The Center Cannot Hold, Part 2

by Stephanie Osborn
http://www.stephanie-osborn.com

And the 4th installment from Sarah Hoyt's blog today. There are those of you who may not be interested. However, I think these are things that are important to consider in today's economic situations, and the new year is definitely the time to be considering them. I don't always agree with Sarah on some things, though we are friends. (Hey, friends don't have to agree all the time. But we still get along. That's why we're FRIENDS.) But like I said, it makes some thoughtful reading. And as someone born and raised in Portugal, she brings a fascinating perspective to the topic.

~~~

The Center Cannot Hold, Part 2

by Sarah A. Hoyt

The idea of creating inflation to get out of a disastrous debt situation is neither unknown nor rare. Countries like Greece and Portugal coasted on it for years (and we could go on about what losing that ability has done to them) partly because as “touristic countries” they thrived on being “cheap” by keeping their currency devalued.

You borrow high-value currency and pay the same nominal amount of low-value currency. Fine. That makes sense. But if you don’t let the savings and assets people have appreciate at the same rate, via high interest rates, (which in turn pushes company assets and – usually – salaries up, even though not in real value) you’re going to have people who don’t make enough to eat or to buy…anything. (Look, ALL intervention in economics is stupid, ultimately, because economics is not something someone can CONTROL. It is instead a playground for the law of unintended consequences. It's as if we developed an ability to control the weather and were in shock when keeping it pleasant in Iowa buried NYC in ice or something.)

It seems to me we’re headed there. Most of my friends are beyond pinched this Christmas, and that’s the ones who still have jobs.

If I had to guess I’d say this strategy was cooked up to get us out of the real estate collapse. The inflation is supposed to catch up so that real estate assets never “devalue” in numbers, just in real value. And the interest rates are kept forcibly low so that people will soak up the bad assets and so that those in marginal positions can refinance. (We know how well that last part is working – not.)

Mind you, if that really is the idea, this gang is dumber than dirt. First because if people's money holdings and salary stay the same, buying a house is still difficult, no matter how low the interest rates. Second, because they’re not taking in account that those of us working as contractors and getting paid on contracts made years ago, will end up destitute and not be able to afford...not just houses, but anything. I don’t know how many of us there are, but the fact salaries aren’t going up means salaried employees, of which there are a lot, will end up in the same fix.

In Portugal there was an enormous “soak up” of completely paid off real-estate, a lot of it inherited over generations. In fact, it might have been the norm. Having a mortgage back then was odd. This meant that your property appreciated massively and if you got in real trouble, you could sell it and move on. (Various restrictions on selling rented out places, and rent control made this more difficult than it sounds, but…still. You weren’t talking about people having to meet mortgage payments, house repairs, food, fuel, etc, with salaries that remain static and depreciating currency reserves while a lot of the rest goes up. On the food side, too, most people back then had at least some gardens and some "creation" – chickens, goats, etc.)

On the other hand, it’s entirely possible I’m attributing to stupidity that which is more easily explained by malice: they want to turn us into beggars, because beggars are easy to please. No, wait, that still means stupidity, because what can’t go on, won’t, and like with price fixing, when you make it impossible for people to live, people find extra-legal means.

Okay – another way in which we’re different: we’re the world’s charity [fund]. We still give financial aid to most of the world, and have for close on to a century. (We might that way have enabled tyranny, but that’s something else.) We’re the world’s grantor of peace.

If we withdraw, even well short of a total collapse, will the world finally grow up? Or will it go back to the long wars of the 18th and 19th century everywhere, to the point commerce can’t take place?

Make no mistake, whatever bad things happen in the US will be ten times worse in the rest of the world. And don’t say, “Who cares?” Some – if not most – of those people are much better at WMDs than at feeding their people and will consider knocking the “old champ off” a much greater priority than actually taking care of their starving population.

(A friend of mine said, “Whatever happens now, we’re going to lose at least one major city.” I’d like to say he was wrong, but I have the same feeling.)

Other ways we’re different: we have more guns per capita than anywhere except those places that encourage/enforce gun ownership, like Switzerland. This is not a bad thing because:

Even in the milder of the “things go wrong” scenario, where things go bad first are the people who are marginal now, living at the edge of both society and often legality. Where you see any crackup first in society is higher crime rates – we’re seeing that – and lack of safety on the streets. The fact that a lot of people have guns will probably hold some of that (at least) down.

We have a military that is more in the tradition of service than of machismo. We’re probably the last of the Western powers with a military tradition and our military tradition is…odd, built on winning hearts and souls, more than on, “Shoot them all and let G-d sort them out.” Yes, I know, sometimes the rules of engagement (ROEs) are stupid (Okay the ROEs are mostly stupid) but still, it has a built in, “you don’t kill unless you need to.” This makes us different from, say, the various Latin American countries that have had crack ups.

Will the US military fire on the populace if things get bad enough? Some places. Some populace. As someone said, behavior means a lot.

BUT the US military are also generally a force for good and order, and given a central collapse, might hold things together long enough for things to coalesce in another form. Might. One can hope. (Of course, I keep thinking of Starship Troopers, “And then the veterans had had enough.”)

All of these together, particularly the economic thing, added to the chaotic force of changing technology and the decentralization that tech has been forcing on industry and commerce even as our politics and education and other…non-commercial enterprises have got more centralized, has the effect of making us a particularly unpredictable juggernaut.

It won't be like movies or books, because those move on logic. Real people aren't logical. They're cranky, emotional and ornery. A group of one or the other some place can send things spinning out of control. [I'm reminded of one of my favorite lines from the first Men in Black movie, “A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it.” -Steph]

In the best of all possible worlds, you’re going to hit a point where the answer to, “Are things getting better or worse?” will have to be, “Yes.” And then things start smoothing off, if we’re lucky in 25 or so years, so that I can still see it. (Or maybe faster. We’re Americans. We go fast. Hey, look, I’m Heinlein’s kid. The glass is not half full. It’s brimming over.)

On the other hand, it’s unpredictable, and I don’t think the people in charge know that, just like the people in charge of publishing don’t seem to be aware that ebooks aren’t just a “novelty fad.” There is a certain type of credentialed-not-brilliant (but thinks he/she is, because...credentialed) individual for whom knowledge is what exists in books and what your professors passed to you. If reality disagrees, then you deny reality as hard as you can.

Most of the people in charge most places are busy denying reality. Which makes the rest of us real nervous.

Hope for the best. Prepare for the worst. Stay informed. Keep moving. Keep working.

