Friendship, 2010 and Beyond

The Miriam Webster Dictionary says a friend is “one attached to another by affection or esteem.” Wikipedia adds that friends exhibit “mutual trust and support.”The Oxford English Dictionary wanted over $50 for a definition, the price of a monthly subscription. They are not my friends. Thesaurus words associated with friendship were camaraderie, fellowship, companions, closeness, rapport, respect, understanding andmutual affection. To me, trust, respect and understanding seem the most important.

The arrival of 2010 and my advancing middle age have turned me to look at

my friends. I have paused to think about the meaning and character of my relationships

because a few have made me doubt the solid nature of a relationship I have always

assumed to be real friendship. Many times I have counted people as friends but they were not. Perhaps we had enjoyed one instance of great fun, or perhaps they were friends of a friend, perhaps we were thrown together because our children had so much fun playing. There are so many ways to acquire “friends.” Some people bond over a

sport, a club, a hobby, or even alcohol and drugs.

I have been assessing my friendships. I need to nurture the ones that are of the “mutual affection and understanding” kind, not the “fun, party, and drink” kind. As age grows, my desire to party diminishes. Social climbing has never been interesting, nor has ‘‘joining.” I don’t fit well into groups.

Aging is not easy, as anyone who is fifty and over will tell you. It can be a very rewarding (a hackneyed term) time, of course, but there is pain as well. What an aging person needs is different from what a twenty year old needs from friends. In youth we do seek support but we also still have trustworthy parents or relatives to rely on. As older adults we seek deeper fundamental characteristics in close friends. We have no way to stay sane without someone by our side to tell us whether our thoughts and behavior are accurate and realistic. Perhaps there are a few people who can guide themselves without help. Perhaps, but how lonely. Companionship is a huge component of friendship and one of the most important in old age.

So as this new decade and new year approaches I am examining my friends. There are not as many as I thought, to my surprise. Many people are really almost acquaintances and many obviously do not understand me or do not care enough forme. Usually this work both ways, luckily. Does our relationship comprise the qualities of affection, esteem, mutual trust and support? Each friendship is different, of course. As I look over the landscape, some will be those I trust and count on to keep me sane and happy. Some are clearly around for diversion. Most, thankfully, are steadfast, loving

and caring of me and it is mutual. These will last until the day I die.

TV and the Internet

How many of you watch TV online? Probably everyone sometimes if you are under thirty. And you probably use the site HULU. It is now part of Comcast so watch out. If you can give THEM you feedback!

If Hulu (or an equivalent online TV service) begins expensive subscriptions it will cause viewers to skip TV shows entirely except for the shows/seasons I might purchase through iTunes, who's prices must remain at the current level or we will quit that also. Like current cable companies, online TV services should offer packages from basic to loaded and the consumer can choose related to content and perhaps less or more advertising. The sites should clean up their acts, too, literally. The sites are poorly designed and full of c__p. Weeding through it all is a nightmare. Just give us the information for your services in a clean lineup and separate out the ads out (if you must have them!) to the side - preferably the left - it is easier to read a right hand column (remember newspapers?)

I love watching TV on my computer, personally. I don't have to go out and purchase a huge flat screen for a fortune and it goes every where with me. Media moguls, get with the program!

THE CITIZEN'S HEALTH CARE PLAN

The Citizens Health Care Plan

• The Public Option: The Federal government should jump start non-profit insurance cooperatives without initial loans but with large grants (similar to bail-outs) No beneficiary premiums would be required for people with incomes lower than $45,000 for individuals and $65,00 for families of three or four. Tax credits won’t work because poor people do not have stable incomes. They may not file income tax returns.

• Employers with any number of full time employees must offer coverage with the lowest cost plan that meets requirements set by the government. There should be competition between insurance companies as well as real public option as described above.

• Long term care should cover the full cost of at least $75 a day for individuals who have worked at least five years.

• Abortion should be covered by the case of rape, incest or health emergency with the mother or the fetus. Abortion should be available to any woman 18 or under. A private health care plan can refuse coverage.

• Illegal immigrants must pay for basic insurance if they are working in the US. Visitors to the US will receive care with pay. If they cannot pay they will be deported as soon as they are healthy.

• Children should receive care without cost paid for by Medicaid. If the parents are not citizens the family will be returned to the native country as soon as the child is healthy.

• Any health insurance plan should be paid by funds from a surtax to high-income earners of $500,000 a year and increasing exponentially with the level of income. Makers of pharmaceuticals pay sums allocated according to market share and earnings.

• Health Insurance premiums must be capped and adjusted according to incomes of subscribers. These amounts could be set by the Federal or State governments as decided by the people in an election.

