COMPETITIVE GOLD AND SILVER

     I should make it clear that I don't think the United States should return to the Gold Standard. I can't really articulate the argument why and it may seem surprising to hear such a thing from a coin collector. However, that doesn't mean I don't think gold coins shouldn't exist as money.

     Why not have competing currencies? Congress could use its authority to coin silver and gold and put them into the marketplace as money alongside the present day fiat coins and currency.

      Just don't give them the same name.

      Leave dollars and cents to the fiat currencies. Leave them as is.

      However, there was another denomination name in the past: the eagle. An "eagle" was another word for "ten dollars". The word never appeared on a coin. I think it was just an official name and nothing more.
      The next step up was the union. A "union" was supposed to be another way of expressing "one hundred dollars". I remember the term coming up when there were talks of making $50 gold coins in response to the massive gold find in California back in 1848. The proposed $50 coin, which was never made, was referred to as a "half union".

      We could run with those terms...

      The silver coins could be referred to as eagles and denominated as such but with no official conversion formula. There could be quarter-eagles, half-eagles, eagles, and double eagles: 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, and 1 ounce of silver respectively.
      The gold coins could be referred to as unions and denominated like the silver eagles with again, no conversion formula for the other currency types.
      Smaller (or larger) versions of both types of coins could also be authorized if needed.
      How many dollars one could get for these coins would vary based on market trends. Likewise, how many silver eagles one could get for a gold union would also vary.

      The point would be to let the currencies comingle and be used by the public as desired. Laws to prevent abuse of the powerless could require employers to pay employees in the currency of their choice without fear of penalty as well as for banks to pay out debts in the currency desired by the account holder. Stores could post prices in three units much like it was during the Civil War when pricing based on paper money, silver, and gold could be found.
      It might be a little confusing at first and it ultimately might mean nothing. Gold and silver money might prove unpopular with the public and limit its use in commerce. Or it could be very popular forcing Congress to make its dollars more attractive to the public.

      I think it would be a fun experiment. I certainly don't see the harm in doing so.

AN EYE FOR AN EYE...I GUESS

     It really bugs me because I wanted to punish my store and union for not even considering that I was only doing what I thought was right (even if they ultimately disagreed). I wanted to punish my store for those suspensions by no longer shopping there.

      I've been going to another supermarket to buy my foodstuffs but damn, that store is just poorly run and making a mockery of my barely-there protest. It's like they don't even believe in stocking. The gaps on the shelves cannot possibly be due to customers since I'm there shortly after opening. Y'know, when the Night Crew has had all night to restock the shelves. It's ridiculous. The store is already smaller than mine so this just only makes it more annoying. It's like this supermarket doesn't even care. The shelves are poorly blocked with items frequently not corresponding to their shelf tags or products mixed within forcing you to not take for granted what you're putting into the cart. They must have one of the highest raincheck numbers in the franchise.

      I'm thinking I'm going to have to break it off. I'll have to rationalize it though. I figure I've lost about $500 to various suspensions over the years so maybe when I've spent $500 at this other store I can call it even.

      Maybe...

THE SEEKER MUST NOW BE SOUGHT...

     Last month I destroyed my dating site profiles. I'm giving up. Whether for the time-being or for good remains to be seen. I'm tired of the routine. It's a lot of wasted time and effort for practically no results. I'll admit I'm already feeling a little better since I'm able to devote what little energy I can self-generate to other tasks, even some old-school stuff like listening (and sometimes singing along) to music. In that sense it's been fun. Maybe I can finally tackle some projects I've let wither on the vine like my language. Hell, I'm already writing more entries to the stupid blog than I have for quite a while. Let's see where it goes...

     I'll take from the experience what I got out of it. I got a taste of normalcy from Winwood. I got to have the title of boyfriend from Costello. And even afterward I managed to get a date (albeit only one) from a girl I asked out in real life. In a sense I've accomplished several major lifetime goals (albeit very late in life). The only thing I've never managed to do was get to date one of my crushes. There hasn't been another one since Number Twelve, which evaporated quickly and there hasn't been a strong, lingering one since Digby and I first started crushing on her over seven years ago. It makes me think my heart is out of it. It's had enough...I've had enough.

     Strangely I'm not sad about it. If something happens, I'll let it happen but I'm not seeking it. I should focus what's left of my life on things I enjoy and might enjoy doing. I certainly need something. The sad truth is I can't say for certain that I have anything to look forward to after the New Horizons spacecraft passes Pluto next year in July (and to a lesser extent, the Dawn spacecraft will also be put into orbit around the largest main belt asteroid Ceres that year too). I still look forward to The Simpsons but I don't know how much longer that show has. I don't think this season is the last because the media would be all over that. It might be next season. We'll see.

      I need something to grab on to but nothing's been coming my way. This all sounds way sadder than I mean it. It's just nice to have things to look forward to...

SEVEN DEADLY SINS (play-at-home version)

(click to enlarge)

     I saw this image floating around online and thought it interesting enough to give it a try. Which one would you choose? They each have ups and downs. The only trouble I have is that what is promised is light on details, making me wonder if participation in this game would find you the victim of a Jerk Genie. But let's consider, shall we?

ENVY, option A: I'm not entirely sure what is meant by "aspect of your life" and while it certainly could be used for good, trading a good quality of one's own for a bad quality in another to give that person a shot at a better life, the evil implication is that you're basically fucking over one of your friends with something about yourself you don't like, trading it for something desirable in the other friend. Is this limited to mental aspects or conceptual things like "luck", or are you able to trade for, say, a full head of hair if you were balding or increased height if you felt yourself too short? It doesn't say and it would certainly suck to find out it had to be nonphysical when you wanted something physical, wouldn't it?
     Definitely wouldn't take this option.

ENVY, option B: Trading lives. Does this mean I continue having my own body but people react to me like I were the other person or does it mean body-swapping? Either way, what is to stop the forcibly traded person from coming after me for having stolen his/her life? Sounds dangerous to accept, no?
     I'm gonna have to say no to this one as well.

SLOTH, option A: This is most certainly the safest option I would think. By far the best default in the event you find you cannot forfeit choosing one of these options. Median household income for the year 2012, according to the OECD, was $30,932. Another chart shows the median 2011 income from the U.S. Census Bureau at $50,054, a considerable difference. The former isn't much more than I make now while the latter would make me feel solidly Middle Class.
     Of course, the country whose median income your sloth check would be based on is never stated nor whether the amount would be indexed for inflation or fixed at the present year's value making this option potentially risky, especially given that you would never work a day (which could also mean you're in a coma). I want to take this one, but what if I end up receiving Mexico's median annual income ($4,493 in U.S. dollars)? That would certainly suck and you know there are worse countries than that...
     Now I'm thinking this wouldn't be such a safe bet after all.

