Aesthetics, Beauty, and Lingering Memories

Please note, in advance, it might be work reading the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia

I know this isn’t a shock to you, if you read this often. Of course, you could be a stranger, not know me, and be shockingly surprised at this simple fact: I live alone, and I have a lot of “alone-time”, as it were. With all of this time to myself, practicing solitary acts, e.g. grabbing dinner at the Albertson’s deli to eat at home, or running for 70 minutes alone, I have a lot of time to think. During the runs, the errant thoughts that migrate through my mind do so at an ever-faster pace.

I wonder how it goes, this biological basis for our thoughts, speeding them up in a state of physical excitement or agitation. Methinks during a run or some other sustained physical activity the body’s “fight or flight” mechanics are providing elevated levels or nor-epinephrine, serotonin, and dopamine. Those neurological chemicals that make us feel oh-so-good, and afterwards provide us with that illustrious “runner’s high.” Whatever the case, I would be interested in seeing an MRI at the neurological effects of heightened sustained physicality.

As of late, I have been thinking a lot on my runs about aesthetics, not so much from a design perspective, rather from a beauty perspective. Not of those popular dialogues about which stars are gracing US Weekly this week, but more in line with how we associate feelings and memories to those that come into our minds. I am writing about this because, during my runs for the past few weeks, a former loved one from more than two years ago has popped into my head from time-to-time.

Now for this former loved-one, I have no illusions of our getting back together, nor do I rationally think we should. We don’t speak. Nevertheless, I know that neither of us rationally thinks we should, and I am content with that. That being said, it continuously intrigues me over the course of a run how this girl will just pop into my head.

In some parts, the conception in my head during a run has certain qualia assigned to remembered aesthetics that are ever-present during the flashing vignettes about which come. I don’t know. Of course, I thought of her as a beautiful woman, before and after we were together. One of things I always found so beautiful about her were her softer cherubic features, fare skin and smile. The qualia assigned that rest in my mind’s eye are, for example, sweet and peaceful, but the challenge to these glimpses into the past are they are not far-reaching nor do they assign all of the substances or history that caused things to go awry. I guess that’s the challenge with aesthetic qualia, they don’t convey all of the substance subsisting with the features conveying in the mind the qualia.*

I guess that is the continuous challenge to life and decision making, we encapsulate our decisions with the influences of our perceptions and tastes. Certainly, on a base level, we can speak on things we find immediately attractive, e.g. Jessica Simpson, or something. Ultimately, however, for many of us, that personality is so atrocious; no amount of aesthetic can make up for one’s overpowering repellant personality, for me at least.**

These perceptions are as subjective as they come, which is why some love the H2, in spite of its horrible mileage. I guess my point is, with the cycle of relationships, there is the initial aesthetic attraction, found entirely prima-facie. Our subjectivity extracting qualia during this infatuation stage assigns substances to the qualia, e.g. beauty, sweetness, and innocence to a cherubic face and fare skin. Perhaps, it is through these assigned characteristics, bound to these aesthetic qualia, we continuously assign and project upon our lovers that which we want them to be or have? At the end of the day, we always impose on our partners the characteristics we want or expect them to have. When they betray these expectations we have constructed for them, we get upset. Herein lies the foundation for interminable arguments, I suppose.

If you are still reading this, and feeling the slightest bit sorry for me, don’t – please. I couldn’t be happier with my rather slow love-life at the moment. I love where I live and what I am doing. It is with this general self-satisfaction, I don’t find myself pining for anyone in particular, nor have I for a long time. I don’t know, I suppose at the moment I must just be too busy and happy to be self-consumed by anything outside of the upcoming trip to Nicaragua this week. Interesting, this condition of humanity, I suppose that’s why whilst typing, I am allowing my shuffle to play “Explosions in the Sky” repeatedly.

*Please allow me to rephrase. During my runs, I remember certain images of this girlfriend’s face, not any time in particular, but just the face – peacefully beautiful. These memories of her are predicated on thoughts and perceptions I had two-plus years ago. Here’s the problem: these pictures and memories of this beautiful woman, they don’t come with why our relationship ended, we just didn’t get along enough to keep it viable. Perhaps she got tired of asking me to translate bits of thought like the paragraph this footnote references.

**I have to admit, that is a rather hyperbolic example, as she runs contrary to what I like, but she appeals to the lowest common denominator, the same way people go out to buy albums by such artists as, Britney Spears, Nick Lachey, anything on VH1 or MTV.

Hillary and Surreptitious Press Slips Against Obama

Sometimes I just fall in love all over again with politics, or thinking about it. Of course, like any relationship, it has its ups and downs. For me, the parts I hate about politics are the planted questions and denials we catch too often. For me, as of late, there is one act trending too frequently to date, to consider any other options.