~~~

 

Or as my grandmother used to say, "Hope for the best, prepare for the worst, and take whatever God sends."

 

-Stephanie Osborn

http://www.stephanie-osborn.com

Happy Independence Day, All!

Today is a special day in our nation’s history. Today, in 1776, the Second Continental Congress formally adopted what we now know as the Declaration of Independence. Two days before, they had voted to approve a resolution of independence, but felt that it was necessary to put out a statement explaining this vote. The resulting document is the Declaration, which in modern parlance would be considered something of a press release! It has been celebrated ever since, beginning on its first anniversary in 1777.

The American Independence Day is a fine day to remember what it is to be a citizen of this wonderful country. It is also a day to remember those who serve, who now and ever shall, I hope, maintain the freedoms upon which this country was “impelled to the separation.” Those who serve, not only in our Armed Forces, but as police, firefighters, paramedics, and emergency responders of all kinds.

I myself was briefly an emergency responder, a technical officer in the Department of Public Safety for a small Native American reservation. I provided security for the reservation during public events, ensured that animals were not mistreated, performed investigations, and responded to traffic accidents, the latter mostly occurring off the reservation when I happened upon them. I was present at death, though I cannot say I was ever blessed to be present at a birth. So I have some small feeling of what it is like to be on the first line of defense.

I have also worked as a government contractor, a payload flight controller for our civilian and military space programs, and in developing defensive measures for our nation.

Perhaps that is why invariably my writing seems to have the component of patriotism and service to country, and even planet. To me, heroes are those who do whatever it takes to ensure that people are safe and that right is always victorious. And I don’t mean that in political terms. I mean it in terms of morals and conscience. The guys in the white hats, as it were. It’s essential to me that my protagonists, while being fundamentally human and capable of error, always strive to do the right thing to the best of their understanding and ability. Because that same thing is essential to me, fundamental to my being.

After all, like so many before me, I, too, swore “To Protect and Serve.”


-Stephanie Osborn, July 4, 2011

http://www.stephanie-osborn.com

Airport Security - A True Story, Part 2

Having contacted my congressmen the evening I posted the original blog regarding my treatment at the hands (literally) of the TSA, today I received a reply - from one of them.

Congressman Mo Brooks, 5th District, Alabama, sent me the following email:

Dear Mrs. Osborn:

Thank you for contacting me to share your views concerning the Aircraft Passenger Whole-Body Imaging Limitations Act of 2011, H.R. 1279. I welcome the opportunity to respond.

As you may know, Representative Jason Chaffetz of Utah introduced H.R. 1279 on March 31, 2011. This legislation would limit on the use of advanced imaging technology for aircraft passenger screening. H.R. 1279 has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee and the House Homeland Security Committee for review and consideration. As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, please be assured I will keep your views in mind should this bill come before the Homeland Security Committee or to the floor of the House of Representatives for a vote.

Please feel free to contact me again in the future. You may wish to visit my website at http://brooks.house.gov/ for additional information about issues and legislation before Congress.


Sincerely,
Mo Brooks
Member of Congress

MB/

Note also that Mr. Brooks wrote this himself and did not dictate it.