SLOTH, option B: Same shitty life I have now except that I always feel rested after I sleep. Again, I'm assuming this reduced sleep is still enough to keep healthy and not like a drug. Assuming this genie isn't totally a jerkass, this option could prove a bit ironic to the sin as you could now being WAY more productive than would otherwise be possible for a human being. If a five minute nap counts as a full day's rest, what's to stop you from always pulling all-nighters, tinkering with all sorts of hobbies, partying 'til dawn on worknights, having your cake and eating it too when it comes to business and pleasure, etc.?
     Even though I'd still have to work, this one could be a good "if I have to" option even if the health risks do exist. It would mean simply be careful not to abuse your power, like one must be careful not to abuse pain medications lest their effectiveness dwindle. I mean I hope it would be that simple and not some other horrible side-effect...

WRATH, option A: Certainly a very tempting option. Both options come with the same potential drawback: are you able to get away with these crimes? I would like to believe proving it in court would be impossible but then being tied up in court having to defend oneself could prove costly and as the O.J. Simpson civil trial showed, being acquitted of murder doesn't mean one cannot still be found liable financially.
     Also, must you inflict this annual fate or can you be merciful and skip a year? Can you bank fates (I'll assume not). Must the fates be terrible or can they be used to slowly grant lottery victories or spontaneous remissions of cancer?
     Of course the wording states that the target must be "of my wrath" making me presumably less likely to wish to be civil about it...

WRATH, option B: You get a monthly option provided the fate be non-lethal - though it can be delayed - but like the above, it must be visited upon an object of rage making this power decidedly useless to pervert in order to help family and friends out.
     Still...I can be pretty creative in my non-lethal horrors but again I wonder, do I have to do this once-a-month or just once-a-month maximum? It makes a difference because I'm just not that angry of a man. I'd run out of justifiable (to myself anyway) targets pretty quickly and my remaining lifetime could still be quite long...

LUST, option A: This really sounds like a roundabout description of rape, doesn't it? Speaking as someone unlucky in both love and hooking up, this is a very tempting option as it would allow me to fulfill a number of fantasies...from my perspective at least. As the nightmare of my prowess is visited upon my targets, what becomes of them afterward? Do they remember hooking up with me but unsure why they weren't able to resist? Are they happy for having done so? Do they regret it? How much time afterward do I have before their free will kicks back in? Like it has been said allegedly of the Devil, would I have no power over true love, meaning I could only hook up with single girls (which would more than suck as I've lusted after a few boyfriended/married girls in my life)? Will it be reported as a rape, tying up my time in courtrooms like with the wrath options?
     Lots of questions with no help offered from the option's description. Still...a tempting option regardless of the potential problems. Yeah, I'm a terrible human being...

LUST, option B: While this sounds like a safer option, I need reality for my fantasies to work. It's like asking for a hug. It's not the same as a hug given freely. Having a shapeshifter who could turn into a crush I could then fuck is not the same as being able to fuck the crush herself.

PRIDE, option A: Fame and popularity. Again, for what is not made clear nor is it in any way certain that I would have a choice over as to why I'm famous and popular. Serial killers tend to be both (except with their victims' families I would imagine). Not exactly something I would like to be prideful of, especially since it would likely mean a lifetime of imprisonment...or pending execution depending on the state. One might also be famous and popular for having exposed national secrets à la Snowden but then stuck in a life of exile for it, always looking over one's shoulder. Many good results and many bad results can come from this...

PRIDE, option B: I like this option, a powerful and commanding aura. I get to be automatically respected and feared by those around me. However, is this a power I have control over or am I always that way? While it could be useful, even when always on, it would make it hard to have friends and those friends you already do have would treat you differently, denying you their honesty.
     If I could turn this power on and off at will or if I could grant exceptions to certain people (even if such exceptions were irreversible), that might be better but still...without clarification, I think this option too risky to assume...

GREED, option A: Actually this seems like the safest option now, unless this hundredfold increase in salary is the result of a bank robbery (I think that's how a genie got wished-for money in a Woody Woodpecker cartoon once: I watched too many cartoons as a kid). Also, is this an annual - but now fixed - 100x salary or just a one-time thing and future years are my present salary with no possibility of a raise and/or promotion ever after? Something perhaps that should've been cleared up in the text. I'm assuming it's a one-time thing since there are no restrictions on how I may spend my new found wealth. 100x my present salary would be plenty for the rest of my life barring a serious illness.
     Maybe I shouldn't give this genie ideas...

GREED, option B: This is actually an interesting option but what would I so covet that I would wish simply to have it with no ability to do anything with it except possess or sell it at a loss/give away freely since I cannot make money off it?
     A double-edged sword indeed...

GLUTTONY, option A: Sounds nice though I would suspect hedonic adaptation would ultimately apply, ruining the joy of this choice...

GLUTTONY, option B: None of the negative side-effects of eating? Does this mean I could eat poisons and be unaffected by them? Are all my poops now perfect, no-wipe-needed wonders? This power could be an interesting way to make money from bets...

     Overall, I'm not sure which one I would take. If I could forfeit the game, I would to play it safe. As mentioned, I've seen too many cartoons and TV shows with jerk genies, literal genies, etc. I don't think any of them ever got the job by choice which might explain why they delight in creating misfortune with their power.
      But if I had to choose, despite the unclear wording, the life of leisure that would (presumably) be afforded me with an annual median income and not having to work for a living. Option A Lust would certainly have its uses but I can't see how I wouldn't feel guilty, at least eventually, for having exercised it. Same with either Wrath option...


"Seven Deadly Sins" by The Traveling Wilburys
     Perhaps a differently worded version might be composed by someone more lawyerly? Internet, I'm waiting...

THAT'S THE END OF THAT CHAPTER...

     Back around Christmastime in 2004, I bought a Whitman coin collecting board for Lincoln Cents. It is the second book in what is probably now a four book series covering the years 1941-1974.

     I started filling it with cents found from circulation wondering just how long it would take me to do. I was primarily interested in the 51 varieties of Wheat Cents of this book (1941-1958) over the later-date Memorial Cents (1959-2008), the latter of which I held to a higher collecting standard (they still had to have some mint luster).
     For the Wheat Cents, any find would do though I was not above replacing those found with better examples when they came along. For most of these coins, I did find at least two over the course of this experiment.

     My first coin was, found on December 26, 2004, was dated 1942 and on November 20, 2014, I was able to fill the last hole in that book with a 1955-S.