A classic example is of Bob Kerrey’s endorsement of Hillary, which was good for Hillary and speaks well for her, as Bob Kerrey is the kind of Senator I like. Of course, Kerrey’s statements about Obama were well placed attempts at trying to dissuade Middle Americans from liking him:

“Kerrey continued, "It's probably not something that appeals to him, but I like the fact that his name is Barack Hussein Obama, and that his father was a Muslim and that his paternal grandmother is a Muslim. There's a billion people on the planet that are Muslims and I think that experience is a big deal." He added, "He's got a whale of a lot more intellectual talent than I've got as well."” (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/12/16/kerrey_for_clinton.html)

It was a nice compliment, but it does indeed highlight something about Obama; they are guessing that Nascar Dads and Soccer Moms might find those points a little discouraging. The fact that contextually it was planted in a Hillary endorsement seems uncannily odd to me. It’s as though in the midst of Democratic Party Establishment meetings, read: DLC, they are saying, “we need to support Hillary, because we owe her. Obama is a shining star, so we cannot attack him, we move Hillary up by highlighting disadvantages he might see in the General, wherein we want Hillary to be.”

Another example is the well placed coming out of a Hillary office manager saying the following:

“Bill Shaheen, a national co-chairman of Clinton’s front-runner campaign, raised the issue during an interview with The Washington Post, posted on washingtonpost.com. Clinton’s campaign did not have an immediate comment. Shaheen, an attorney and veteran organizer, said much of Obama’s background is unknown and could be a problem in November 2008 if he is the Democratic nominee. He said the Republicans would work hard to discover new aspects of Obama’s admittedly spotty youth.” (http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/693699,obdrugs121207.article)

Again, this is a similar trend, too similar that I think there is some underlying strategy promulgated by Clinton’s campaign to surreptitiously attack Obama. It’s very “Primary Colors.” I say that because Clinton fired the second guy and Kerrey’s comments were “complimentary,” but in both instances the sound-bites and bullet points one sees from these two comments will see something in a flash that looks dissuading about Obama. Essentially, it is a strategy used by the Clinton Campaign predicated on the media medium used today, and the way headlines read. With that, it allows her to continue to take the high road, and not come off as attacking Obama, but it jabs at parts of Obama that ultimately aren’t a big deal in the right context. Out of context, in headlines, these things look immediately damaging. It’s yet one more reason the thinking man, me, doesn’t like Hillary or her campaign on a personal level. It’s caddy surreptitious garbage, that if she were a true front-runner with spiritual momentum, she wouldn’t need. It’s just ugly.

Sitting down to Write – Writing in Terms of the Metaphysics

Every once in a while, when I have the opportunity, I enjoy sitting down to write a bit to post here on this blog. What is quite odd to me is my propensity to do so when I don’t have anything that is particularly evoking thoughts of articulation. What’s more is the desire to sit down, nevertheless, and write something about, well as Aristotle put it, “being qua being.” For more information on the random phrase I just wrote, one can go to Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics_(Aristotle) for the quick and dirty. In short, it involves the analysis of something that is “being” for its own sake, not for any other reason.

Rather than delving into something that truly sounds as though it could be a vicious infinite regress, and how Aristotle establishes a defense in Book Alpha, and later Lambda, I simply think that like “to be”, there can be “writing qua writing”, right? In any event, I guess one could observe that I am a jackass for citing Aristotle’s Metaphysics to write about nothing except for their writing. Of course, it leads me to think otherwise, in the words of my favorite High School English/Writing Teacher, Dr. Thomas Watkins, “when have writer’s block, just start writing.”

Dr. Watkins is right in that assessment and suggestion, and you win the Team Award if you are still reading following that verbose introduction. It’s interesting in analysis what one comes up with when they are alone much of the time. I am, as some might say, an External Processor. With that, I find that I think a lot right now, not that I haven’t always, but going home to oneself, it provides for errands, reading and sleep. I do all of that following my runs. Prior to my run, I usually go to Java, my local coffee shop, wherein I am not too scared to start conversation with a random person or two. I have made wonderful conversation, and I have met some wonderful friends in the process. Sometimes, it is hard not to be self-conscious of the act, in that it is socially somewhat unconventional; however, I find that I reconcile all of that with a self-justification expost facto. Quite simply a friendly smile is enough to draw me into a discussion, and as you know me, I can typically speak about a good amount of trivial information.

Sometimes, I wonder if I come off as though I am trying “too hard,” in the process. I don’t know. What’s the most comforting is to find someone who is educated with a spouse or significant other, those are the most comfortable and forthcoming with invitations to have me sit down and enjoy my coffee. My friends Andrew and Lea were like that my first full Saturday here in Boise, and they have become age-wise my closest friends in Boise. Beyond that I met a lovely couple with children my age following my run on Sunday, Barry and Roz, native Irish folks who have lived in Boise for twenty-five years. Their younger daughter is getting her Master’s in Water Management, which led me to a rather robust discussion on Water Rights and to ponder how all that will go.

The simple point is that those with whom I speak on occasion make things all the more comfortable and enjoyable in my hours away from the office. The office is lovely on several accounts, but one of the greatest advantages is having nice folks here with whom I can speak. The challenge of course is making certain that all of that speech, while at work, is professional. I make a concerted attempt to always do so, and provided how much I have grown up in the past years; it’s not been too difficult. That is the nut of it, I suppose, one wants to be friends with their colleagues, but it is also important to keep work and life separate so as not to intertwine the two too much.