ABOUT ABORTION

To the Los Angeles Times, November 8, 2009

The issue before the senate currently contains the following, I believe, that was an editorial in the Los Angeles Times last September. The editorial described the financial coverage allowed in the House Health Care Bill (there have been so many it is confusing) for women who want abortions:

U.S. law bars federal Medicaid dollars from being used to pay for abortions except when the pregnancies result from rape or incest or threaten the mother’s life. It also prohibits insurance plans for military personnel, federal employees and lower-income children from covering abortion. This page (of the healthcare reform bill) has opposed these rules because they deter poor women from obtaining the constitutionally protected medical care available to women with means. Legislators in California and about a dozen other states agree, and they provide funding for elective abortions with their own states’ Medicaid contributions.

In my opinion, abortion should be available to women who need one for any reason at all. It should be her choice and perhaps also the choice of the father. A baby should not be born into an environment that is lacking in any way. A child of fourteen or fifteen should not be forced to ruin his or her life if they make a mistake. Make abortion available but make that woman AND the man suffer the consequences. They should pay a lot of money (also something required in the House version of health care reform) for that mistake (Then watch those boys put on those condoms!), and perhaps some other consequences such as community service and some classes they must attend.

If they choose to have the baby they should BOTH bear the responsibility of their behavior and pay lots of money to insure the welfare of the child. They should also be required by law to go to regular doctors visits during pregnancy and afterwards. Social workers should be required by law to regulate and supervise the environment in which the child grows up in. The choice to have a baby is a lifelong commitment and this should be part of the education of minors who are sexually active.

Just my opinion,

Elizabeth Brady Woods

Pasadena, CA

Afghani Election

Americans have the wrong idea about politics in Afghanistan, and the countries of that area, including Pakistan. There is no such thing as an election that is not corrupt. It is not possible to install a government that is not corrupt. The Taliban know that and possibly even pay for the area's governments to look the other way. The people of the region are terrified for their lives. Americans are making things more dangerous for the locals everyday that we are there. What David Shenand said about building our defenses against enemies here at home is the right way to think. We all need to realize we are getting our own killed while helping a bunch of thugs. The whole region of Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan is in a centuries old turmoil that can only be rectified by the people themselves. We need to step back (out of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq) and build up our own country's intelligence and defenses.

We need to fix our own ailments, healing the cankers that are destroying us, the leading Democracy of the world. We should be proud of the education we give our children, proud of how we care for the medical needs of our citizens, and proud of our scientific advances in stemming global warming. We should be leaders in guarantying the civil rights of all of our citizens. We have no credibility until we do this. Ms. Clinton, look homeward and work to disengage from hopeless and dangerous governments. Work to form a strong bond with friendly countries. Work for your people, Secretary Clinton, not the corrupt puppet governments of the East.

Imigration 101

President Barack Obama

1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington, DC 20500

October 1, 2009

Dear President Obama,

Immigration is an economic and cultural “tradition” in the US. Were you aware

that the American Apparel crack down was going to occur? I hope not. Those people,

and many others like them, have been in this country many years and are Americans, except on “paper.”

America has had open borders for more than two hundred years. It has been

a fruitful and beneficial policy. Our population is as diverse as the United Nations. Our

Constitution welcomes all people to our shores. Immigrants who have been woven into American life by doing jobs we won’t do, shoring up our economy and raising our children should be respected and rewarded for what they’ve contributed to our society. We must reward them with citizenship, not arrest them.

Perhaps our borders need to change with the times, however. We can’t just allow people in without documenting them these days. Unfortunately, it is now too dangerous

for us to have completely open borders, there is so much illegal trafficking. The safety

of our citizens is suffering from many kinds of criminal activity by many unscrupulous

people, not just undocumented workers. There is much illegal commerce interfering with our peace and prosperity.

We can tighten our borders by screening immigrants for everything we need to know in order to keep all Americans safe. We want that. Arresting workers and forcing families to leave and return to their countries of origin is cruel and counter productive. Many haven’t been “back home” for decades. Many will be arrested for political views when they disembark their flight “home.” These are important people in our lives. People such as the woman who helped raise my child, the grocer down the street who has been caring for his community and raising two sons, the seamstress who lost her only son in Iraq or the doctor who plans to return to his home country to serve the poor there.

The proper and respectful procedure in rounding up illegal residents should be

to do background checks, see if they have any record of criminal activity, examine their current situation to see if they are good people and make them citizens, not deport them.

We need them here.

An amendment should be discussed and perhaps added as an “update” to our Constitution, which was crafted long ago. There are good productive people here from all over the world who should stay and help us advance to meet our challenges.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Brady

Afghanistan War On Line

September 23, 2009

Dear President Obama,

Today the papers are reporting you want to take a new turn in the Afghan war.

That is great, but we should not send troops there at all. Trying to fight Al Quaeda is like fighting ants by stepping on one and thinking that you’ve won.