     Its condition was surprisingly new but then, perhaps I ought not have been so surprised. Reading over the years has told me that many people hoarded this particular cent as a memento of the closing San Francisco mint (a cost-cutting move back in 1955). The only other coin minted in San Francisco that year was the dime but cents are cheaper so they were the coin of choice for hoarding. Also there was a speculative craze going on at the time that manifested in collectors/dealers/speculators holding rolls of newly released coins in the hopes that their value would appreciate. I believe it got kicked off with the low-mintage 1950-D nickel of which about half the total production was believed to be hoarded in uncirculated condition.
     Authors of articles who lived during the time of this coin's release anecdotally relayed that they had never received one of these coins in their change, being forced to buy one at a substantial mark-up from a local dealer to fill the hole in their childhood collections.
     Now I am the holder of this recently "liberated" coin. I can only hope this find was more the result of an ungrateful heir/grandchild than that of a robbery because that happens too.

     I'm not used to seeing Wheat Cents with any, let alone all, of their original luster intact. I guess because they were never new for me. I always saw them toned. Indian Head Cents look weird to me too when uncirculated. I'm surprised I haven't seen more over the years since luster bearing Memorial Cents from even 1959 can still be found infrequently and commonly from the 1970s and '80s. Wheat Cents have just always been brown, even the mid-1980s when I first started collecting.

     But with that find, I can say now that it took just short of 9 years and 11 months to complete that set from circulation. From the outset I thought I would never see any of the 1943 steel cents; I was actually planning to overlook them and consider the set complete without them but then I found one in another person's till (1943-D) and so added them to the list. I thought they'd be the last ones I'd ever find but the steel cent set was finished in 2011 when I received a 1943-S in payment, and not from somebody who knew I was looking.
     I also discovered that if you check the magnet trap in a bank's coin counting machine, you can sometimes score a steel cent or two there as well but I didn't need to depend on this trick to get all three of the steel cents. Each one actually came from different customers over the years.

     Naturally the first full year, 2005, had the most finds. It broke down for the 51 date and mintmark combinations as follows and as you can see, it's the San Francisco dates overall which are the hardest to come by.
     San Francisco made coins have a certain allure with collectors as they were often the lowest mintage of any particular year:

2004: 4 [4, 47] - started off with 1942 on 12/26/04; 1944; 1953; and 1957-D
2005: 32 [36, 15] - highlight of this mess: got the 1943-D on 8/20/05
2006: 4 [40, 11] - 1941-D; 1942-D; 1944-D; 1944-S
2007: 3 [43, 8] - 1945-D; 1945-S; 1951-S
2008: 2 [45, 6] - got the 1943 on 2/28/08; the other find was 1952-S
2009: 0
2010: 3 [48, 3] - 1942-S; 1947-S; 1949-S
2011: 1 [49, 2] - got the 1943-S on 3/26/11
2012: 1 [50, 1] - this year's lone find was 1941-S
2013: 0
2014: 1 [51] - set completed with 1955-S on 11/20/14

     As of now, I have found every date and mintmark of the Lincoln Cent series from 1940 to present in circulation. I need only an example from 1915, 1931, and 1922-D to have completed a date set from circulation (i.e. one example from every year from any mint). That attempt has been ongoing since 2002.
     A twenty coin subset, 1934-1940 PDS, is what I am hoping to complete from circulation next. I need only seven more date and mintmark combinations to do so.
     The 1909-1933 subset I would say is impossible to complete from circulation anymore though I feel year representation is still achievable with enough time and coins to sort through. This is why it helps that I am a cashier...

     For other series, I need only two more coins to complete a set of Jefferson Nickels from circulation (1938-present), the 1939-D and 1944-S, and I have more than half the total set of silver Roosevelt Dimes (1946-1964) and Franklin Half-Dollars (1948-1963) as well.

      I wish me luck :-)

AM I DOING BOOK REVIEWS NOW?

     There are spoilers in this kinda-sorta review so if you don't want to know, you only have yourself to blame for continuing...

     I finally finished reading a novel by Samuel Delaney called Dhalgren and when I say finally, I mean from start to finish, this read took over fifteen years.

     When I was still in college I had gotten into the habit of speaking with my adjunct after class. He would talk about literature, storytelling, and whatnot. One day he recommended to me, based on things I was saying, a novel called Dhalgren. He convinced me of its interesting nature by recalling events like their being an enormous sun and two moons in the sky and some other details which could be gleaned from reading the book's jacket. However, I never asked him how to spell it (or even if it were one word or two) and I quickly forgot who the author was.
     It took me about a year to track the novel down because I had never thought to spell it with a D-H. But I found it and serendipitously at that, and by using a card catalog too...way to date myself! I put in an order at the local bookstore and it soon came into my possession.

     I noticed the first page started in the middle of a sentence and my impatience got the better of me so I checked out the novel's last page to see if it ended on the start of that sentence. I found that it did and that I soon regretted having spoiled myself of what I thought the novel's twist was. I decided that I would not like to read this novel until I had forgotten this detail but as it is with memory, telling yourself to forget something is how you burn it permanently into the fabric of the Gilligan's Island Theme region of the brain.
      Every time afterward I would look at and consider beginning that novel, the memory of my impulsiveness would return.

     Six moves later, I unceremoniously plucked it from my shelf and made it my newest laundry read. A confession: I'm not much of a reader (by my definition anyway**) so I only read when doing my laundry. I'm stuck in that room for about an hour so it gives me something to do as well as an excuse to finally read these books that've been decorating my various residences all these years.
     And so began my long journey to complete this novel, thirty or forty pages at a time once or twice monthly depending on my laundry needs. I avoided looking up anything about it online, even fan artwork, because I wanted to get as much out of it as I could without being influenced from the outside. I'll admit I had grown impatient by the end. When I hit that final chapter (and these are long chapters...it's an 800 page novel with seven chapters), I wanted this over so I actually read on my own time over a couple of days to finish it up and so here I am.

URINSOMNIA...

     Does the body know it's asleep? I had another pee dream last night and I find it weird that my dreams have to resort to symbolism like a sense of urgency, displays of flowing water, loss of control (like becoming suddenly clumsy or in a recent dream, cars riding the sidewalk keeping me from walking safely and confidently), etc. to get the point across that I need to wake up and empty my bladder.

     I found myself wondering, why doesn't some character in the dream just say flat out, "Vachon, you need to wake up so I can pee."? Or even more simply, why don't I just wake up? Why is it like I'm in a wussified Nightmare on Elm Street movie rather than something more simple?

     Thankfully I've never had an accident though I know it's come close, even in adulthood. I've actually urinated in my dreams and woke up ever-so-thankful that it was "just a dream".

     Seriously though, why can't we just wake up when we have to pee? I don't think the language center of the brain is shut down because I have dreams with speech in them. Does the sense of self shut down during sleep? I don't think so because I know it's me when I'm dreaming. I never feel outside of myself.
      The only thing I've noticed about dreams, aside from their inherent weirdness and internal inconsistencies, is that dreams only seem to work so long as I'm not concentrating on details. It's like dreams are great whooshes of generalities but I have memories of waking up from several dreams because I got suspicious and simply wouldn't just "go with it".