As I write this, I feel as though I have been here for so many weeks, whereas I have not. I am coming onto my third week here in Boise, and the time has flown by; however, in looking back over days, I feel like I have been here for quite a while. Perhaps that is because of all that I have accomplished, and the two full weekends here now following weekdays at work. Most certainly, I have my routines, which allow me a great deal of efficiency and control over my environment, which makes me think about something I once heard from someone older, “Matt, don’t be afraid of settling down sometime soon, and getting married. If you don’t, you’ll get too set in your ways.” Taking a step back from my life, I have to say, my love for routine and regiment are such that I now suppose there is some truth to being set in one’s ways; however, I don’t feel as though I should work myself into any big rush to settle down and get serious. I have yet to be on a “date” here in Boise, and I am cool with that moving forward as it should.

I did have a terrific “Man” date last night. Just prior my run, I received a phone call from my friend Terry. Terry’s wife was out taking care of some grandkids, and he was cooking soup. Following my quick run, I drove over to his, and sat down to a wonderful dinner. Dinners are such a joyous thing, and it was such a nice evening to sit with a friend that has an older person’s perspective. One can’t help but love the nuggets of wisdom that unintentionally come from someone with some years. By “unintentional,” I mean conversational suggestions, not stern talking-to’s or overt suggestions.

There it is, I surmise, the thoughts whilst sitting down to write, which is to say, “I live alone.” I enjoy living alone, and I have done so before, both in Memphis and Chicago. It is always an adjustment, one that requires ingenuity, but what is so interesting, it allows for greater control and regiment to my life. This weekend, since Bogus Basin is not yet open for skiing, just outside of the city, I am going to be productive in Boise one last weekend. Saturday morning will be a good run with a new running group, and following that, I am going to REI with my friend Andrew to pickup a new pack and some snowshoes. I want to then make one last push before I say, “My place is done.” Then, I will be ready to go on vacation for the week following next. My family and I are going to Nicaragua to see Sister Becca, and I couldn’t be more thrilled. Of course, what’s so fascinating about the excursion is the surprise-like way it is going to come upon me next week. I have been so head-down focused on sorting life here in Boise, I have not thought much about leaving the country with parents, aunts, and grandparents. As such, next week when I find myself back in Chicago for dinner and crashing at Zack’s on Friday, I will be awash with surrealistic sensations. Writing about it right now has me smiling as to how funny that will seem.

Again, that is moving elsewhere and living alone, it provides for so much introspection and reacquainting with oneself, the hermit-like self humor is always abound. I couldn’t be happier with that.

Sharing One’s GMAIL Story

Of course, considering I am writing about the company whose free blog service I am using, I suppose that makes me something of a hypocrite; however, going to GMAIL, I keep repeatedly seeing the same link: “Share your GMAIL Story.” Now of course, as you know, or should, if you use GMAIL they have algorithms that concern privacy advocates. Most specifically, one never throws their data away, and their information or the things they mail and are mailed reside on Google’s servers.

What has privacy advocates in an uproar is the fact that Google makes no bones about using what you send and receive to offer you products for sale by those that buy from Google directed advertising space. Google isn’t the only firm that does this, at one point, I had a phone interview with Experian, a credit agency that not only reports on one’s credit, but uses their credit data to help advertisers direct their marketing. Again, this is something that has privacy advocates in an uproar.

Of course, being what we are, read: lazy, we abide by this with our discount grocery store cards, using our credit cards rather than cash, and surfing a web bogged with cookies. It’s amazing what a market for the product that is our information there is.

The debate is more than I have time to write on for the moment, but I was thinking about some shared GMAIL stories we won’t hear or see posted, for instance:

GMAIL is amazing! I was surfing it and my friend John said, “You need to get off of Meth!” I read that thinking, “Meth? That’s just one of the many drugs I think are just great.” That’s when I saw an ad to the right of the message body offering addiction counseling in greater Sioux Falls. I have to say, “It’s a good thing Google has algorithms in place to sift through the mails I am sending and receiving! Otherwise, I would never have heard of ‘New Recoveries’!”

I wonder about what Google is looking for in their “Share your GMAIL story.” I don’t suspect it will involve stories like the above hypothetical. It’s a good thing there is irony, otherwise, we wouldn’t be able to giggle.

Extrapolating The Economist’s “Case for John McCain”

While I have always liked McCain on personal levels, provided he lost to W back in the primaries of 2000, I have my reservations. First, provided what W and Rove did to McCain, it is that he has managed to come around to supporting W has my Machiavelli-sense tingling, the same way Hillary’s vote for Iraq authorization, it’s too calculating. Beyond that, his age says to me, “no, he is not your guy.” I used to like McCain, but I don’t any more for President. Personally, I would prefer a disintegration of the old guard in Washington; moreover, that he is in the GOP says to me, “not a chance.”

What I love about the Economist’s Lexington piece this week though, is its deconstruction of the other Pols running in the Republican Primaries.

“Mr McCain's qualities are particularly striking if you contrast him with his leading rivals. His willingness to stick to his guns on divisive subjects such as immigration stands in sharp contrast to Mr Romney's oily pandering. Mr Romney likes to claim that his views on topics such as gay rights and abortion have “evolved”. But they have evolved in a direction that is strikingly convenient—perhaps through intelligent design. Can a party that mocked John Kerry really march into battle behind their very own Massachusetts flip-flopper?