The pursuit, we all know, of Osama Bin Laden is futile. He may even be dead. We all realize that he is just one of many Al Quaeda leaders. For that to be our objective, I have to believe your administration is just using that to explain to the Americans who need a reason for the death of their sons and daughters. Either that or we need a war to sustain our flagging economy? Or, perhaps, you, Mr. President, feel you must continue the conflict to shore up the Democratic party. Are we fighting to keep the Republicans from beating you up some more?

Mr. President, I don’t mean to be rude. You are in a tough spot. You were handed this idiotic war and there is no easy way out. If changing the mission there from killing all insurgents to weeding out Al Quaeda so that perhaps we can have fewer troops deployed, I’m all for it. Keeping any troops there at all, however, is senseless.

The US needs to pull out of that area entirely. You and the other commanders in chief should develop a solid new plan to fight Al Qaeda (and even the Taliban) in cyber space. The latest capture of Mr. Zazi, in New York, is good. He seems to be talking quite a bit (can we believe this?) and providing the authorities with some useful information, hopefully. Our investigators are looking at plans he and others had on his computer. He used the internet to organize a group of terrorists, make a plan of attack and assemble the different materials to make bombs.

This method of combat is what I think the American armed forces should use more extensively. If we have to find people hiding in caves, use their Facebook or MySpace. I’m not trying to be flip. I am serious when I say our enemies use electronic devices and we should track them via that technology. Obviously, we will deploy troops at some point to go get whoever is found out. The number of American at risk would be so few and their objective would be so much clearer and much more direct. At least, they would know what and where the enemy was.

Such a surgical approach and use of many fewer troops would surely make more sense, save many lives and win the approval of the American people. The people of Afghanistan and many other countries would be happier with us too. What right have we to invade these countries, march through villages with sub-machine guns frightening people and putting their lives at risk? We are now trying to “make nice” with those localvillagers. Are we really helping them? The Taliban and other groups kill the elders for talking to American soldiers.

We should be a silent force in our battle with terrorists. Our missions should be clandestine and invisible to our enemies. Our intelligence agencies would do well to get better information to supply to the troops on the ground. It would be nice to be so good that we attack our enemies with surgical swat teams that accomplish their objectives

and then leave, without killing civilians.

We don’t have to risk American lives by making our soldiers befriend Afghani people over tea, ever on the lookout for someone who might kill them. That is ridiculous. Our soldiers with camo and guns should not be doing the job of the Secretary of State and foreign policy experts. Secretary Clinton should be over there winning over Afghani hearts and minds.

Al Quaeda is not an army that assembles at some headquarters in Pakistan or Iran or any other one place. They gather in “cells” all over the world. The recent arrest of Mr. Zazi proves that. Al Quaeda is everywhere. Al Quaeda is on the internet. Do our military really think they have home offices in the mountains of Afghanistan? Cubicles in the caves? Coffee machines and Sparklets water fountains in the rocks?

President Obama, if you really want to take the war in Afghanistan in a new

direction, look no further than your laptop. That is the way in. That is where our enemies lurk. Please get our people out of that desert and onto the world wide web. I makes sense to fight terrorism at its heart and its weakest point. Communication.

Urgent: Obama and Health Care Reform

Dear President Obama,

In today’s New York Times (online) I found the best opinion piece yet about what is wrong with your approach to getting the health care reform we all want.

“Mr. Obama should declare himself in favor of covering as many of the uninsured as possible in the near future; should insist that insurers grant and renew coverage without regard to health status; and should insist on new insurance exchanges in which people without group coverage and those working for the smallest employers could buy insurance at large-group rates.” He should insist,...that a strong public plan be introduced if private insurers fail to hold costs down in the future.”

Declare, insist, push are strong words that echo what the American people

are waiting for you to do, Mr. Obama. You are way too diplomatic. We are no longer

sure of what you believe. There are “reports that the price for winning over Republicans and conservative Democrats” will get us a “drastically scaled-down” plan. We have been

very clear. We want every American to have basic health care coverage. Cutting costs

to please Republicans would be a huge mistake. Democrats need to take advantage of the number of their colleagues in Congress and the Senate at this time and have the

guts to push through a comprehensive health care reform bill that will provide what all Americans want: universal coverage.

Finally, the editorial says, to get through the Republican blockade, “Democrats ought to resort to a parliamentary maneuver known as “budget reconciliation,” which would allow them to push through most reforms by majority vote.” Absolutely right,

Mr. President. This is the time to push hard, use every way possible to do this for our country. If you, President Obama, never achieve anything else while you are in office,

this would be enough of an accomplishment to make you a hero forever in American

history.

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Brady Woods

Dear President Obama,

It seems, from my readings, that you may have to relinquish the plan for a public option

when you speak to Congress tomorrow. I want to tell you to do so, but only if

you get in return: 1. a substancial structure in place that will give good care to poor children and the neediest elderly. 2. no allowance of refusal of coverage of pre-existing conditions.

Lets hope for that much.