     I remember many years ago having a dream with the First One. Already curious that she would be visiting me at my father's house, I couldn't help but try and focus on her face because something about it wasn't quite right. It doesn't help that I can't remember faces that well at all so in my dream she may have had, for all I know, a mannequin face...featureless. I kept focusing on that detail; I wanted to see. My insistence on detail I think activated some part of my brain that was necessary for consciousness as I would wake up soon after.

     I don't know. I mean, c'mon! Just wake up. I gotta pee!!!

AHOY ME MATEYS...

     The last time I was at the dentist, I was thinking about all the blood from the cleaning. It was much more than usual. My gums had been bleeding frequently too when brushing my teeth. I joked about it with my hygienist but the more I thought about it, I couldn't think of any substantial sources of vitamin C in my diet.

      For years I would take a juice box with me for my lunch but starting maybe a year or so ago, I started buying styrofoam cups and filling them with water instead. The Hi-C fruit punches advertised a 100% daily supply of vitamin C, something I would thus get five times a week. Now I wasn't getting any. The vegetables I would eat with dinner would have some, but my diet could not give me 100% of that vitamin ever.

      I bought vitamin C supplements and just like that, the bleeding went away. I'm sure my next cleaning will be bloody again because that seems to be the norm now but in my daily life my gums are no longer swelling easily nor are they bleeding.

      I had scurvy, or at least its early stages. Imagine that. That's so 18th century :-)

VOTING SHMOTING...

     If you don't vote, you lose the right to complain. See, I don't understand that line of reasoning. How is that even possible? Does not voting somehow negate my rights as a US citizen under the Constitution? No, of course not. You can't even vote until you're both 18 and registered and there are numerous ways to lose that right but regardless of whether you vote or not (or can't), your rights under the First Amendment...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

     ...are in no way affected, not to mention any of the other rights afforded to you as a citizen. Whether I vote or not, I am still allowed to petition the government and peaceably assemble. Those are not voter's rights, those are US citizen rights.
     Voting may have gotten those men and women into office but it doesn't preclude the citizenry from complaining about them (or praising them as the case may be...or have I "lost" that right too by not voting?).

     Another reason that argument is bullshit is because only white, land-owning males were allowed to vote originally. That's a whole lotta people with no say in who may or may not represent them. Were the multitudes of disenfranchised from the late 18th to mid-20th century admonished for complaining about a government they did not vote for?
     Their voices may not have been appreciated (especially I would gather from blacks and women), but they were still entitled to their free speech, free presses, to peaceably assemble, and to write the government about wrongs they feel have been committed.

     I'm pretty sure the only thing you lose by not voting is the ability to say you voted for that particular person or proposition.

     By extension, I wonder if anyone has done any research on those who didn't vote. Like, during the day of an election or just before, has a suitably done poll of people who were definitely not voting ever been conducted to see whom they would've voted for if they could've been bothered to go to a polling station?
     If so, did the acquired results, if tabulated as actual votes, ever affect the outcome of an election? I have this feeling their missing votes would not change anything. Without any evidence (mind you) to support my opinion, I feel the collective opinion of those who don't vote will closely match the collective opinion of those who did vote.

     I say this because there are no longer any deliberately disenfranchised voters in this country anymore. Women have the vote. Blacks have the vote. Anyone who's 18 and older and a US citizen may vote.
     Arguably the only disenfranchised population are felons. Whether convicted or not, and especially those who have been released, I don't see why committing a crime ought to cause one's right to vote to be revoked. Criminals may not be desirable but they are still citizens, right?
     But that's a different argument. My concern here would be are there enough legally disenfranchised people that, if their votes could be cast, would they be able to affect the outcome of an election? I'm guessing had the United States had full suffrage for all citizens back at the Constitution's signing, our line-up of Presidents would likely be very different today.

     I don't know. That's not much of argument and it's certainly not well-supported, but it's something to perhaps start a conversation...

ABOUT AS MUCH A PROTEST AS BISMUTH-209 IS RADIOACTIVE...

     I decided since neither my store nor my union supported me with my latest run-in with management that I would no longer shop at my store. I figure, I will take their money but I will not give any of it back.

     I was placed on cash control at the end of September. This is one of the drawbacks of lane accountability. While the upside is that I get to go through a hell of a lot more change (my take of 1978-dated coins, especially quarters, has been WAY higher since my store switched over to this new system), the downside is that the screw-ups of those who worked the lane before (and after) me affect us all.

     Anywho, when placed on cash control, I was given a sheet to sign with several rules regarding how I am supposed to conduct myself and control my cash while under this observation period.
     This was also my first time on cash control ever. Nearly fourteen years I've been there and it's never happened. Yes, I've gotten the occasional write-up for being over/short (almost always over...I seem to be good at convincing customers to walk out without their money) warning me that if it happened again within a certain period I would be placed on cash control. I never was. I'd get a write-up once, sometimes twice, a year.
     Three months into lane accountability and I've been written up three times for shortages. Like the other warnings there is a rollover period where if nothing else happens (I think it's ten days), your reputation is restored...until the next time. The trouble is, this third write-up mentioned that the shortage was excessive so I was placed on CC immediately...

     Right away I got into conflict with my manager. He would refuse to prove my till either having me do it myself or not at all despite the CC guidelines specifically stating the manager has to do it. I had also been directed to not leave my register unattended (the till would have to be placed in a cash control bag, sealed, and locked away before I could leave).
     The second night he insisted I leave my register without securing it first. And when I protested and finally refused, he sent me home for insubordination. Was it insubordination? Yes. Technically.

     It bugged me that he refused to take the thirty or so seconds it would take to lock away my till as directed or that he refused to use another employee who wasn't on cash control...no, it had to be me for some reason. It bothered me that he reprimanded me publicly and in front of other employees (both union no-no's). I was also annoyed that I got sent home for refusing to violate cash control policy and another cashier that same night also refused to do what he told her for the exact same reason and did NOT get sent home. And it irked me that when I returned, he took me aside immediately and insisted I pledge to do whatever he tells me.
     I told him I would do what he said provided it does not violate CC policy. For him, this was a yes or no question. He would not accept my modification and sent me home again, pending a union meeting...also my first in all my years there.
     I made my detailed statement, gave it to the shop steward, and when I finally got my callback, I was told basically "do the crime, snitch later." My union did not side with me at all. My union would not fight to get my lost pay restored for refusing to follow what I felt was an illegal order. And my store felt the same. Insubordination, period. Completely risking my job now if it happens again.

