Baby Tax

Truly, I'm biased with my own baby daughter here on my lap, but this is one of those few issues I go off about - and I've been seeing a lot of discussion about it lately, especially on the Fark message boards h2odragon and I frequent.

Have you seen the movie 'Idiocracy' yet? Where the intelligent people stop breeding and thus the world is overpopulated by idiots who are slowly letting the world go to hell in a handbag? I think of that movie when I see an article like this.

On the other hand, it also almost ensures that poor people, regardless of intelligence, would not be allowed to have kids unless they can come up with the money. Some of the decent folk I know who have children, including my brother, would be ready to run if they had to choose between a 5000.00 tax and 800/yr after or aborting a pregnancy. Yes, babies are expensive but most people can find a way to make ends meet when it comes to taking care of their child. When, because of something like this, only the 'rich' can have children, what happens to society? What happens to how society views and treats children especially? It opens the door to lots of evils... like China's one child policy has done.

Human reproduction is just one of those issues that is much too difficult to put limits on without eventual corruption and misappropriation. As I saw in one of the message boards - there are times when all the poor have is their lineage, and if you tax or take away that, they are left with nothing to lose at all. In short, when you take away a people's future, especially their children, they are likely to raise up against you.

Also, having children can open some people's eyes. They suddenly begin to work for the future, for their children - and become more productive members of society. My friend in high school straightened out when she had two kids - beautiful kids and she takes care of them well even on a minimum wage job while going to school. A female relative of mine went further into the hole when she had kids, and foisted them off on others so she didn't have to stop her lifestyle... If anyone political had looked at those two situations at the beginning they would have set them equal when both of these girls had entirely different reactions about how to live their lives from that point on.

There is also talk of 'baby licenses' where each individual is sterilized in puberty, and must then prove themselves able and willing to take care of a baby before they are made fertile again. It has some logic to it, and would give free birth control to all of those who would want and/or need it. However, I'm sure you can see ways this could be used politically, to further somebody's agenda. Soon after, you have to be in a certain income bracket to have a child, and then of a certain 'optimal' age and live in a 'safe environment' etc etc... until the restrictions are so insane that the only people able to pass the test are those that slip a bribe into the right hand. Our society would crumble within a single generation, much like the movie 'Children of Men.' However, I do not think children would be looked on as favorably as in that script. There are already so many 'child-free' couples who complain about taxes providing for public education, public health etc... who would like everyone else to 'stop breeding' so they can go back to whatever else it is they're doing with their lives.

Atitude Judo

The strategic failure of a whole generation of economists, bankers, and policy-makers has been so enormous that it may now take a strong draught of socialism to save the Western democracies. We start - but may not end - with the nationalisation of Northern Rock.

--
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, widely dismissed as a raving right wing lunatic, usually because he manages to say sensible things in major newspapers.

Some of the more hyper commentors speculate about the chances of violent revolution, universal bank failures; "what will replace the Federal Reserve?" ... The more educated (appearing, I'm not necessarily fit to judge) frankly wonder at the meaning of signs and indicators they used to think important but which have now begun behaving in ways that contradict theory and gut feeling.

At least, the ones that're commenting in public and where I read. Those who think they know what the economy is doing are out there taking advantage of the volatility... the ones who are right are probably even making money.

2006-2007 Baby Boom?

I don't have all the evidence I need yet, but I've seen some articles recently that have set the ball rolling.

Evidence:
An overall view of Baby Booms at Wikipedia
Baby boom and rise in twin births in Australia in 2007
Baby boom in Australia in 1971
U.S. Teen Birth Rates up for first time in 14 years / Unmarried birth rates reach high

Does it seem like you've been seeing more babies born around you lately? In my own family there are two babies born within a month of each other. A co-worker had two miscarriages last year, and Internet friends and their siblings are all delivering babies left and right. I can count 10 family members and casual acquantances between the ages of 20 and 35 who have delivered a baby within the past 12 months, compared to maybe two or three in previous years.

The articles linked above seem to say this is the first large baby boom since the 1970s and not just in the U.S. That seems to make sense, as the people born during that time period are coming into their most fertile time of life, and also probably getting more stable with jobs, homes etc... Some of them are just saying 'Now or Never' and starting their families now, without waiting for security. With the ongoing war, economy downturning and this financial crisis ramping up, who can blame them?

