We Moved.

In Uncategorized on 3 February 2016 at 14:29

Just not to any of the places I’d listed previously here.

New York City.

There’s a long story to be told. But, for now, suffice to say we live with a roommate in Harlem, Misty is at her new job as an Associate Creative Director at frog and I’m working from the roommate’s kitchen table, which I’m sure she appreciates my having completely commandeered.

The summary of what happened after we landed at JFK that I’ve been sharing with colleagues is:

Landed in NYC to find out our landlord had disappeared with our $2400 for first month and security. Stayed in disingenuously expensive hotel in Chinatown a few days while looking for apartments. Found out our credit is too bad (though our income is far beyond what’s needed) to get an apartment alone . . . ended up staying with a friend (Hollywood Anderson) of a friend (from Austin) in the Bronx for the last four days. Two days ago, got all our stuff into our new place (with a roommate) and sat down to start working — the most relaxing thing I’ve done in two weeks.

Had drinks with a coworker (Tania) from a consulting gig I have. She also showed us $2 hotdogs, which was the first thing we’d eaten in three days.

So far, the NYPD officers who came to our hotel room to take a report for larceny and fraud were nice to us (one of them looked like McNulty from The Wire); Tania was nice; as is our roommate, Betsy and Hollywood is super-cool and a great host, especially considering we’d never met and only spoken on the phone for a total of maybe, maybe 15 minutes before crashing in his livingroom for four days.

I will admit to the sin of having taken Lyfts a few times. But we were loaded down with eight or so bags of luggage — heavy luggage — that it only made sense. And taxis — good luck. But it appears Lyft is fairly well-regulated here. I notice the registration stickers and “T” license plates displaying their legitimacy. Still, a sin.

The Reading Lottery

In Uncategorized on 8 January 2016 at 21:14

I hear everyone is lining up to get their Powerball tickets, especially those who don’t usually play. The Washington Post ran a story today discussing the good things that have happened to people who have taken home large lottery winnings. One man, Roy Cockrum, said exactly what needs to be said more:

The best way to help starving artists is to give them a chance to work. Culture is what enriches us all. We are all in trouble when the arts are not supported, when there is no seed of change.

I know we were all dumb for studying the humanities and now our fellow students in business and finance are quite well-off, but I do believe the market for writers (Oh. I’m sorry. I meant, content strategists), musicians, designers and other artists will continue to improve. As knowledge and creative work (aside from creative ways to make money from others’ money — we’ll leave that to our former classmates) become more important at the same time the middle-class is realizing it long ago lost that status now that white-collar work is proving quite compatible with automation, we will, hopefully, continue to find employment.

Thus, I am happy to, as I called it in my last post, outsource my design.

In the current issue of The Spectator, Matthew Parris discusses British “leaders’ suicidal urge to sex it up.” It being any foreign conflict into which they find they’ve steered the country. He, essentially, discusses what I posted here in 2003 about Bush and the Iraq War: Just be honest and I’ll at least respect you. As Parris writes:

“I want to suggest how (Prime Minister) David Cameron might have presented his case better, proofing himself against the sneers of such as I. He could just have told the truth.”

Delicate Gun Control

In Uncategorized on 5 December 2015 at 18:04

The irregularly (but inevitable) scheduled mass shooting we’re so seemingly fond of has once again sparked the usual gun control debate. I know. What’s new?

Even The New York Times issued a front-page editorial advocating tighter gun control. The last NYTimes front-page editorial was in 1920 — opposing Warren G. Harding. Or so I read in the Washington Post today.

The WaPo article itself is good, but it also reminds one of how many other issues come with the implementation of gun control — and how many solutions we can come up with to combat illegal gun (ab)use, which includes any death caused by a bullet ripping through someone’s body fired from a pistol, rifle or other such delivery platform — and the obstacles to achieving that goal without violating or nullifying the 2nd Amendment.

As an aside, I’d love to see the male lead — a Revolutionary War hero who was tight with Washington, was somehow transported to our time and who often comments on the perversions we’ve made of the Constitution on the television show Sleepy Hollow. “Bloody hell! We were using muskets, cannon at best. It’s a marvel,” he say, “and completely unacceptable and unconscionable. This is not quite what we had in mind.”

One begins to realize the issues and obstacles just pile up as you readthe article and pay attention. The immediate political discussion — because the status quo seems to be the current order for days — makes it seem pointless to continue discussing the subject through this lens. Instead, I want to demonstrate how this single article brings such seemingly disparate disciplines to bear on the issue of gun violence and control.