     Now understand, yes...I would've like to have won that battle but that's not really the point as far as I'm concerned. All I needed to hear was the gist of President Luchenko's speech to Sheridan (from Babylon 5) and I would've been fine.
     In Rising Star she told Sheridan that his insurrection against President Clark's dictatorship was probably the right thing to do but that he did it the wrong way, the inconvenient way and thus, even though we viewers saw Sheridan as a hero, he still legitimately faced execution for taking up arms against his own government.
     Now obviously I didn't go THAT far, but it would've been nice to hear from either side that at least someone believed that I was trying to do the right thing but that I was doing it the wrong way...the inconvenient way and thus I still had to be punished. But I would never get such satisfaction.

     Thoroughly demoralized, I knew I couldn't quit my job (I was really, really tempted to). I meant to take a "mental health" day too after that phone call but I ultimately decided not to. The bitch of that decision was when I got into work, I was the only one on my shift who DIDN'T call out. What luck!
     I went into a severe depression that got interrupted, but not aborted. When I get very sad I lose my appetite. This was the first time since 2008 that I had gone the no-eating route. I forgot I had agreed to go to a charity dinner that Friday so I had to eat before I was ready to again. By that point, I had gone thirty hours without a calorie. I gorged at the dinner thus refueling my sadness. After that dinner I went another forty hours without food...a new record. My previous record was thirty-six hours (which is also the longest I've ever gone without sleep) so, uh...yay?
     I've been fine since but I decided I would no longer shop at my store. I imagine this will become difficult after Christmas when I'm staring at all those discounted M&Ms. I'll have to hope my alternate store will have had the same difficulty off-loading their supply as mine always does.

     My alternate store is smaller than my own so its product diversity is not as high. One thing it definitely does not have is my high-fiber Fiber One bread so I've been eating a different brand of ordinary whole-wheat bread.
     Here's the thing. I've had hemorrhoids for a good five years now. My asshole still bleeds occasionally (story's taken a turn now, hasn't it?) but since I've stopped eating the Fiber One bread, my asshole's been getting, well...better. So far, it's the only thing I'm doing differently in my diet. Everything else is the same. My poops are smaller too...easier to pass. Is it possible there is such a thing as "too much fiber"? Perhaps.
      I've had some hints of blood on my wipes, but not as much and many times now, none at all. It's weird those unintended consequences, right? I inconvenience myself to make purchases at another supermarket, a protest which the accountants will never even notice in their weekly sales reports and it results in me discovering that maybe I've been overdoing it with my fiber intake.

     Weird...

CASTLEVANIA THOUGHTS...

     One thing that bugs me about the Castlevania series is how easy it is to upgrade your whip (for the record, I'm talking about Castlevania, Castlevania III, and Super Castlevania IV).

     The rules of the game made it so that you needed four (4) hearts to upgrade from the leather whip you start with to a stronger ball&chain whip of the same length and eight (8) hearts to upgrade to the longer ball&chain whip. The thing is, you start each life with five (5) hearts so it's practically impossible to be stuck with the leather whip for any length of time.

     The player may as well have started with the ball&chain whip...

     This could've been rectified by having either the player start each life with no hearts or making the upgrades at higher heart levels, say eight (8) for the first upgrade and sixteen (16) for the second one.

     Another option could've been to adopt the rule from Game Boy version of Castlevania: if the player gets hit, he loses an upgrade. In that game, you could get a chain whip that launches a fireball after two upgrades. One hit and you're back to the chain whip. A second hit brought you back to your standard leather whip.

     Either option would've made the game a little harder. Whether it would've made the game better is a matter of debate. It makes me wish I knew how to ROM hack...

LINE OF THE DAY, part XXXVII

from Emiscary:

"Being cloned makes an oddly perfect metaphor for birth.
Congratulations, you now exist. Here's a fistful of problems you didn't cause, they're officially yours to fix. Here are the expectations of everyone who existed before you showed up, their desires automatically take precedence over yours because they outnumber you and/or outrank you within an arbitrarily designed pecking order into which you've been inserted against your will.
Oh! And be sure to realize that what you feel is effectively meaningless beyond what it makes you do. And free will is an illusion. Good luck!"

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/video_19060_why-job-market-would-suck-in-star-trek-universe.html

METROID II THOUGHTS...

     In retrospect, one thing that bugged me about Metroid II: The Return of Samus is why did she start the game with so few items? Now, I don't mean fully powered-up because that would be a weird game. I'm talking about the minimum necessary for her to accomplish her mission.

     The story of the game has Samus traveling to the planet SR-388 to eliminate the Metroid species. I guess they have been deemed too dangerous to live. Unfortunately the game manual gives away that the Metroid species moults into successively larger forms when permitted to go through its natural life cycle but that's a God's-eye view for the player.
     Samus, as far as I know, is unaware of this creature's capability so one would think she would've landed on SR-388 expecting to encounter the same creatures she found in the Tourian region of the planet Zebes. Those Metroids could only be killed by freezing them with her ice beam and pumping five missiles into their now-hardened gelatinous bodies.

     Metroids attacked by grabbing onto Samus and rapidly drawing out her energy. That's how Metroids eat, they draw out the life force of living creatures. If this happened to you, you rolled up into a ball and dropped bombs. The bombs would knock the Metroid off you since you could not freeze them from inside.

     Based on these attacks and abilities, one would think Samus would go to SR-388 bearing an ice beam, some missiles, morph ball, and bombs. Instead she begins the game with only a standard beam, the ball form, and 30 missiles.

     The game had a chance to set up a HOLY SHIT! moment but missed the opportunity. Let me illustrate.

     In the original Samus runs around a fairly open and unprotected cave encountering few enemies. At one dead-end is a pool of corrosive liquid through which she cannot pass and the other dead-end is a flashing Metroid resting on the ground and definitely not pursuing Samus. Get within a defined range and the Metroid's first metamorphosis occurs right before your eyes. An Alpha Metroid appears. Your shots have no effect on it, nor should you expect them to because in the original game only the ice beam would stop their advance. Your missiles, however, hurt the creature and five hits later it is vanquished, an earthquake happens, and the previous dead-end no longer has the corrosive liquid allowing you to advance.
      Later on you find bombs and an ice-beam among other new and old items.

     What I propose should have happened is Samus begins her adventure appropriately armed for killing the Metroids she expects to find (ice beam, missiles, morph ball, bombs). She travels through the same open cave.
     The difference is she encounters an ordinary Metroid below several rock layers that one cannot quickly traverse. I'm thinking a couple layers of narrow corridors. Go all the way left, drop a bit, go all the way right, drop a bit, repeat. This is a set-up for the player. Why the Metroid is flashing would be unknown to the player and even easily dismissed as something the Game Boy's limited graphics were doing to make the enemy appear more interesting.
     The Metroid would appear unaware of Samus perhaps because of the many rock layers between them the player might surmise. Either way, since this appears to be the point of the game, the player would give chase and the Metroid would dart out of the room further incentivizing the player.
     The player then encounters the floor-resting Metroid like in the actual game and the metamorphosis sequence begins.