To the New York TImes: TALKING ON CELL PHONES WHILE DRIVING

California

July 21st, 2009

7:21 am

I am a 57 year old woman, well educated and travelled. I am well informed in general. I listen to NPR, watch CNN, read the LA Times as well as the NY Times. I vote in every election. I am a mother, a wife, a teacher.

I also have a beloved iPhone.

I will say honestly that I have texted two times in the last month while driving. You know. Just a few words. I have used my \"hands free\" device every work day to make \"neccessary\" phone calls. My hands free device has fallen out of my ear so I had to reach to pick it back up, taking my eyes off the road, many times.

I beleive talking on the phone is extremely distracting and should be against the law.

What if someone called you to tell you a loved one had been killed by a texting driver?

Do you think you can really drive well and watch out for dangerous drivers while someone is telling you about Aunt Mary's latest faux pas or your date is telling you he wants to get married?

There has got to be a way to stop me (and others) from texting and talking on the phone. Maybe random searcheds by police? Lets say it was illegal to have a phone in the car. Maybe cars could have a signal to remove a phone from a car before it will drive. I am deadly serious.

“Dear Governor Schwartzeneger,

In my dream you were the best governor we’ve ever had. You probably had

that dream too. Too bad is was just a dream. I suspended my criticism of you and your policies for years because you seemed to be a new kind of conservative, more centrist than others. So we have a few differences of opinion, no problem, I thought. We have that even with our pets.

Now I am very angry indeed. I am an elementary school teacher. I hope you know that our anger is not about the money we are loosing. Believe me, we have never earned enough to have it be an issue. We manage what we do with money that we find in other places, sometimes our own. We work for our children to do the best we can for them. We make things with our hands. We go to the $.99 as much as possible. The parents of our students bring us paper.

Now you have spoken of suspending Proposition 98 and you have threatened the California Teachers Assn. You have attacked us through our TVs, with mean and dirty commercials, spending taxpayer’s money as a weapon against ourselves. Democrats advocate new taxes on oil and tobacco. I think that is a great idea. We have college age kids (we might have to pull out of school because we can’t pay their tuition, by the way) who abuse alcohol and tobacco. To make it harder to buy would be nice.

This phobia against raising taxes has got to stop. There are many places we

can raise taxes. Tobacco and alcohol are not our only vices. We buy designer clothes when we should use J. Crew or Urban Outfitters. We travel first class when we could go coach. We buy gas guzzling expensive cars when we could all get much more affordable hybrids. There are so many “luxury” areas of commerce that should be taxed. How

about the new airline for pets?! Please tell me that is a necessity.

Cuts and layoffs in LAUSD schools are among the last ways the state should use to pay off the deficit. We have no summer school this year. Our poor families

don’t know where to put their children while they work. It is a choice of where to leave their children or lose their jobs. Our special ed teachers were laid off. We have no art programs. Even the music has ceased.

Is this a pretty picture? Would you want to have your children in this situation?

As an immigrant, are you different just because you landed a job in a movie all about your built up body? Do you think you are really any different from all the children I teach?

Please don’t punish our school system anymore. I am begging you. We have no supplies. We have no summer program. We have no tutors. We have no teacher’s assistants and we don’t have enough teachers. Soon we won’t have enough public schools. What kind of a world is this? Is the TERMINATOR coming?”

Very sincerely,

Elizabeth Brady Woods

WAR

Dear President Obama,

This week, in the op-ed section of the Los Angeles times, George McGovern wrote an editorial about our war in Iraq and the one that is still continuing in Afghanistan and possibly spreading into Pakistan. He wants us to pull out of that area completely and immediately. I agree.

As it happens I grew up in the Middle East and know the nature of the tribal and religious sects in that area. I have not been to Afghanistan but my father was all over that area as a New York Times correspondent in the sixties. I was there for three years with my family and returned to Beirut for college from 1970 to 1975. I know first hand how the different religious and
sectarian factions think and compete for power. We are not going to change any of that. It is a fight as old as Jerusalem.

I agree with Senator McGovern that we should not be fighting there. It is nothing we can win. We have spent six years teaching the Iraqi people how to manage their country. It is time to leave. The costly lesson must end now. “Khrallas!” as they say there. The word is a mixture of “finish” and “stop.”

As for Afghanistan, it will indeed be your Vietnam, as Senator Kerry communicated yesterday, along with a soldier home from duty in there in Afghanistan. He said that combat in that stark landscape is like “fighting ghosts” because they never see their enemy.

As Mr. McGovern says, “Why have you adopted most of Bush’s formula for dragging out the war?” The fixation Americans have on Al Quaida is psychotic and miopic. There are many anti-American groups there and elsewhere. There will always be. If thousands of American troops go into those Afghan mountains it will be slaughter for many on both sides. You will just encourage more insurgents to join the militants in the caves. Why are you insisting on it?