Mr Giuliani gets good marks for character. His record as mayor of New York bespeaks toughness. His performance on September 11th 2001 proves that he can take charge in a crisis. But what about judgment? He chose Bernard Kerik to run the NYPD, made him a partner in his consultancy, and persuaded the White House to nominate him as head of the Department of Homeland Security. Mr Kerik is now facing serious corruption charges. The Democrats will be happy to remind people of other lapses in Mr Giuliani's judgment if he wins the nomination.

The weakness of the two front-runners is persuading many Republicans to turn to Mr Huckabee. Mr Huckabee is indeed an attractive candidate—a good debater and a charming fellow. But he is woefully lacking in experience. He knows next to nothing about foreign and military affairs, and his tax plans are otherworldly. A presidential debate between Mr Huckabee and Hillary Clinton would be a rout.” (Economist, December 6, 2007)

In short, I like to think of myself as an independent, but I have not seen anything out of the GOP since McCain ran eight years ago. When the GOP went with W that is when I went the other direction with a clear conscience. The GOP’s base was sold on W’s religious conservatism and his tax cuts, one of those two platforms he executed on, but did so poorly. The other, religious conservatism, well, it’s just not politically viable. As for the tax cuts, the genius thought that one could push tax cuts during a war, which he also thought we completed, what? Three Years Ago? We are in such a mess right now, the years it takes to fix the state of the GOP’s hegemony in Washington will leave pundits blaming who is holding the torch fixing things, not those who left it in shambles from ’00-’08.

Greater Points of Conversation

Taking this foray into blogging, it’s hard to think of what to write sometimes. Strike that. I cannot say that it is “hard” to write, as I simply write whatever about which I am thinking that will make a complete thought; that which is, of course, not obscene or base in demeanor. You may frown at that, but we all have thoughts that turn to the more vulgar or base side of things.

With that, however, I am wondering, “Should I write about things more scintillating? Are there topics, which might strike up more conversation?” With that, I started writing this going through my blog from the last week, and I have noticed a drop-off in the number of comments readers leave for me. What is it, vanity? Or is it something nobler; like, for instance, care and concern for that which my loved ones read and think?

I don’t know, methinks that vanity has a great deal of play involved; however, contrary to that, I have to admit the joy I have in writing is having a friend or family member respond with something contemplative or thoughtful. At the end of the day, that is the ultimate gratification for which I am pursuing. Which begs the question: how do I develop more dialogue and communication going back and forth on the webpage?

Certainly, amongst all of my friends and family, there are topics that I know appeal to individuals, viz. Politics for Todd, Boise experiences for much of my family, etc… I know that for some there is a limit to their exhibitionist tendencies, and there are others that just enjoy the act of voyeurism concerning what I write. When I sit down to write, I write for all about which I mention. Of course, most importantly, I surmise, is that I sit down to write for “Matt” ultimately. That is the gist of it, right? Yet, while I do that, and do that with joy and pleasure, I have to admit, I would like a more consistent turnout of thoughts on what I am writing. Am I too prolific?

Don’t be afraid to comment; in fact, please do. Over what should I spend my time musing? What is it that you, my audience enjoy? Please don’t take my writing style as factor to inhibit your response. As of late, I have made more of a conscious effort to write more popularly with my prose, am I achieving that? What are your thoughts?

I look forward to the conversation!

Why I am Secure in Getting the Pedicure - If it ain't broke, don't fix it

Since I started training for the Chicago Marathon, the one that later quit while I was running it, I have been getting pedicures. Why do I get them? Well, at some point, let’s say early March of 2007, I had a toenail grow in just enough to cause a slight infection in my big toe. The girl I was dating at the time suggested I get a “pedi” to prevent those in the future. Of course, there I was frequently soaking in Epsom, and all of the other things one could do to prevent an infection as such. The next time I needed them cut, I went and had one of those petite immigrants clip the nails for me.

I had just finished a ten-miler when I was in the process of getting my first “pedi.” During the treatment, she began viciously beating my calves as a massage, screaming, “these are like stones, they are like stones,” in a broken English. Of course, I was trying to find the humor in that whilst I was internally screaming from the pain of having the lactic acid beaten out of my lower leg muscle tissue.

Nevertheless, I have never ceased getting “pedis” provided the preventative maintenance with which they leave me. In short, the pedicures through my training for the Chicago Marathon kept me from ever having an infection in my big toe, near the cuticle on the side. All of that said, of course, I am writing you, as it has been probably more than six weeks since I have had one. With that, and a planned long run on Sunday, I sat there clipping my toenails. I didn’t do a great job; however, I thought I was able to get along the cuticle well enough, like I’d seen, to do the job well enough to not suffer the same pre-pedicure fate.

I had a great long run on Sunday, and I stopped at Java in the North End of Boise after my run, as I had planned, enjoying some coffee with a nice older Irish couple living in Boise since ’82. Of course, my coffee with the lovely couple kept me from soaking in Epsom straightaway as I had planned, but I thought, “my goodness, these things don’t just happen like that. What are the odds?”