Raising a family in hard times is difficult but not impossible. Family is one of those things that has staying power and reaps more genuine rewards than any other 'investment' you can make. You may lose your expensive home and new car to the bank, but your newborn baby just requires love, care and a healthy home environment to grow and thrive. I'm willing to bet more people are willing to make that family investment now that they've seen their fancy 200,000 houses and expensive cars haven't brought them happiness and aren't going to last.

However, how does this relate with the bigger picture? There are other trends affecting human fertility, beyond economic, that need to be studied. In general, we've seen a smaller increase in the animal population across our region. The harvests have been sparse, due to both early frost and drought. The cost of food, oil and services are going up, not down. People are losing their jobs, investments, retirement funds and banks are foreclosing on homes. There are less resources available and look as if there will be hard times ahead. Some say we are even heading into another depression, and this is the time to stock up on durable goods, valuable metals and to learn how to store food and emergency supplies for the future.

So why would the human population, even in a regional area, suddenly increase in the face of possible economic hardship? Quite a few people are saying the global population has been on the decrease for many years, but just as many warn we are going to overpopulate the Earth. This is why I state more research needs to be done.

But to any Joe Blow, there is an increase in babies happening here. It could be another echo from the original Baby Boom - their youngest children reaching their prime childearing years and oldest grandchildren reaching their first fertility? But I can count five of the ten babies I mentioned born unplanned to married families - which means there is more at work here than family planning.

Perhaps other cues in the environment are lending a hand in boosting human fertility? Better regulation of chemicals that once caused infertility? Some environmental factor in air, water, temperatures? A decrease in the use of birth control? In some studies birth control pills have been shown to make it harder to get pregnant after discontinuing long-term use (over 5 years).

It is true that we just had our first little girl in November of this year. Some of the above factors were true for us, and others have left us wondering about the choices of our contemporaries. Are we really starting to go through another baby boom? If harder times are ahead, will this be a good thing or a bad thing?

Nanny State Wants her Baby

I just came across this news article from the UK, where a young woman who previously had an eating disorder is being told her unborn baby will be taken away from her upon birth. So now the Nanny State is taking things even further? This woman has straightened herself out in the past seven years, is attending college and seems to want this baby very badly. So why do they want to take away her firstborn child? Because they claim she has a record of being a danger to herself, and thus she cannot care for a baby.

I too, was once labeled anorexic, and saw many school psychologists because of family issues early in my life. Yet - none of these things has any bearing on my ability to care for my daughter now. The idea implied by this is 'once troubled, always troubled.' That is in itself frightening.

She contacted social services herself knowing that she would be 'assessed.' They had three doctors, two of which knew her, provide opinions. The two who knew her said she wasn't a risk, and the third one reccommended she be assessed after the birth to see if her previous self-harming habits would affect her ability to parent.

FTA: In a letter, Dr Ward Platt said: "If the professionals were concerned from the evidence available that [this woman] probably does fabricate or induce illness, there would be no option but to put the baby into foster care at birth pending a post-natal forensic psychological assessment."

...Dr Ward Platt also recommended that Fran be assessed by professionals. Social services drew up their "birth plan" without doing any of these assessments. In October, Fran was told the plan would mean that Molly would be immediately removed into care, minutes after she was born. Fran was also told she could not be trusted to breast-feed her, for fear that she might try to take strychnine as a way of poisoning her own child.

yay for common sense...*sarcasm*

This is a terribly trgic situation - and I hope this young woman, who has fled the U.K. to escape these sanctions, can raise her child safely and in peace.

While Bazooka grows up or We Aren't Raising Namby Pambys around here!

We have a three week old daughter, nicknamed Bazooka. We have been talking about the kind of world she is destined to grow up in...

It seems America is continuously 'pansifying' today's kids.

Kids need to learn the boundaries of society in ways they understand - but recently the boundaries of society are all screwed up.

Kids can't run at the playground, for fear they'll get hurt. Yet, we complain they watch too much TV and don't get enough exercise. We ban books, images etc... that portray 'dangerous' activities (like climbing ladders), or with viewpoints that aren't 'politically correct.' Then we say this new generation doesn't read enough. We want every child to be smart and active, but if they get too rambunctious, creative or 'hard-to-handle' parents solve it by doping them up with Ritalin, Xanax or Zoloft... WTF?

Whatever happened to learning from your mistakes? To continuously asking annoying questions until a grown-up answers? To running and screaming outdoors with imaginary playmates and making games with no rules and no score? To learning rational behavior is met with rational behavior, and irrational behavior is met with a single or double firm smack on the buttocks? Heck, it's almmost as if it's illegal to be 'juvenile' these days, unless you're a congressman or celebrity...

