lookin

About a decade ago, soon after 9/11, I read an article in the New Yorker called "Private Lives". It highlighted the differences between Germany and the U. S. around the issue of transparency between the government and its citizens. In Germany, partially as a result of its Third Reich experience, things were set up specifically so that the government was to be as transparent as possible to its citizens, while the lives of its citizens were to be as opaque as possible to the government. The Germans were quite clear that, while the government should not have any secrets from its citizens, its citizens should be perfectly free to have secrets from the government. One result of this philosophy was that Germany's spy agencies were deliberately set up so that they were in separate parts of the country and communications among them were intentionally made quite difficult. Since one of the terrorist cells responsible for 9/11 was based in Hamburg, the article highlights the frustration that the U. S. expressed with the German philosophy and the carrots and sticks used to change it. In my opinion, 9/11 was a major factor in the latest wave of privacy erosion in the U. S., spawned by a desire to make sure the 'bad guys' can't hide anything from the government. Unfortunately, the 'good guys' also get swept up in these changes to our laws and challenges to our Constitution. Even worse, I think, is that the line between 'good guys' and 'bad guys' can be blurry at best and, at worst, can be pretty easily shifted based on political and financial interests. Whose political and financial interests, you ask? Good question.

Indeed, and you've expressed the present trends very well. Burying a rider in a future bill to further restrict what they didn't get around to restricting in this one is all too easy. It's becoming nearly impossible for groups of ordinary citizens to keep ahead of lobbyists and 'corporate persons' when it comes to influencing legislation. It seems odd that the tilt in U. S. government is away from individual freedoms, while we encourage the exact opposite in other regions of the world. Perhaps an overstatement, but I find myself wondering if we need a State Department that represents our values here at home as well as abroad.

(Ooops! Wait a second. I forgot about the contest.) . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gcursor, I totally agree with KYTOP. Opening your heart to someone who needs help is a wonderful thing to do. Though it doesn't sound like it happened in this case, there could be times when you might get taken advantage of. But that doesn't take away from your act of kindness which, in my opinion, is the important thing as it's what makes us human. Good for you! And good for your flirt-guy for heading back to his family. Thanks for sharing your story.

Perhaps he is gathering material for his next post.

There are definitely a lot more posts than I can read these days, but I'm sure that's always been the case for some folks, and hopefully it won't be the end of the world for me either. What's important, in my opinion, is that quite a few folks are having a good time with it, and it should shake up the site dynamics a bit. A few hardy posters will end up with some cash in their pockets, and the Awards Banquet should be a fun time with a good opportunity for members to mingle. I also think it's pretty nice of OZ to put some thought and some cash into the community. There aren't a lot of site owners who would do that, and I think it's worth acknowledging. PS: Not proud to admit that only today, this old dog finally discovered the View New Content tab, so that should make things go a bit quicker.

You just have to use your imagination a little. ( Now guess what I'm imagining? )

Much obliged, MsGuy, though I'm happier being just one of the Pepys.

Three old posts, three old posts, When are they from, when are they from? They nearly engendered a furious fight, And sparked a debate over wrong versus right. Did you ever see such a thing on the site, As three old posts?

While such a consummation is not without a certain appeal, I must confess to a bit of difficulty picturing it.

That better be a real 11 ½ inches, young man!

Stick around folks. I'm just gettin' warmed up!

Personally, I'd let this 'friend' know that I've been moved to take a vow of silence.

According to this article, acupuncture can result in increased levels of melatonin in the blood. If this is, in fact, the mechanism by which acupuncture works and, if you have concluded that melatonin doesn't help you, then acupuncture may not help. Of course, I doubt it would hurt either, and there may be some other mechanism(s) at work. If I had debilitating insomnia, I'm pretty sure I would head to the Stanford sleep clinic. These folks have been around for a while. I would expect, at the very least, if they couldn't help you, they would tell you why they couldn't help you. Personally, I'd be optimistic that they might uncover the underlying reason for your insomnia, and be able to provide at least some relief. I don't know how insurance companies look at this field of medicine, but a phone call to the clinic should get you some answers. Very best of luck!

I wonder if OZ has any plans for those who post too much?

Last year's winner celebrates his good fortune. Moments later, a hearty pat on the back from the second runner-up turned good luck into bad. Fortunately, the sore loser was able to snatch away the winning ticket just before the wind got it.

Thus proving that there's more than one way to skin a kielbasa.

Three here also: #1, #54, and #87. Somehow, this year's movies weren't quite pulling me in as they did last year and the year before. Wouldn't have seen J. Edgar, had it not been for the discussion on this site. I'm very glad I did, as it provided some good context for Hoover's life, and gave me another opportunity to appreciate Armie Hammer's talents.

Do you mind my asking who you told them you were?