Pull out completely. You and your staff should work diplomatically to receive accurate intel from the countries that harbor (against their will, by the way) terrorists and make sure the anti-American groups are well contained and observed closely. Just use the considerable resources in the area already. We have to surround any place they are operating from,
contain them, maintain a close watch on them and their movements. Please don’t use our men to go in those treacherous mountains.

President Obama, I’m wondering if you have been brainwashed into thinking we need to continue a war there in Iraq and Afghanistan. Are the commanders of the Armed Forces controlling you as they did President Bush? If so, I am extremely disappointed. You are still allowing Americans to die every day in Iraq (and probably other places) and killing civilians
by the dozens. I am shocked that you are allowing this to continue.

Please try to do the right thing. Save all those lives that will end there in the next few years. Bring our troops home, please.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth Brady Woods

The Butterfly Effect

The idea that one butterfly could eventually have a far-reaching ripple effect on subsequent historic events seems first to have appeared in a 1952 short story by Ray Bradbury about time travel (see Literature and print here) although Edward Lorenz made the term popular (see below). Lorenz noted in a publication for the New York Academy of Sciences that "One meteorologist remarked that if the theory were correct, one flap of a seagull's wings could change the course of weather forever." Later speeches and papers by Lorenz used the more poetic butterfly. According to Lorenz, upon failing to provide a title for a talk he was to present at the 139th meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 1972, Philip Merilees concocted "Does the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas?" as a title for the talk.

P.S. The term "butterfly effect" itself is related to the work of Edward Lorenz, and is based in Chaos Theory and sensitive dependence on initial conditions, first described in the literature by Jacques Hadamard in 1890^[1] and popularized by Pierre Duhem's 1906 book.

Why Are We The Boss of the World?

April 5, 2009

To the New York Times -
re bossing the world nations, as in telling N Korea they can’t develop
nuclear weapons:


Now, wait just a minute. I may be naive and simple minded but , to me, telling other countries, such as North Korea and Iran, not to build missiles and bombs seems presumptuous and possibly causing rancor enough so that they defy us. President Obama is doing a great job and I am very happy he is President. On this subject, however, he is towing an old line that has gotten us nowhere.
We ourselves have nuclear weapons as do several other countries. Is that the credentials to boss everyone else around telling them what they can’t develop missiles or nuclear power? Yes, I know this was a United Nations treaty but wasn’t that agreed upon back in the cave era?
Time to be real. Use diplomacy to make friends who won’t attack us.
The Nato countries should rewrite their agenda. The Alliance should use international forces to keep nuclear nations from doing anything aggressive. The US must come to terms with the fact that we have little credibility after attacking and ruining Iraq.
Please tell me why we, Americans, have the right to tell other countries how to live in this big bad world?

Response to Greed or Stupidity, D. Brooks, New York Times

April 3, 2009
My letter to David Brooks, of the New York Times, about his editorial “Greed and Stupidity”:

Dear Mr. Brooks,
You put the entire picture of the causes of our financial crisis or collapse very succinctly. I really appreciate that. The complicated nature of it all explains why Americans and the new President are
having a difficult time figuring out what to do. They are still looking for a formulaic explanation, as if there is a recipe and they left out an important ingredient. In a way they are right. The recipe included responsibility and integrity but I guess they thought that was
optional.

From the editorial by David Brooks - NY Times - 4-3-09:
The best single encapsulation of the greed narrative is an essay called “The Quiet Coup,” by Simon Johnson, (former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund or IMF) in The Atlantic.
Mr. Johnson says:
“The crash has laid bare many unpleasant truths about the United States. One of the most alarming, says Johnson, is that the finance industry has effectively captured our government—a state of affairs that more typically describes emerging markets, and is at the center of many emerging-market crises. If the IMF’s staff could speak
freely about the U.S., it would tell us what it tells all countries in this situation: recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is blocking essential reform. And if we are to prevent a true
depression, we’re running out of time.”
Johnson begins with a trend. Between 1973 and 1985, the
U.S. financial sector accounted for about 16 percent of domestic
corporate profits. In the 1990s, it ranged from 21 percent to 30 percent. This decade, it soared to 41 percent. In other words, Wall Street got huge. As it got huge, its prestige grew. Its compensation packages grew. Its political power grew as well. Wall Street and Washington merged as a flow of investment bankers went down to the White House and the Treasury Department.
The second and, to me, more persuasive theory revolves around ignorance and uncertainty. The primary problem is not the greed of a giant oligarchy. It’s that overconfident bankers didn’t know what they were doing. They thought they had these sophisticated tools to reduce risk. But when big events — like the rise of China — fundamentally altered the world economy, their tools were worse than useless.
Many writers have described elements of this intellectual
hubris. Amar Bhidé has described the fallacy of diversification.
Bankers thought that if they bundled slices of many assets into
giant packages then they didn’t have to perform due diligence on each one. ...the formula that gave finance whizzes the illusion that they could accurately calculate risks.
In Wired, Felix Salmon described the false lure of the Gaussian copula function, the formula that gave finance whizzes the illusion that they could accurately calculate risks. Still, one has to choose a guiding theory. To my mind, we didn’t get into this crisis because
inbred oligarchs grabbed power. We got into it because arrogant
traders around the world were playing a high-stakes game they
didn’t understand.
We should return to the day when banks were focused institutions — when savings banks, insurance companies, brokerages and investment banks lived separate lives. We can agree on that reform.
Again, from Johnson at the Atlantic:
“Typically, these countries (those that go to the IMF for help)
are in a desperate economic situation for one simple reason—the powerful elites within them overreached in good times and took too many risks... ......With credit unavailable, economic paralysis ensues, and conditions just get worse and worse. The government is forced
to draw down its foreign-currency reserves to pay for imports, service debt, and cover private losses. But these reserves will eventually run out. If the country cannot right itself before that happens, it will default on its sovereign debt and become an economic pariah.”
There is a “disturbing similarity” to a banana republic in our
own crisis: elite business interests—financiers, in the case of the U.S.—played a central role in creating the crisis, making ever-larger gambles, with the implicit backing of the government, until the
inevitable collapse.”