We want Bazooka to grow up in a world where she can learn almost anything she wishes to pursue. When we think she is old enough, and with our supervision, she can find out that fireworks blow up or how to shoot a .22 rifle. She can find out for herself how to build a fort in a tree out of scrap bits of wood, tie knots in rope, and read about fire-breathing dragons and evil space robots without fear that it will 'warp her mind' or 'give her bad examples.' We don't plan on 'talking down to her level' any more than she needs to understand us, and hope she will be able to hold an intelligent conversation with a University professor with as much ease as she would another kid. Furthermore, if she wants to go running in the yard screaming about imaginary alligators chasing her - I'll sit back and laugh. I'll probably even play along and ask her what color they are.

It's about time that Americans raising today's kids take a good look at how ludicrous their schools and communities are being with all these cover-your-ass type laws.

If we want these kids to be worth anything as adults, we need to stop protecting them to death. They need to see a good example in us of how to deal with real world problems - not an overprotective, always scared of what-might-happen example. Hopefully we'll be raising Bazooka in the real world, and not in an imaginary construct 'for her own protection.'

Inflation and the Credit Crunch. Wake up America, before it's too late.

We've heard a lot about 'credit crunch' and people who just can't make ends meet because of the resulting/coinciding inflation. In response to the AP news article on living paycheck to paycheck, and the Carpetbagger's blog post Paycheck to paycheck in Bush's America, we make this response.

Wake Up America. Most of us have put ourselves here, and those who didn't fall prey to the initial 'easy credit' craze are still going to feel the bite of it.

The real problem is the people who have overextended themselves with 'easy credit' in the past few years. This includes sub-prime loans, credit cards and 'pay nothing now' deals we saw on television not too long ago. People snapped up that easy and/or 'free' credit and now they've come up against a wall of people wanting money at a time of inflation. Prices are going up on some key commodities - which raise prices for businesses and for consumers. Employers are laying off or downsizing to keep competitive and in the black.

The Scenario:
People who depended on those jobs are suddenly unemployed or underemployed, and still facing the same main cause, inflation, with much less money in their pockets. They're crowding into lines at food banks because they no longer can pay their bills, pay rent and buy food. They may have closets of designer clothing, an SUV and a huge home they can't make the mortgage on - and not enough income to even feed their kids this paycheck. They have a houseful of stuff, but nobody wants to buy their big screen TV because they probably also have one at home or never wanted one in the first place. Their expensive SUV is a gas guzzler and they can't trade it in for anywhere close to the amount they still owe on it. These people are newly poor because they have bills due but no worthwhile assets or collateral. If they miss a payment on their maxxed credit they lose what things they do have of monetary value (home, car etc...) and will have to pay MUCH more to get back where they were. They're trying to skid by until things get better, instead of changing the way they live and planning for the long run. It makes sense case by case, but it doesn't help them out of the situation, it just keeps things afloat.

I'm guessing most of these people are still planning on buying big gifts for Christmas. For many of them, it's not an option - Christmas will come, and they'll take whatever credit they can still get to buy the things they think they (or their kids) need to have. They might have a few hundred dollars tightly saved for it already, thinking things will get better. And - if this 'Holiday Shopping Season' doesn't meet expectations even more people will be laid off or fired and start a whole new round of the same thing.

So, What do we Do?
It's a wake up call - and it will cause a chain reaction through our economy at many levels, and in different ways.

The American people have to sit up and realize what is happening, plan for a long bad time to happen, but also try to keep the economy moving and productive.

If we all do nothing but 'business as usual', things will get awful.
AND - if we all try to conserve, they'll still get awful, because the economy will tank at ALL levels.
It's too much of one, not enough of the other, that has put us here and will continue to dig the hole deeper if we don't change our methods.

We should work for moderation, productivity and durability in goods and services. Hopefullly, we will be able to crawl up back out of this while keeping the necessary parts of the economy going. Luxury services and unnecessary products (like Tickle Me Elmo or $4 gourmet coffee or whatever the latest fad is) will falter some, but they'll come back after the 'crisis', when people have more time, money and energy to spend on unneccessary things.

Stay tuned... this is an interesting time in America, and we are all players in a cast of millions.

Calendars

Today is apparently the Jewish New Year.

Ramadan begins tomorrow?

jaxdahl on fark.com says:

please: Doesn't Ramadan start soon too? And who says those cultures are completely unrelated...