There I was last night, I took the evening off provided my great run on Sunday, and I had just taken my shoes and socks off my beloved tootsies. There, looking down at my toe, I thought in great dismay, “Well you dumbass, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” That’s right, hindsight being what it was, I was kicking myself. There along the inside cuticle of my left toe is the redness, which looks like the beginning of infection. For nine months, I have been devoutly getting “pedis” to avoid a run-affecting toe infection, and they have worked. The one time I don’t, like clockwork, here I am again, trying to find a good doctor in Boise to diagnose, double blindly, and prescribe the appropriate treatment.

Why I say “double blind” above is due to the fact that this is too comical, it’s too Hollywood, such that I don’t want the fact that this is poetic to be reason for my being hypochondriac. Well, what can one say? I need to find a good Doctor here in Boise, and let it be for something as small as this to find a good physician. Of course, by the same token, I am kicking myself for messing with a working formula. That, of course, is why I am brand loyal to following goods: Subaru, Mizuno and Kashi. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it – rules by which to live.

A Lonesome Friday Night

As a departure from my rants on the state of things more political-economic, I am feeling a bit more introspective tonight. A quick admittance, it is 9:15PM on a Friday night, and I have nothing in the way of plans. Alas, these are the prices one pays for moving far away from one’s friends in a city they called home for four years. While writing that seems a bit morose, I feel nothing of the sort. From this evening’s events and this first complete week in Boise, I have nothing but the most sublime wash of self-satisfaction undulating over me.

I liken it to my drive from my apartment in the morning or evening, running to work, errands or whatever. In doing so, I drive away from my place by driving down a hill with a decline of approximately forty-degrees. Every once in a while, driving down my hill, I think to myself, “the life on these brakes is going to be reduced driving down this hill a couple of times per day.” These are the kinds of thoughts I am sure many people think in certain iterative circumstances, concerning the life and maintenance of one’s mechanical materials with finite lives.

Every time I find myself thinking those thoughts, I also find myself reconciling that internal complaint by acknowledging the fact that I moved here for the very topography I am now finding will shorten the lives of my brake pads. Indeed this is a small price to pay for migrating to a place with close proximity to wonderful mountains, rivers and streams. I suppose that is at the root of the famous “Opportunity Cost.”

What I find is so amazing about being solitary is the heightened awareness of the body’s nuances, which are probably more often than not well recognized by the busy and distracted human mind. I could go on and on about the minutia I note lying awkwardly on my couch typing this post.

What else the couch provides? A refreshing reminder of the importance existing on cable television, penultimately the talking head shows of twenty-four news channels, and ultimately VH1’s “I Love the XX’s” series. Indeed nothing is more fulfilling from a self-awareness perspective than knowing one is the target demographic for inexpensive programming predicated from boredom and nostalgia.

Why I am not out is because I am going to get up in the morning to run errands. Action-packed, I know. Listen to this list of excitement, the DMV, Target, Boise Bench Commission (for a dinner table), and the grocery store for whatever I couldn’t obtain at Target. While I make fun of how unexciting that is, my sister would love to run to the furniture/Target, in the comfort of my car. What can I say, for everything we can whine about, we can always put it in perspective. Beyond not having an exciting evening and a busy morning, I am so happy to be here in Boise. I am having a love affair with the city; my job and the folks here only serve to enhance it. It’s great to wake up every morning having this perspective.

Mormonism—Romney, “You-Go-Girl”—Clinton and Presidential Politics

Romney will not get my vote. In spite of Romney’s business success, his pretty family and his well fitting hair, my ballot will not go to Mitt. Is it solely that he is a Mormon for me? No, it isn’t. When I see him, I feel as though he lacks substance. I am sure he is intelligent; however, his intelligence is muted by the disingenuous commercials with his family-side chats, and their commune-like decision about him running for President. For one, it cannot look more staged and gross. Two, they look too plastic for me to gain a sense of substance or sincerity. Romney’s family in the commercial look as though they made sure their make-up was just right prior to it.

Beyond that, yes, I have a problem with his Mormonism. I have to admit, I don’t get the religion, nor do I have an interest in being converted. One of the major tenants of Mormonism is to convert, which for me says, Romney cannot detach himself from his religion or its influences and be President. All of this is in spite of what he says about his faith’s affect on him potentially being the President. Romney saying all of that before a crowd at the George H.W. Bush Library, in front of the Seal of the President, seems all too well crafted and staged.

As for Hillary, from the other side of the spectrum, she won’t get it either, but for the same reason: disingenuousness. Hillary repeatedly looks like someone uncomfortably trying to fit into a comfy-casual politician model her handlers and Bill try to encase her. First, just bringing back the phrase, “You Go Girl” is reason enough for me to hate her; beyond that though are her and her staffers attacks on Obama. They have had nothing of substance; however, they pushed out that ‘at five he wanted to be President, so he has always wanted that.’ I don’t know that I have ever seen a group of people be more absurd. It’s not Hillary from a policy perspective, but it is her personally; I will never be able to like her.