Unfortunately my attempt to reply to Mr. Brooks was bounced back. It would have read as follows:

Thank you, sir. So far you are the ONLY one of my congressmen who has replied to me on this issue. I am glad and appreciative you took the time to read my complaint and my blog, and even more appreciative that you will do something about it. For whatever it's worth, I put in my time as a government contractor, both for NASA on numerous Shuttle flights and ISS increments, and for DoD. I held a government clearance, and the safety of astronauts - and the populace - was entrusted to my hands. I was a volunteer/reserve police officer for a Native American community as well. Now I write full time as a novelist, but that does not negate the innate moral stance which allowed me to perform those jobs any more than retiring from the military negates a soldier's inherent morality or patriotism. I do NOT object to the safety and security of our nation, but feel it must be done with an eye to avoid eroding our freedoms and the inalienable rights guaranteed us as a free and independent people. The current procedures do not meet my standards of safety AND freedom.

Thank you for your time, and please stay in touch.

Mr. Brooks and other congressmen, I do hope you read this and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. It is shameful the way our citizens are being treated. May I respectfully suggest, as have many of my Facebook friends who have read my original blog on the event, that we emulate a country with highly successful, efficient, and non-invasive security measures such as Israel? They have no choice but to be the most efficient they can be, or they would not survive. They also do not abrogate the rights of their citizens in the process. This business of, "We must be politically correct and screen everyone, regardless of background, lest we offend someone," grows not only tiresome, but dangerous. May I remind you that the terrorists have no such compunctions.

Airport Security - A True Story

I recently had occasion to "check out" the new airport security scanning techniques while the TSA checked me out. And in the process found myself embarrassed, humiliated, threatened, and my privacy invaded.

I was traveling home from Penguicon in Troy, MI when I encountered the new "nude" scanners in the Detroit Airport. Images posted at the scanners plainly depicted the full extent of the scanners' capabilities: Unlike the television images, which were blocked out, it turns out, to MAINTAIN TELEVISION CENSOR STANDARDS, the scanner depicts EVERYTHING - buttocks, breasts, and genitals. The only thing it does not depict is the face of the "scannee." My alternative was an invasive, full-body pat-down. When I protested that this was a gross invasion of privacy, I was told that I "would not be flying, then."

Now, for those of you who don't know me, I had major surgery (as in removing a 25lb, 4-6L cyst from my abdomen) last August, and only a couple of months ago got the go-ahead to exercise at all, let alone fly. I have a full-abdominal incision scar that runs from my pubic bone up to only a couple of inches from my sternum. It is not pretty, and involves staple and large suture scars in addition to the incision scar. Because I could not use my abs or obliques for fully 6 months, and because the scarring is prone to forming keloids, I often wear a body wrap akin to the commercial "Spanx" products. This not only keeps the scar tissue relatively flat, it supports my back in its efforts to stabilize my torso. Had I not had this wrap, my back would have gone out months ago and I would be invalided. As it is, my back is chronically in pain.

But the wearing of this wrap also makes it difficult to keep my jeans up. My body is still changing shape as swelling, etc. decreases, and the wrap is made of slick lycra material. Belts are a necessity, but I usually wear woven cotton belts - which I did this day. Minimal bulk, minimal hardware.

So I stripped off jewelry, pocket contents, wristwatch, shoes, and cell phone, dumping them all into a tub with my carry-on. I stepped into the "nude" scanner (having been given no other choice to get home) and "assumed the position." (Yes, the position for scanning is the same as the one assumed when being placed under arrest - spread-eagled, hands in the air.) The scan took place, I stepped out...

...And was promptly detained.

I had to take off my belt. Scanned down to skin, but they took objection to my belt. My COTTON belt. I explained that I had had surgery and needed it to keep from losing my jeans, but it didn't matter. I was taken into a small room off the screening area, where two women in latex gloves stood and watched while I raised my shirt and removed my belt. One patted down the belt while another patted down my midsection. Finding nothing, of course.

THEN came the coup de grace.

"What's this?" the woman patting me down asked, tugging at my wrap.

"My surgical wrap."

"Does it come off? Is it down in your pants?"

"It comes off, but it goes down in my pants and it's difficult to remove."

"Let me see, please."

I was forced to unfasten my jeans, dig the bottom of the wrap out, and raise it up, openly displaying my badly scarred abdomen TO PROVE I WAS TELLING THE TRUTH. There was no chance that such a form-fitting garment could be concealing anything, but my privacy was invaded just the same, to prove some sort of point which I couldn't see.

Before I could get myself fully dressed again, the TSA agent who'd patted me down opened the door into the main area and walked out, calling back, "I have to go have the gloves checked. Keep her."

Once I was covered, I was led back through the still-open door by the 2nd TSA agent into the main security screening area, where I was held - still without shoes, jewelry, cell, etc - until the first TSA agent could have her latex gloves screened for contraband chemicals.

Only when that was okayed was I allowed to complete dressing and leave for my concourse.

Never before have I been submitted to a body search DOWN TO THE SKIN by anyone who was not a doctor. And then, only with my consent. I find this to be a serious violation of my rights as an American and as a human being. As a scientist and former reserve police officer, I can say that this is not a reasonable, efficient method of security screening - and it is sliding down a steep, slippery slope toward the abrogation of our rights and freedoms.