      The player would fire ice beams only to find they have no effect. This teaches the player that this new, lightly armored version of the Metroid has developed a resistance to cold.
      The player would also quickly learn these Alpha Metroids don't draw out life energy by circumcluding their prey like the larval forms do. They instead directly attack prey, perhaps drawing out energy via pokes and prods making the bombs she has brought worthless for keeping these new Metroids at bay.
      The player would then find only direct missile strikes in the smaller exposed core have any effect. Five hits would kill the creature resulting in the earthquake as before. Game continues as normal but this time the player gets that shock of finding out Metroids are a lot different from what we've come to know about them.
      The manual, if it were especially devious, would give no hints about the various Metroid moults and explain them only in an ending sequence or via log entries like Project AM2R has been doing.

      Sometimes I wish manuals wouldn't give crap away. In the original game the manual told you how to kill the Metroids. You would think it would have left that for the player to figure out. Too bad they couldn't just be killed with missiles but freezing them with the ice beam would make it easier. The game had a wave beam and you were pretty screwed if you entered Tourian with it. Hell, if you didn't have the manual, you might have thought the Metroids were invincible :-)

TOKEN COINS...

     I was writing a comment about dollar coins in another blog the other day and it got me thinking, why is it in modern times do coins of all nations have such trivial purchasing power?

     I've mentioned before that the cent, nickel, and dime ought to be retired (and the $1, $2, $5, and $10 bills should be replaced with coins) but that's just our country but what about the rest of the world? Since the end of the gold and silver standards, coins have managed increasingly negligible purchasing power.
     The Euro I think provides a most recent example of how this trend was continued rather than upended. When the Euro was finally adopted for circulation use, its value was approximately 1 to 1 with the U.S. dollar and the smallest denomination of the Euro was the 1 Eurocent coin. Certain European Union members quickly stopped producing the 1 and 2 Eurocent coins and having only the 5 Eurocent coin as their smallest denomination.

     My question is, why did they adopt this particular system? By 1999 (hell, arguably by 1964), the U.S. cent had negligible purchasing power so why would the European Union bring into existence a coinage system with values so low? Why didn't they make the Euro 5 to 1 or even 10 to 1 with the U.S. dollar? That would have given their coins honest purchasing power, something that hasn't been the norm for decades around the world.

     A cursory glance at my world coins guide shows the same trend (I do believe) everywhere around the world. The smallest coins cannot buy anything anywhere whereas when the United States was created, its ½ and 1 cent pieces could buy trivial things. Now you practically need a half-dollar to purchase the most trivial of things and that coin is rarely seen yet the production of smaller denominations continues to this day.
     My Indonesian friend's currency is approximately 11,900 rupiah to the U.S. dollar (as of this posting) and her country's smallest denomination is the 50 rupiah coin which is slightly less than ½¢ in U.S. dollars.
     By contrast, at the start of inflation record-keeping in 1913, the smallest U.S. denomination, the cent, had approximately 24¢ worth of purchasing power in 2014.
     Therefore, for comparison, her country would probably do just fine with the smallest denomination being 1,000 rupiah.

     The article I was commenting on was wondering about the future of coin collecting. I was reminded of my experiences with younger shoppers at my job and how they care only about the paper currency (my favorite declaration by one girl to her friend when offered the coin part of her change - "I don't want those. They're not real money."). I felt that younger people are not as interested in coins because coins themselves are more of a nuisance than a store of value.
      When I was a kid in the 1980s, only quarters were appealing as they were the only denomination which added up significantly quickly enough to be worth the effort of holding on to. Dimes were tolerable but not particularly helpful. But nickels and cents were definitely not worth one's time.
      Had dollar coins caught on in the 1980s as intended they would be the quarter for today's youth but they didn't so they have pockets full of change which cannot buy anything except in great numbers.
      My parents lived in a time when nickels and dimes were the worthwhile denomination and my grandparents were children when cents and nickels added up like quarters did in the 1980s. I was thinking that if we had $5 and $10 coins, they would be respected by today's youth and that mystique could lead them into a lifetime of collecting. I wonder how the Great Recession would have impacted 2009's mintages if they consisted of $1, $2, $5, and $10 coins? Would they be the rarities for tomorrow's collectors with mintages in the very low millions or even high hundred thousands? Remember, the dimes which had for years been produced to the tune of about 1 billion coins per mint per year fell to 96½ and 49 million pieces for the Philadelphia and Denver mints respectively that year so I think it could've been possible for a modern-day rarity under such inflation-adjusted coinage.

     But either way, it's a mystery to me that the world's mints continue to strike coins with no purchasing power. No one has taken the lead to try and make something old new again. I wonder why even the public has accepted this? One would think low-value coins would be a nuisance to businesses and consumers alike but they continue to be tolerated.
     Argue as one might about the digitalization of our money, physical coin and currency will not disappear...there's always a use for them so why not make them capable of actually buying things?

STUPID LIBRA V

     Lane Accountability at work has been going on for a little over a month now and I must admit I've noticed a few positives, though I think they're all selfish.

     For one, I've been finding a lot more 1978 dated coins to hoard. I have a water bottle jug I've been filling with coins bearing that date for over ten years now. It was intended to be a one year project but I just kept rolling it over. The idea was to accumulate my birth year coins for a year and then buy myself something with them for my birthday. The trouble was, it was less than $20. The idea of distilling a year's worth of effort into a music CD seemed depressing so I just kept accumulating.
     After many years I had enough to warrant using the jug and I claimed that when it was full I'd use its value to go on a vacation or something. I estimate the value of the jug will be between $800 and $1,000 depending on what coins are found. Cents make up a little over half the total number of coins. Just yesterday I hit exactly 5000 of them. And while that number sounds impressive, it means only $50 worth of pennies. The remaining nickels, dimes, quarters, and halves make up the other roughly 5000 coins with 1978 halves being the least represented because that was a low production year.