For me, Hillary is a one-way ticket for Romney, Huckabee, or Giuliani to win President. I say that, because I feel like deep down the majority of Americans sense Hillary lacking any sincere conviction, e.g. her vote on Iraq. I could go off on this vote indefinitely, but, in short, I’ll simply state that I think she voted for that authorization, because she didn’t want to look weak on Defense strategically. One can extrapolate a million other decisions she has made from that, but I just can’t buy into her.

There it is, I don’t like either Romney or Clinton, not because of their policy stances, and so as much as I feel like they are both overly groomed and too disingenuous to be a good President. It’s just not cricket. When Obama wins Iowa, and subsequently wins New Hampshire, he’ll be both the nominee and our first African-American President.

Down on Petrol, but from a Different Angle Today

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=10252015

I realize that I have been rather prolific lately, and as you saw on yesterday’s post concerning the CAFE Standards and Monday’s on Petrol, I have a big issue with our lack of conservation in policy. Reading the Economist, above I posted the link, they have written about something I was talking about with a Gold Market expert a few months in arrears. Quite simply, we are driving ourselves to starvation. A lack of fuel economy and a thirst for larger automobiles predicated from bad policy in Washington, is consuming all of the commodities in the world at a faster rate.

Seriously, if one were to sample the aggregate for all commodities’ pricing, if I was an Economist I would; they would find a substantive increase in the market price for commodities. Some of the commodities are the likes of Gold, because in a tumultuous world, Gold is a safer bet than currency or bonds for longevity. Of course, with resources being finite, and our population ever-expanding, the commodities like ore are shooting through the roof as well. What’s just as interesting are rights and ownership pertaining to water, which we should watch in the coming elections. Then, of course, there is petroleum.

Quite simply, we have a finite pool of resources in the world, and we have an ever-increasing population with needs for them. The areas to right now invest are the commodities, particularly if one is moving for longevity. Those companies in the business of extracting these things are only going to grow. In the meantime, we need to do a much better job of reducing demand for this pool of supplies, all of which are only growing more limited.

This is not a granola-loving tree-hugging perspective. I can’t get on my high-horse about environmentalism with a clear conscious; I am by no means a model member of the Sierra Club or Greenpeace; however, from an Economic perspective, I don’t like paying more for everything. Not only are peoples’ lives throughout the world affected by this short term greed, but, in the long term, our way of life is in jeopardy. With resources growing more and more limited, we only have more war to look forward to, more likely than not, these wars we will fight over indirect dependency on a region’s commodities.

It is unquestionable as to why we have such a vested interest in the Middle East to date. Quite simply, by limiting our demand for finite resources, we remove ourselves and our society from indentured servitude to our interests elsewhere in the world. In the meantime, as a society, we will continue putting our values and freedom on the block to sustain material needs, which are solely predicated off what the Jones’s have and our lust for what marketers tell us we want.

The Visible White Undershirt – The Male Panty-line

Gentlemen,

This is an appeal, much in the same way women said something to their friends about the use of thongs underneath tighter pants twenty-some years ago. Quite simply, if you are not wearing a tie and buttoning the top button of your shirt, please don’t wear a crew neck t-shirt underneath your shirt. If you would like to wear an undershirt, please don’t hesitate to go with a tank-top, or you can come to the dark-side of the MattyJ-force, throwing on a v-neck-t.

By no means am I advocating one not wearing an under-shirt. If one happens to perspire, or they are too much man for the thin material of their shirt, please wear something. I am simply saying that the crew-neck bordering your neck, underneath your golf-shirt or oxford looks more unkempt; moreover, my guess is that those with hom you are trying to impress will be less so.

I am saying this as a friend. Sure, you may have busted my chops, or given me grief in the past, if you saw me walking around, let’s say Frat-days, in a crusty white v-neck. You were right to do so; however, don’t be scared to throw on that v-neck if you aren’t wearing a tie. Otherwise, you are throwing ground balls…


Ladies,

Please feel free to comment.

In Addendum to My Post on Petroleum

I wanted to post today noting that I have added an addendum to my post from Monday on Petroleum. There has been a lot of news concerning CAFE, and it speaks quite directly to about what I wrote. You can see the link: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10249454&fsrc=nwl following my addendum. We will see Bush veto this, I am quite sure. Bush is more or less a lame duck, and this runs contrary to his positions on Economy, Environmentalism and Petroleum. Alas, there is always next year.

Trading Skyscrapers for Mountains - Aesthetics and Relativity

One month ago, I would stand up in my desk, and peer out over the Chicago River, seeing a mix of high rise buildings of downtown Chicago’s Loop. Right now, I stand up in my desk, peering North of Boise a bit, and I see the foothills North of Boise. There is something to be said for the aesthetic of the West and the “Golden Hours” here in the West. “Golden Hour,” as I understand the expression, is a phrase spawned from cinematography. I know Terrence Malik prefers only to film during “Golden Hour” as the light works best with the cameras. If one were to Wikipedia “Golden Hour” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_hour_%28photography%29), they would find that these hours are the first following dawn and the last prior to dusk.