They actually coincide on the same day this year - both start sundown on September 12, 2007. I did some calculations and I believe this is the first time this has occurred since September 12, 1942 -- correct me if I'm wrong.

The first day of Ramadan is not the first day of the year in the Islamic calendar, it is the first day of the 9th month (holiest month for them). Rosh Hashanah is the first day of Tishri, the first month of the year in the Jewish calendar.

The Jewish calendar is lunar based but self-correcting, there are extra months every now and then to keep it in sync with a solar based calendar. Rosh Hashanah is almost always in September on the Gregorian calendar, but sometimes happens in October. The Islamic calendar is lunar based with no self correction so the first of Ramadan shifts back by 11-12 days every year.

Nah, not foreboding or anything....

Unintentional Arguments

I'm reading a lot of financial blogs recently. Many learned commentators appear to be confused (moreso than normal) about the state of the world...

Sometimes these people are saying things they don't even realize: case in point. Note the picture at the bottom. Was The Onion publishing in 1929?

What Mr Sutton is saying there is that no matter how studied and academically accomplished he might be, he has yet to learn not to believe everything you read on Teh Intarwebz. I wonder how many other pundits and professors suffer the same perceptual gaps...

Pipeweed

I used to smoke cigarettes. Now, I smoke a pipe. When I switched (this time), my local drugstore still had the same stock of "Half & Half" pipe tobacco that they'd had the last time i quit smoking cigarettes, back in 1996. I finished the two cans they had in June. The new stuff deserves the bad reviews.

Hunting for more on the intarweb led me to the shocking news that the company that used to make Half&Half doesn't anymore, and I might've been enjoying the last couple cans of "the real stuff" around (should've sold them...)

Shopping for alternatives led me to this gem of marketing speak:

"The premium version of Captain Black regular."

Oh. Really. Premium.

I think I'd rather go out and strip the husks from last year's unharvested rotted cornstalks, feed those to my dog, and then dry, shred and smoke the result; than experiance something billed as a premium Cpt Black. May the perpetrators of that sentence be forgiven...

The Splenda Infiltration of Everyday Products

We were at the supermarket today and saw two of our regular favorite products had been 'enhanced' with Splenda, the sugar substitute. I had to stare at the two bottles of pickles, side by side, for a long time until I could see what the one difference between them was. And I am surely glad I did see it before that item made it's way into my cart!

It's not that I'm against things with less sugar. [Dragon, however, is against less sugar. He likes his sugar!] I am against chemical substitutes. Need we mention the problems with aspartame and saccharin? Make up your mind, have real sugar in it or not. If you can't have regular sugar, then learn to cook differently. My mom is a diabetic, and when I was a kid we changed our entire way of eating to accomodate her new dietary limitations. Instead of sugar she would add spices or a sweet fruit or vegetable to the menu. Rarely she would use a small amount of honey. When I became older and learned to cook for myself I still didn't see much value in adding sugar to most dishes to enhance the flavor.

I've tried Splenda in iced tea and in baking - and it is definitely 'fake.' Not only that, but the sweet flavor it gives is decidedly wrong, too sweet in one way, slightly powdery in another. So, to see it as an option in our usual brand of pickles or applesauce made me wince in pain.

I hope this isn't a trend that will supersede the regular products. It would be a hard choice between buying the item with the Splenda in it or just changing brands. A generic brand might be less likely to have been 'infiltrated' by this substance. If it came down to it, I would much rather have something that wasn't sweet at all, or add sugar to it at home. I am definitely not impressed to buy something off the shelf because it says 'Now with Splenda.'

Making loans to people who can't pay them may be bad fiscal policy. Amazing thought, eh? Found on naked capitalism.

OK, why another blog?

I bitch a lot. It amuses me, which is reason enough. I hope to amuse bystanders as well, and I think I do -- people often laugh at me...

I've been venting my whinging on IRC for years, but it's finally time to supplement it. IRC is a wonderful medium for bitching about the things that annoy you (and thereby pretending they're dealt with), but it's a limited audience, it's impermanent, and you can't search what archives you keep very easily. So It's about time I got me a blog.

Marie (the light and love of my life) and I have some major annoyances, and some joys too. We're looking forward to the birth of our daughter sometime after Halloween: a blog will be a good place to post baby pictures. Surely all of the massive ad revenue people talk about will be helpful for the nappies and such.

Thanks for reading, hope you enjoyed...

I love this picture...

Boo!

eek a blog.

bah. an edit.