     The thing is, when I had my own till, I was giving out my unwanted half dollars in change which limited how many quarters I could go through. A good week would maybe net me three or four 1978 quarters. Now I get a new till every night. Two in fact because after "till exchange" we need to start on a fresh till. My 1978 quarter haul has been double, sometimes triple, what I've been getting so Lane Accountability is improving the value of my 1978-dated coin jug.
     And to be honest, knowing me...the likely thing which will happen when that jug fills is I will end up buying a second one and begin filling that. Actually I'll probably separate the cents from the other coins and wonder which jug will fill up first. I'm assuming the cent is on life-support so it'd also be a race against time :-)

      I've already gotten two silver dimes - both out in the open (i.e. not from sealed rolls) and both Roosevelts but at least I know silver is still possible. I've even gotten a 1950-D series $10 Federal Reserve Note from one of my daily tills. I imagine any non-Presidential coins will have to come from sealed rolls because I think even non-collectors tend to hold on to a Buffalo nickel or Mercury dime as a curiosity when they see one.
      But then again, the tills are proven not by hand-counting but by weighing them so a buried non-Presidential coin could easily go unnoticed. Same thing with Silver Certificates, United States Notes, and God-willing, a Gold Certificate. Possible bonus...

      The other joy of Lane Accountability is that it embodies the Tragedy of the Commons which, when it comes to cashiering, is a godsend. Now when a customer pays me with fifty or more dollar bills, I don't have to manipulate my change-giving to draw them down: that's the next cashier's problem. Messy coupon bag? Fuck it (and I say that while I use the claim of facing the money in a "messy till" as an excuse to search through its coins every day).
      Plus I can open change rolls unnecessarily and without guilt on the fresh till because I know the coins will get used up throughout the day.

      Basically Lane Accountability has the potential to aid my coin collecting habit. However, I won't be entirely convinced of this until I finally start getting some non-Presidential coins in my daily hauls.

      I still find this system to be cumbersome and the timing of till exchange interrupts the flow of the evening. It doesn't help that my panicky, 800 lb. gorilla of a co-worker insists on waiting until after till exchange before I go on lunch even though it is totally unnecessary to wait for that. All it does is make me start my overnight work a half-hour later.
      Silver linings to every dark cloud...

TALKING ABOUT STUFF I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT...

      Since the latest Israeli incursion into Gaza, my Twitter feed has lit up with supporters for Gaza and I think one person for Israel. It's very lopsided. Apparently the United States is the only nation right now supporting Israel in its decision. I'm not sure if that means the United States is on the wrong side of this issue or if it means the United States is the least anti-Semitic country. I mean, there's still a lot of hatred for Jews around the world and in Europe. I guess the guilt over Germany's actions in World War II has worn off?

      Still, I wonder if all this support for the Gazans is real or just lip-service. Do the nations opposed to Israel's incursion aid the West Bank and Gaza strip to the tune of billions of dollars in annual aid? I'm just speaking out my ass right now, but I feel like the supporters for Gaza are related to the pro-life people.

      The pro-life people fight tooth-and-nail to protect the lives of unborn fetuses and put just as much energy into shaming poor, single mothers and fighting the social welfare programs designed to at least give them a leg-up in life. In other words, they don't put their money where their mouth is. They want to force all pregnancies to term but are not interested in making sure those children have a chance in life.

      The Gaza supporters go out of their way to immediately blame Israel for its deeds with no blame-sharing (i.e. how much of this is Israel's fault and how much of this is the Palestinians fault?) but leave it at that. The Gazans have the verbal support of the world, but should not ever expect them to pony up some foreign aid (and not simply humanitarian aid) and/or military support...the kind of support they'd actually need if these protestors were actually interested in helping them.

      Personally, I'm not too interested in what goes on there. I'm not saying Israel should wipe every Gazan off the face of the Earth, but why can't they use their military to bring about a forced relocation of the Palestinians in Gaza to the West Bank and then annex the territory? It's an old-school tactic. Apparently that's wrong now: it has been arbitrarily decided that maps are permanent now.
      Why can't the other countries of the world bring a united force together to oppose Israel? I don't want to hear some bullshit about the United Nations. The United States has veto power: they obviously wouldn't approve a military strike against one of its allies. But why should that stop the Middle Eastern nations from sending a force over? Or the European Union? Or the African Union? Or China? Or whomever? Do they really think the United States would declare war on those who did? The United States is strong, but even it cannot fight a war against, say, sixteen nations at the same time. And it needs those nations for trade/oil anyway so really, what's the United States going to do?
      That's why I feel like all this outpouring of support for Gaza is bullshit.

     Also, when did the deaths of a few hundred or even a few thousand people get to be considered genocide? Whenever I hear that word, I'm picturing the on-purpose deaths of a significant percentage of a people.
     Cambodia's actions under the rule of the Khmer Rouge offer a guideline for what that percentage ought to be. The Khmer Rouge killed a quarter of Cambodia's population and that was considered a genocide. I can go for that. I would consider something a genocide once the death count requires two commas or represents 25% or more of the targeted population, whichever comes first.

      Okay, I'm done talking about shit I know nothing about...

STARTING TO WONDER IF I SHOULD BE TAKING MY OWN ADVICE...

     I am deliriously unhappy at my job or I'm deliriously unhappy about knowing that I still have around thirty-five years to go before I can collect Social Security or both...

     Over a year ago, I listened to Winwood grow ever more unhappy with her job and once I had heard enough conversations about it, began gently encouraging her to quit for her own mental health. Later on, I dropped the "gently" part.
     Eventually Winwood did quit though I can't say my encouragement had anything to do with it or if total burnout had finally occurred.

     Of course I look at her now, still unemployed and no prospects for future employment ahead...I see her falling deeper into despair and wonder if ultimately my advice was sound or if she'd practically, if not literally, be dead by now had she continued. It remains to be seen but the fact remains that she left her job without first securing a new one. I want to believe she will turn out all right but I do worry about her for the time being.

     As for me, I feel like I should quit my job. Again, I don't really know for what reason. I just feel like I've had enough but I don't know what I've had enough of. It's not like the job is physically demanding or even mentally demanding. It just is. I'm a cashier for the majority of my time there. But the fact is, aside from my friend the Security Guard and the occasional old coin I find in my till, I have nothing to say about my job that suggests I should remain there.
      Years ago I would've recommended anyone work for my company. I thought it a fair place and felt treated well. I can't say with certainty what has changed, only my feelings on it, but now I would not recommend getting a job for that company. I just wish I could remember these things for when I fill out my employee satisfaction surveys each year. I always circle the lowest number for morale but I fail to recall good reasons for it in the space provided. It's not like that survey appears the same day each year. I usually just say that I am made to feel more like a number than a person and that I am viewed as an unwanted expense. That in of itself is pretty harsh but barely gets to the root of my dissatisfaction.

      I have felt pangs of hope before. The Security Guard keeps swearing to take me away from that place but every lead he's had so far over the years has not panned out.

      I've been afraid to just quit. Quitting is not in my nature (cf. any entry about Digby) and it's not like it's easy to be fired from my job since I won't steal (neither time nor money...and besides, doing so deliberately would be a form of quitting) and I don't feel like cursing out management (despite the ever-present temptation to do so with my current overnight manager who has lowered considerably my respect for the company seeing as how he still has a job). I wish I could fall victim to some metric that's mostly out of my control or to a layoff but I'm trapped.