With work, I have been getting here prior to sunrise, and leaving just following sunset. From my desk, when I stand, I see the “foothills,” I think in the Midwest we would call these “foothills” “small mountains,” diffused of light cascading and undulating around the rises and falls of the land. This is the scene I get from my office these days. I reckon that it has more to do with where one is at with their life. I say that, in that many think the idea of a massive city is about as beautiful as it gets. Chicago, like London, San Francisco, Singapore, Sydney or Dubai, is known for its skyline and its aesthetic predicated off of its landmarks. I am quite certain that there is a twenty-two-year-old recent graduate from a Big Ten University who awakens in the morning thinking the same thing about the Loop, and how they are so excited to be in the “big city” away from their small farm town in some Midwestern state.

I guess at the net of it, that is one thing we can say about ourselves, aesthetics and their appreciation is something entirely relative. This relativity is predicated from personal experience, education and desensitization. I don’t think I am espousing anything we have all thought before, but methinks it takes a phase of change and transformation to appreciate these things.

Social Stratification and Boise – Moving away from the Plethora of Ghettos

I am absolutely enjoying life here in Boise, and it has me thinking a lot about the broader spectrum of life than the atmosphere of life I was experiencing while living in Chicago. Provided the size of Chicago, there is no question there aren’t more elements or dimensions to life; however, having lived in several cities, in different regions, I can say one thing: “the more medium-sized a city is, the easier it is to find a broader spectrum of life.”

In retrospect, I find I am getting more to life’s dimensions here in Boise than I was in the much larger Chicago. I realize this is fairly abstract, but a great way to ponder is for one take a step back and look at her or his life in college. I say that because, if one were to go back and look at their lifestyle in a big university, and from this context, odds are good they would find the following bits of reality. One, they would find quick social stratification, kids coming from money hanging around others with money. This was especially true in the Greek system, where wealthier young women or men would tend to be drawn to the same sororities or fraternities.

In another way, because these groups of students are arriving at a large state school, coming from various backgrounds, those coming from especially strong High Schools were afforded the opportunity to place higher in classes right on the front-end. I can continue to spell out such examples, but rather than doing that, I will assume my point is made. The net of it is that we are a collegial species. We form groups or clubs, and rise up a barrier of entry, whether we do it consciously or not. If we aren’t consciously working to do so, more often than not, we are doing so subconsciously, or we are simply joining on with others of the same mindset or body of experience.

A classic example of this was how, in going to a large public state institution, we had lots of different ethnicities, but more often than not, kids of the same ethnicity would socialize together. The same applies to cities and life outside of one going to a Division I university; they are analogs.

I say that, because I assume that if one went to a small Liberal Arts College, because of size constraints, more often than not, their classes would place them in a broader mix of socio-economic varieties. With that, in the same way, I feel as though being in Boise is providing me the same broad variety of experience I was more accustomed to in primary and secondary school than I was at the University of Illinois to now. The one exception in that arc, of course, was living and working in Memphis.

In Memphis, because of the composition of economic class and ethnicities, at the office I was more than likely going to see and interact with folks of many different persuasions, pertaining to socio-economic categorization. Upon moving to Chicago, I relegated myself rather continuously to ghettos of young, largely Caucasian, affluent ghettos. By that, while living in Chicago, I lived in the West Loop, River North, Old Town and Lincoln Park. If one were to take a random sampling of the demographics of those neighborhoods, undoubtedly, they would find neighborhoods full of aspiring eighteen-to-thirty-five white folks. That is not to say that is always the case, but by percentage, I am going to argue I am more correct than not. In working for a smaller firm, leaving a more ethnically diverse large company with many people making the spectrum of incomes, I relegated myself further to one more ghetto. That is not to say that there weren’t more working class ethnically diverse folks working at company two, but it was so small there weren’t too many in all directions. In short, if work was where I was finding diversity, then the second employer in Chicago wasn’t the place to find it.

Now, I am in Boise. I cannot say there is a plethora of varying ethnicities here in Boise, as it is a largely Caucasoid population; however, there is more variety in economic status here than there was for me in Chicago. That is the trick, I surmise, by positioning self in a smaller city is more than less likely that they will be confronted with a wider variety of economic stratification. That is not to say we, or I for that matter, still don’t relegate and ghettoize ourselves wherever we go. I would argue we inadvertently do; however, being somewhere smaller allows more heterogeneity in people and experience. It’s something for one to consider, I suppose.

Real Pricing for Petroleum and Our Growing Up

Thinking about the environment and greenhouse gasses, it’s hard not to meditate on large gas-guzzling autos that we drive. I know people all over the world drive automobiles that are environmentally less-than-friendly, but in some places, I feel as though there is more of a justification than what we have here in the States. Quite simply, because of the political-economic infrastructure and our two political parties’ electoral/funding interests we perpetuate bad policies, which are short-sighted and strategically repugnant.

Please let me take a minute to restate my thesis statement. The difference between strategy and tactics is simple: tactics are concerned with the next move, as a reaction to the most recent change; whereas, strategy is composing a long-term goal, and making continuous decisions with that goal’s accomplishment continuously in mind. Why I say our two parties make “strategically repugnant” decisions is that the votes for continued subsidization of oversized vehicles and the subsidization of the fuel to allow for them is a short sighted goal promulgated in favor of their respective constituencies, not thinking of the bigger picture.