Good gosh! Much as I'd love a $500 Gift Certificate, it seems I'd have to significantly change my relationship with the MER site in order to get one. And maybe that's the whole point. I'm starting with 956 posts after five years, although the statistics tell me I've been hitting an average of half a post per day. With 152 days between January 1st and May 31st, normal practices would get me only about 75 posts - not even enough to earn a place in the hat. I'd have to quadruple my output to do that. And, even then, my little slip of parchment could easily end up getting caught somewhere in OZ's hatband. The most reliable way to snare the five hundred bucks would seem to be getting to 2190 posts as quickly as possible to be among the three shoe-ins. Even if I had all 152 days to achieve that feat, I'd have to post nearly fifteen times a day, or thirty times my present rate. And, if I wanted to have the most posts between now and the end of May, Heaven knows how much I'd have to post, day in and day out, not even stopping to enjoy a little siesta on Cinco de Mayo. As it's a very rare day when even two interesting and sharable things happen to me, let alone fifteen each and every day, I guess my choices are limited to (1) start sharing things like how often I get up to pee during the night (twice last night, although New Year's Eve itself provided quite a bounty of opportunities for renal relief as the champagne continued to flow well past midnight, as did I), or (2) continue sharing only those rare events that may enlighten or amuse, and remain on the sidelines to cheer on my more prolific fellow-posters. Right now, I'm leaning toward (2) although, should there be some significant uptick in the quantity and/or quality of events swirling through this rather mundane life of mine, I promise you all will be the first to know.

If it will cheer you up, I promise to keep kiting writing checks.

Not to be too much of a Pollyanna, but there have been a couple of small consumer victories in the past year or so: ● When Bank of America decided to charge five bucks a month for a debit card a few months ago, the consumer outcry was pretty vocal. Partly, I think, because the Occupy Wall Street movement was just hotting up and partly because so many ATM cards had transformed themselves into debit cards without much fanfare. I figured Wells Fargo wouldn't be far behind, so I lined up a local credit union and was prepared to switch my accounts there within hours of getting my notice. Fortunately, it never came, not for Bank of America customers and not for Wells Fargo customers. I figure they'll try some other way of getting an extra five bucks out of me, but I'm ready to walk the minute they do, and I'm sure I won't be alone. ● The second thing I'm happy about is the prominent box that started appearing on the front of my credit card bill starting a year or so ago. In addition to the minimum payment, it now tells me that it will take me fifteen years to pay off my balance if I only pay the minimum. (!) It also tells me that I'll pay about as much in interest as the amount I owe. Anyone can see that's a bad deal. Plus there's an option to pay the balance off in three years, and save lots of interest. It's pretty obvious why the banks did not want to make this information as visible as it is today, and why they complain about the high cost of regulation. Clearly, the programming required to put this information in simple language on page one of my bill did not cost more than a few hundred dollars. What they were complaining about, in my opinion, is the lost opportunity to pull in ludicrous amounts of interest from their customers by keeping the information less available to influence consumer decisions. The demise of the debit card fee came directly from consumers banding together and just saying 'no'. The more transparent reporting of true interest expense came directly from the Credit Card Act of 2009, with most of the provisions taking effect in 2010. It took a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress to get it done. For those who complain about President Obama, the Democrats, and/or over-regulation, I'll point to this one small example of something good happening on behalf of the U. S. consumer.

Ah, well, that's very different.

I think they're double-talking you. When I got home later that day, I had an email from Wells Fargo telling me that I had left my card at the ATM and could drop by the branch to pick it up. No report of "lost", no deactivation, just the machine eating it because I didn't want to sign up for automatic overdraft protection. Of course, I had already got my card back by then, and knew that it was working. Sometimes I think these 'customer service' reps just say the first thing that pops into their heads, so they can get you off the phone. When they don't help me, I ask for a supervisor. I also ask them to stay on the line until the supervisor answers. Two can play at that game. I don't like being a butt, but, having been in a number of jobs where my livelihood depended on making customers happy, I do not take kindly to the word 'can't'. I'm always polite, but I think of 'can't' as just the first step on the way to 'can'.

Very odd, a Wells Fargo ATM also ate my card last week. All I wanted was a couple hundred bucks of the thousand I had in there, and it flashed this big banner wanting me to OK future overdrafts at thirty bucks a pop. As the last thing I need is somebody else lending me money at a big fat fee, I told them 'no'. Next thing I know, the machine is munching on my plastic, and wouldn't give it back. I went inside the branch and got them to retrieve my card from the machine, hand it over, and come outside with me while I started all over again to get my two hundred bucks. It worked this time, but no thanks to the Wells Fargo computer that had orchestrated all this folderol. Anyway, the point of this screed is that your physical card may still be at your local branch, and you might - emphasis on 'might' - be able to get them to hand it over and reactivate it. If it's already on its way to credit card heaven then you will, as you say, just have to wait for the new one. Good thing you have a business partner who is flush. Bonne chance!