In wrapping up Mr. Brooks comments and those of my other sources for the essay above, it is obvious that strict regulation is
necessary and obligatory now, for the banking industry and other
financial institutions. That is clear. Whether or not this President
can do enough remains to be seen.

We Are Impatient Children of Technology

Reading the comments above makes me see that we are too impatient in America. On CNN the commentators said that we are too accustomed to instant results. Such as a home make over completed within an hour on TV or a business venture ordered up by Donald Trump all in one episode of The Apprentice.
I am guilty of similar lightning expectations. I have been impatient with this new administration also.
Patience and trust is what we must learn, on both sides of the isle. Don’t we all love our country and want the best for her? We can moan and grown like spoiled children and perhaps ruin the opportunity for this bunch in Washington to do anything constructive.
Come on, it has been only TWO months for them. Could you turn things around that fast? As President Obama said yesterday, the US is like the Titanic. It will take a super human effort to turn her around. Give Obama and his crew a chance.
I’m as skeptical and impatient as the next person but I think we should back off (INCLUDING the press!) and let them figure it out. No one has faced these problems before (exactly) so don’t crowd them and suffocate them. Let them govern and in a year or two the day of reckoning will come, so to speak.

Bi-lingual, tri-lingual, or quad-lingal (?) Education

To The New York Times-March 11, 2009

Bi-, tri-, quadrupal language education would never do anything but help children. I work with second graders who are at least bi-lingual. Their parents have poor English skills but and I don’t speak Thai or Chinese or Tagalo. We talk all the time anyway because I can understand badly accented English easily. This comes from living in different countries and learning four languages before I was ten. My “ear” is trained linguistically. Our communication is about the children, of course, and they deeply appreciate a teacher that can speak to them in their first language or in any language. The children do not need to speak to me in Spanish or Thai.They are completely fluent in Engish. Their minds are agile and they quickly switch from language to language.
Language comes from a part of the brain that is it’s own. That part of the brain needs as much development as any other, as we know. Bi-lingual education is something everyone should have, especially in today’s global society.
Europeans routinely speak many languages. They are better educated than we are so, obviously, learning multiple languages didn’t hurt them.
The US education system is poor but removing language learning is not the answer. Hiring teachers who speak multiple languages is.

— Elizabeth Brady

Public v.s. Charter Schools

Mr. O'Connell, Governor Schwarzenegger, President Obama,
Please do not take funding away from public schools, especially elementary schools. I am a second grade teacher in a wonderful public elementary school here in Los Angeles. It has been built up in the community by a very talented principal and involved parents.It is small and intimate, where the families feel comfortable and safe enough to spend time on campus getting to know us teachers and each other. Their involvement in the school activities and knowing the teachers is crucial, as we know, to the quality of the school. The three hundred or so families, whose children are there from kindergarten to fifth grade, are mostly immigrants with American born children.
Charter schools are not the way to go. The problem is that they are not all located where the children and their families live. Another issue is the quality of their teachers. Thirdly, the funds they operate on are mostly private donations and therefore not under government jurisdiction or regulation. The AB1137 requirements for "re-authorization" of charter schools are not effective enough. the charter school only has to perform as well as the surrounding public schools. The school is measured by tests that are loosely prepared and subject to bias. Even if these meager standards are not met, the school can continue to operate regardless.
As you know, some of our schools in the Los Angeles area are the worst in the country. The elementary school I mentioned initially is, however, proof that our public schools can redeem themselves. We must improve on the infrastructure we have, aided by federal, state and local governments. Ending busing, keeping schools small and community based and raising the expectations of the teachers the administrators and the students is the key to our renewing the high standards that our schools once had.