Let’s say one is a Democratic politician, they vote for gas subsidization or against taxes that would constrain growth in the gas-guzzling SUV market. I know; I know; Democrats are the more environmentally friendly of the two political parties, right? Why do they take positions contrary to ecological ethics? It’s simpler than one might suspect, it all rests in Big Labor. That’s right, the UAW and the Teamsters have a vested interest in making sure that gas prices stay as controlled as possible, which is why the Democrats continue keeping gas reserves as consistent as possible. Further, because of the UAW, they work to keep Detroit making the SUVs. They have since the late 1990s. Why? The SUVs are beloved by the UAW, because they keep Detroit progressing with success and profitability, which keeps jobs plentiful and keeps unemployment low.

From the contrary, the Republicans vote for gas subsidization and against taxes to appease their constituency, but from an opposite position or at least for different constituency. The GOP, like the Dems, greatly benefits from a robust and strong Detroit. This is true, mostly because happy Detroit keeps Wall Street happy, and it keeps the Economy moving from all areas. From an economic perspective, the GOP and Dems have the same set of interests, but for the GOP it is in that their constituency’s income is either from Big Oil or is predicated from investment in supporting industries and general commodity growth. From a more base and vain perspective the culture of the McMansion, which includes an oversized “keeping-up-with-the-Jones’s SUV” as a birthright, is sitting firmly in the GOP constituency.

Therefore, with both sides of the US political dichotomy taking the same position, what is my problem? Clearly, if two opposites agree, there must be something okay with it? Sure, sure there is nothing wrong with economic growth, I certainly appreciate it, but let’s not grow so artificially. In short, if one were raising a high school kid, and saw their child taking steroids, they would force them to reconsider, and grow healthily. Quite simply, I don’t want to see the economy suffer, but there has to be a better way to continue to grow with a dependency on oil, but do so reducing that dependency.

We all know oil is the root cause of a great deal of turmoil in the Middle East, and it keeps our interests there consistently. In addition, it is not helping our stewardship of the Earth, forcing us down a road of extinction. Why don’t we slowly and surely change our policy, in a gradual way such that our economic interests would not be destroyed? Quite simply, we integrate more efficient platforms and new technologies which reduce our demand for petroleum. In addition, we subsidize conservation rather than massive trucks that look good going from the suburbs to the mall. We do so, letting the markets no very publicly, so there are no surprises. As we reduce demand, our amount of money going to keeping oil prices stable (i.e. the strategic oil reserve) is reduced; moreover, we will spend less money, time and lives fighting wars to preserve our interests in the Middle East. The UAW could get behind this, as their laborers can keep their jobs building more fuel efficient autos, and they can grow into the new areas. It wouldn’t be any easy row to ho, but it would be more long-term than what we are pursuing right now. It is just time we outgrew our bad policies and positions.

An addendum to this post, posted on Monday, the news concerning CAFE. You can read more on this at The Economist, or via any other news source. It's a step in the right direction, but it's just a step. The Economist's link: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10249454&fsrc=nwl

Cheap American Labor

Having worked for a company based out of another country, while working there I thought a lot about what it involves to be an American at work. As I wrote this sentence, I googled "productivity index." If one goes to the bls.gov, they will find the productivity index for the US. Further, if one goes to an economic journal, like The Economist, they can find that information against other countries (OECD). Quite simply, the US is the standard for productivity. To be fair, it should, but is not always, be weighted for hours worked, which means that simply because we work more hours than the French does not necessarily mean we are more productive, per se.

That said, thinking about productivity and the US against other countries, I have some thoughts. First, the US is the global barometer for Productivity; we are 100/100. With that, and thinking about colleagues in other countries, I think about what a US employee of a global firm receives in vacation vs. their colleagues in the EU, or elsewhere. Certainly, there are those in the developing world that have it more difficult than we do, and that work very hard for paltry wages. Yet, when I think of the EU and the US, sometimes I think, do executives in the EU not think the same way of the US that we do of places like Sri Lanka or Malaysia?

As Americans, we are cheaper as employees. In an exempt salaried position, an American will work more hours and have less vacation. Moreover, if one wants to lay off hundreds or thousands, in the US it is not so difficult. Rather than have one's firm suffer a surplus of labor not having demand to fulfill, a US employer can simply lay-off resource to meet the demand. Of course, there are reasons for the US having a more liberal economy, allowing for such corporate prerogative, but we should see benefits, right?

I say that, because one, as I am sure many, take the position that the US without inhibitions on companies has a more thriving economy than more constrained economies. One could say that, and they could show statistics from the past to help support that; however, the US economy, against the EU's or APAC's, is not carrying the standard. Rather than our bearing both the standard for labor productivity and economic success, we are working more hours, having less vacation, and we have less to show for it.

I have nothing to personally complain about on the subject, but looking at folks all over it is hard not to question the state of affairs. Just thinking about what we have compared to what we don't have respective of quality of life (e.g. family, leisure or health), those things make me think that our culture has somewhat missed the boat.