tax accounting that charges people because they might use something in the future simply because it may be free. People are evil when thinking they should compel others to pay for something they may not want. It is akin to putting up a tower near the footpath and wanting to charge passersby for looking at it. That is essentially what a lighthouse it..
Furthermore, to enforce such laws, they plainly have to be paying inordinate amounts of attention to what other people do. My feeling is "make the user pay". That those who want and/or use something should pick up the cost themselves if they possibly can. If thereafter others use it for free, that is too bad. Not every time, but in 99% of anything practical I can think of.]
In the newspapers I read several items of interest. One was the quadruple amputee who is suspected of killing his parents. I would pay $50 to hear his side of that story, but he committed suicide as the police, in pure innocence of course, surrounded his vehicle, pistols at the ready. How about the probe to the comet? Hey, you NASA bastards, we still are not on Mars. Quit wasting money. I understand NASA logic pertaining to Mars. The only way those numbskulls on a par with druggies, queers, and other social undesirables would ever get to Mars is by lying on the application form or as stowaways.
And two court actions we’d rather, well you decide, today’s azzhole award is shared by Christine Callaghan and the Duncan family. Bunch of sub-human bottom-fishers. Callaghan is suing because she was not hired because she used “medical marijuana” (duh) and the Duncan’s are suing the Texas hospital where their cousin Ebola croaked. They claim he was not treated right, no doubt playing the race card.
As expected, Munoz, the drunken cop who plowed into the secretary got his blood test (three times the legal limit) thrown out of court. He also used the “thin skull” defense, saying she contributed to her own death by having traces of drugs in her system. Gee, did she die of an overdose, or was she crushed to death? The fellow cop who arrived first stated he saw no signs of impairment, indicating he was legally blind. Or drunk himself. Or something.
On Sunday last, a man was shot and killed in “a Hollywood home”. Now, if there was nothing funny going on, every sordid detail of his life and the suspects would be plastered all over the news. But in this case, the police refuse to say if there were other people in the home, how many, or who they were. What’s that smell?
NOON
Another ideal day, work outside weather. I even changed the oil on the red scooter at half the recommended range. And here is a bad photo of the new cPod wagon, being tested for length. I know it’s hard to make out, but it is getting dark by 5:30PM these days. I added some graphics to show the size, 38” including the tongue. The final length, when “buttoned up” will be 44”, or slightly over half the size of the first mark. It is already apparent the new cPod will be a much better balanced towing unit.
The wooden frame is still on the drawing board. It should only add another 80 pounds. I can tell you we know a substantially lot more about wagon construction that last year. And we have another unit here that is probably three times as strong as it will ever need to be. To celebrate, I bought a box of butter nut ice cream and treated myself to a generous helping.
And that, folks, constitutes my day up till now. Sorry, no parades or drama, Everybody needs down time. I’ll be nice and not ask how exhilarating your day has been.
EVENING
What’s the big deal with the banks being fined $950 million for manipulating the market? What do you call what they’ve been doing with mortgages since 1960? But the reaction is as if the population never suspected a thing. Read my lips, every depression and collapse in modern history has been the result of central banking. The situation is laughable this time, because the bankers openly bragged about the exploitation. They couldn’t keep their mouths shut—but why bother, it’s not like they have to pay the fines themselves, and it’s not like $950 million hurts them. And it’s not like the victims will ever see a penny of it.
I could not help listening in as divorced women talked about dating. I’ve never understood where they get their impossibly high standards, but it is pretty clear they highly over-rate themselves as good company. I learned this in spades when I worked for the phone company, older women thinking they are fantastic company. Most of them are as flat-out boring as a box of bran flakes.
But it was the usual items that kept my attention. These women, most late 40-ish, had not learned a thing about dating. My advice to the lot of them is to get real. Most of their demands irked me. Gals, don’t expect a man to have a pension plan unless you have one yourself. Don’t expect a fancy restaurant meal on the first date—unless you want to go dutch. Expensive first dates are for losers of both sexes. How come we never hear women tell how well such dates worked out? Easy, because either they don’t work out or the guy never calls back.
Nor could I help noticing some things older women say they don’t like in a man. Guys, get ready for this:
√ Asking her if the posted photo is recent (you know women wouldn’t lie, don’t you?)
√ “Failing” to mention you are a vegetarian (or can’t dance or wear reading glasses, you cad)
√ Expecting her to have her own transportation (you always wanted to be a chauffer, right?)
√ Showing up in casual clothes (what, you didn’t know first dates are always formal?)
√ Talking about yourself (doesn’t matter that she kept asking you about yourself)
Also, and this one is strange, if you are the sort who takes women out to dinner before you know whether she loves you, which is slightly retarded behavior, but anyway, you have to watch out what you order. Apparently you should not order any food she does not like. Duh, and on a first date, you hardly know that. I always meet new women on neutral territory, most often a coffee shop with booths. And I’ll repeat a fact—I have never in my life ever asked a women for sex. Never had to. (That's rhetorical. I have asked women for sex twice in my life and was turned, but I've only been turned down three times total.)
And as for you guys, quite trying to relate to women on your own level. You can’t. When there are more than three women in a group, they are talking about men. You don’t stand a chance unless you are an incredible talker. You must know how to talk. I do, but most of you don’t. Ha! But women, they certainly know the odds. For instance, they know men who listen to classical music are less likely to chew tobacco. And they like serious musicians. That's for sure. What? You jerk, I said serious musicians. That's why.
My most common complaint about women is possessiveness. I identify with that meme of the OPG. I don’t like women who think I have to answer every question they ask or I’m hiding something. That’s why I dumped Sharon Buchner. My god, she'd ask questions, is it really that necessary I list everyone I talked to every day? Yep, strange she lived with her old boyfriend 12 years but says you living with 12 women one year each is a sin. Be wary of women who crave company 24 hours a day. What now? Okay Ken, I get you wouldn't know about that, but OPG is "over-possessive girlfriend".
Return Home
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