The OMG Generation

to: Kate Zernike at THE NEW YORK TIMES
March 8, 2009
Dear Ms. Zernike,

I thoroughly enjoyed your “Generation OMG” piece. You are so insightful when you compare the parent’s generation (be they from the 1930’s or later) to the their children’s. It is fascinating to see the destinctions in the younger generations play out in their development and subscequent outlook towards the future. I would love to see a graph of the influences of parental sociological traits play out in the characteristics of their offspring A book that encompasses all of this subject in detail would be very interesting. Perhaps there is one?

My parents were teenagers during the Great Depression and became successful writers (in my father’s case for the NY Times!) shunning the material values of the 1950’s. I was born in 1951 and into this wild bohemian household and have been an artist and a teacher. My husband is a doctor. Our son is a freshman at in college and grew up in an affluent environment of private schools and video games. Together we represent the Boomers and the Bubble generations. He is a fairly typical example, I think, of his generation. They are high consumers, risk takers and somewhat more conscious of the world as a whole. They are aware of politics and human rights but most don’t envision a life of public service. They are still young.

The world is changing in a massive way, however, imploding in on itself. Perhaps it it the Y2K effect that didn’t happen in the year 2000, and is coming now with the onset of the tremendous changes in communication and technology.

Our college and highschool aged children will see that the comfort they were raised in is not a given. They are likely to have a difficult time finding jobs in whatever career they choose, even if the economy improves, because of the shear number of them. Some are already working to forge a place in the job market to come.

Our children will live and work in a global society, rather than a world of super powers and the almighty USA. This will mean new ways of making money, what to spend it on or how to save it. Their families, if they have them, will be structured differently. The parents will probably both be working and the children will be out into society earlier. We used to say that the “nuclear” family was the future. It is now the past. This is not to say that the future will be better or worse for them than it has been for us. It is just evolution.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth Brady
Pasadena, California

to Tim Rutten, LA Times

Dear Ms. Woods:
Thanks very much and I don't think it's ever too late to do the
right thing.
Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: Lissa Brady [mailto:lissabw@me.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 8:21 AM
To: Rutten, Timothy
Subject: Shocking and awfull, but not news to me

Dear Mr. Rutten,
Your opinion piece, Bush's Executive Tyranny, in todays online LA
Times, is right on the money. Ever since the Iraq war began I have
been worried about how far the Bush administration would act
unlawfully, dragging down our country to levels of corruption never
revealed domestically before. Your statements about the documents
issued by Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel are terrifying.
Was this office an establishment of Cheney and Rumsfeld? Unthinkable!
I thought they were just out to make money off American tax payers.
Unfortunately, they had much higher ambitions. They were truly
hijacking our country!
(We should have the equivalent movie made to Frost/ Nixon but as
Brokaw/Cheney or Cooper/Rumsfeld or Rutten/Bush.
The average American will not buy this terrible story unless it is
presented as a movie or television expose by Barbara Walters or 60
Minutes.)
The suggestion of Sen. Leahy to "establish a bipartisan citizens
commission to investigate and report on exactly what occurred" is
urgent and of paramount importance. The longer we wait the less we
will be able to uncover.
Americans, all of us, need to see how far the Bush administration went
without asking us or, even, telling us what secret actions they took
and how. There were fanatics at the helm and they have truly battered
this ship. We are sinking from the damage It may be too late to repair
it.

Sincerely and sadly,
Elizabeth Brady Woods

Bailout Bleedout

February 22nd, 2009 8:44 am

The question in the New York Times today was - should the corporate executives who took huge bonus just before the government gave their companies survival funds, give the money back? I am NOT kidding you. My answer:

Of course the executives of our Fortune 500 companies (maybe "Fortune" meant they make a fortune and the jokes on us?) should return the huge bonuses they took so swiftly when they saw the financial crisis coming. Does ANYONE think they were fair in taking that money? Does EVERYONE cheat at cards?
As a common taxpayer I am sickened by this injustice in our country. Is it part of a free market to compensate the rich and punish the poor? We are two working adults who have managed (carefully) to raise one child who is in college now. We have saved for our retirement too. We have never even taken an extension to pay our %40 of our income in taxes..We are not poor but we do not receive bonus pay as we both work in NPOs. We are not eligible for scholarships for our son. Our tax bracket is the highest there is. We have no extra cash and have stopped eating out and entertaining, even on a small scale. We believe in giving back to our fellow citizens and sacrificing for our country so we don't complain.
The executives that took huge bonus compensations before the bailout are thieves and now we have to pay again to "save" their companies and our banking system.
Will someone tell me what we did to deserve this? Are we just stupid? Are we "bad?" Did we get the wrong instructions and fail the test? How can we continues believing our country will always be on the right side of the law, that our government will always come to our rescue, that all Americans are created equal?
I give up the notion of our nation being any different from the rest of the dictatorships and military juntas around the world. Maybe now is the time to go live on that island under a coconut tree on the beach. So much for fifty years of belief in the good triumphing over the bad. I'm sad.

The Two Party Failure

Eric Cantor, the minority whip, is the epitome of conservative republicanism. Intransigent, towing the party line all the way even if it costs his country dearly. There are Democrats who are his equal, adhering blindly to dogma that is outdated. Both political parties should unite under new platforms that are in keeping with the times, as well as the desires of their constituents around the country. Such a collaboration and unity will never be. I firmly believe this is an end of an era, the one where America was king of the world, and that the era before us, where we are already a weak world power, will be dismal if our government can't overcome it's bickering and divisiveness. How sad that the two party system should be so anachronistic and unable to adapt new ways. Who will save us and bring us glory once again?

Steve Jobs? Can he have some privacy?

The Press, is being despicable. (see The New York Times today) Disgusting, even.
Yes, public figures are forcibly under a microscope. Why are they examined so closely? Because they are famous and the press makes a lot money off them. They also have a responsibility to give us more information if they are having a problem that will effect us, the people, in a meaningful way.
They are NOT responsible to the public about private family members or themselves coping with an ongoing health issue that is life threatening. Beyond disclosing what Mr. Jobs has already (and we do know about his illness,) why does he have to tell us if he is going to live or die?
Would you berate your grandmother about her possible death just to know if she left you money in her will?
Please.

Is it because Apple share holders might lose some money? Come on, you can’t be serious. His life is in question!
LEAVE HIM ALONE.
I too am a cancer survivor, by the way.

Let's fix America!

Dear Americans,
Here are some ideas as to how we should repair America:
1. As for the “financial world as we know it,” throw it away because it is not worth fixing. Good riddance!
2. Restore large and small businesses that are American owned with funds allotted by the bailouts. A multibillion dollar business must help fund programs that help the American people live at a reasonable level of comfort without debt. There should be a cap on their earnings that reflects their equal efforts to help poorer segments of the economy.
3. Subsidized areas of the economy that are essential: lodging, jobs, education, medicine and protection.
4. Provide adequate shelter and food for everyone. Persons with more than one dwelling should help by providing housing to those who have none. They can sell the extra properties or develop them for use as public housing.
5. Provide a “job” to all that can work at a minimum (but higher than it is now) wage so they can feed and clothe themselves.
6. Bailout the American school system. Give money to states and local governments to pay for a completely new educational model. Emphasis should be on the liberal arts, math and science in keeping with the high quality of learning in other countries such as England or France. Teachers and other educators should be valued with a higher pay bracket such as lawyers and doctors and other professionals.
7. Guarantee health care to all. Use a system such as the very successful Kaiser HMO to build a national system so that all Americans can obtain care.
8. Use local police, law enforcement and the National Guard to keep law and order. Local police and fire departments should also be compensated with higher pay and venerated for the extraordinary duties they perform.
9. Insure that everyone is safe, warm, fed and educated.

The present order of the American economy compensates individuals with (income in
the millions and billions) assets that could feed whole countries around the world.
Their earnings are obscene. Why is government regulation so lax? Why is the imbalance so obvious and accepted by such intelligent educated people? The majority of people here in the US struggle to provide the basics for their families, let alone those who are working three jobs to pay for college or training for a trade. The division is classes has grown into a giant chasm that may claim the life blood of the existence of America. America, as we have known it, is dying. We must accept that. New financial models, new systems for organization, new technologies for production, new economic structures for manufacturing need to be built from the ground up. The important priorities such as those delineated above must be addressed by the government and our people. The lesson to be learned is improvement begins at the bottom and grows up, not the old status quo of Reagan’s“trickle down”. This and only this thinking will mean renewed prosperity and justice for us all.

Elizabeth Brady

The Middle East

World, get a clue!
The Palestinians and the Israelis have been at this conflict since 1947 and the Balfour Declaration that took Palestine away from it's people. Study the history of the Middle East just for five minutes and you will find out that this conflict is deeply rooted in both societies. No one in Israel or Palestine is at fault. Europeans, especially the WWII allies, are at fault for alleviating their guilt after the war by plopping the disenfranchised Jews in the Palestinian homeland. Would you like it if someone came along and said move out of your state, we need it for the American Indians?
Divide the holy land in half, one for Israel and one for Palestine. Divide Jerusalem, where many religions have important monuments, and make the old center a city state like the Vatican in Rome. Put a peace keeping force between the two countries until they give up struggling. Until then, there will always be cycles of violence and poor women and children dying on both sides.
This is the bare truth.
The US, to this day, has backed Israel because the Jewish population in our country is large and financially integral to our economy. So be it. We can support Israel and Palestine both.
As I said, get a clue - like the one I'm giving you now - and gather the world to support and bring about the existence of two free and autonomous states of Israel and Palestine. Gather to bring about peace in the Middle East. Is there anyone for this job?
How about it, Secretary Clinton?