      But I wonder if I should resist that fear? Even overcome it...and just do it already.

      I wonder how long it would take me to decompress? You know I wouldn't even consider looking for work right away. It's been so long since I've been free without guilt (I feel I should add that since the weeks I had between jobs living with my Dad were not meant to be enjoyed since I promised I would find work right away). I think my last guiltless free time was the Summer of 1996 while building up residency in New York to go to college there a year later. I remember unplugging my clock and taping over the VCR's time so that I would just do things as I pleased and more importantly, stop when I pleased rather than because The Simpsons was coming on. Eat when I was hungry and not because it was 6 o'clock. Get up because I was rested and not because the alarm went off or I "should" be up by a certain time. It was wonderful.
      And like Winwood, if I did do this, I would be doing so without a job already lined up which could prove dangerous. I would be poised to immediately eat into my savings and I've stated in a previous entry, I have plenty to live for a while without working.
      But then I wonder if I would ever look for work again. From my perspective right now, I would say no definitively. It's not even a question but I do wonder. How long would it take me to get over this mental fatigue from my current job and get to a point where I'd want to work again?

      Based on my savings, I could go at most six or seven years. Three years before I'd have to cash out IRA accounts. So basically three years, but realistically two because I imagine if I did this I would have no choice but to learn to drive at some point.
      Learning to drive might further the delay in a search for work because I imagine a wanderlust would set in. I'd want to visit people I've been unable to see and perhaps make up for the many times I've had to be that guy who made somebody pick me up to go somewhere.

      I don't know. It's an entertaining fantasy but the fact is, it feels like it has already happened...like I've already reached acceptance in my brain. I feel myself weakening mentally. I find it takes longer and longer to talk myself out of quitting each day...even on my days off. My shift has been over for over four hours now and I'm still thinking about it. The cacophony of "leave" is catching up to the shouts of "stay". They feel almost, if not already, equal now...perhaps the leaves are already louder.

      But what would I do?

      One argument I already envision is people chastising me for doing so when, for years, they've never been happy that I've worked there for so long. These same people feel like I could be doing so much better with my mind than working there and I do foresee them being upset that I had left. Ugh...

      Still...would it be worth it? Should I at least take the rest of the year off or would I become desirous of routine long before that? I never liked having to go back to school each year but then I also didn't like the onset of Summer vacation. Perhaps it was the same thing...I had become routinized to the school year and didn't want to see it end and then later I had become routinized to the carefreeness of Summer vacation and didn't want to see that end.
      How long would it take me to miss the ebb and flow of my workweek?

      It would be a bad idea but I think I should do it. I promised Twin I would work for her this coming Monday and Tuesday, my usual nights off so I definitely have to keep it together long enough for that. My coworker is on vacation for another two weeks but then I have reached the point where I don't give a shit about hurting the store.

      I'll have to see how I feel Tuesday.

      Maybe this is none of those instances I should talk it over with my Best Friend first and especially Winwood since this whole scenario is reminiscent of her own...


The Cars: Door to Door, 1st song - "Leave or Stay"

I DON'T WANT YOUR FOOD RELIGION...

     I am fortunate to have friends from all sides of the political divide even if the majority of them fall into the liberal side of the equation. One of the things I see popping up in my Facebook feed is a call for the labeling of genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). It's taken me a while, but I have come down decidedly against such labeling, at least so long as it is mandatory.

     First of all, I don't find the proponents of such labeling to be putting forth scientific arguments. They fail to establish how transgenic plants (and presumably one day, animals, but let's stick to plants for this post) are inherently different from plants produced by selective breeding, grafting, cloning, and chemical and radiation-induced mutagenesis (i.e. the deliberate damaging of DNA).
     Calling it unnatural is a non-starter since both grafting exists and bacteria having been trading genes with each other across species for billions of years. Perhaps analogously, it is the bacterial version of sexual reproduction.
      I would need a reason (or reasons) that make the insertion of a gene into a plant's DNA fundamentally different from any of the other mentioned methods. Presently the only difference I can say exists definitively is that the changes wrought by such gene insertions are far more precise than any other form of selective breeding as this chart shows.

(click to enlarge)

      Nextly I've learned that such a label would be redundant. There's already a label for it: organic. In order for a foodstuff to receive the coveted organic label, among its requirements is that the foodstuff cannot have been made using GMO plants.
      Therefore, if you do not want GMO products in your diet, you have the organic label to provide you with that reassurance.
      When I originally made this point I was told that organic products are expensive to which I replied they are expensive because they are not popular. If getting GMOs out of people's diets is the goal of label proponents, they need only begin advertising this fact. If getting GMOs out of diets is truly the will of the people, they would then flock to organic products, having a new reason to do so. More people desiring organic products would put pressure on producers which in turn would increase the amount of such products on the market and drive their price down.  I got no response to that.

      It was with this mentioning of the already-existing organic label that got me believing that GMO labeling proponents are not about creating an informed citizenry. I could argue that it is about fear-mongering (especially the calls/stall tactic for ascertaining its safety when I don't see them eager to have scientifically verified/disproven the legitimacy of their claims about organic foods) and while that may be a component of the push for GMO labeling, I thought of it as something else instead: religion.

      As far as I know, there's no science behind organic food nor its movement. Organic appears to me as a philosophy, perhaps a misguided philosophy but a philosophy nonetheless akin to other values-based, but often pseudoscientific, movements like raw food advocacy and alternative medicine. It's presented in an emotionally persuasive, but not evidentially persuasive, way by practitioners to prospective converts. Logical fallacies like "appeal to nature" are also employed but I'm digressing...

      What I'm getting at is I see anti-GMO movement as an offshoot of the organic movement, though still most definitely under the natural food movement's umbrella. For me, their dietary requirements are akin to religious dietary requirements.
      Take kosher (or halal) for example. There's nothing dangerous or particularly unhealthy about non-kosher foods nor is there necessarily anything better or healthier about kosher ones. People consume non-kosher foods all the time without consequence to their health. Scientifically there's nothing to support keeping kosher either. There's some ret-conning of things like pork saying that trichinosis was common back in ye olde days so avoiding pork was a good idea but that's not why this was done.
      No, the reason why religious dietary restrictions exist is the same reason why cultural idioms exist: it serves as a useful way to solidify membership/express solidarity in an exclusive club (so to speak) and to identify outsiders. There are plenty of war stories about how spies were caught not because of some elaborate operation, but because they looked the wrong way first before crossing the street.

     Organic worshipers (if you will) have a set of values by which they abide and through these values, offer a means to show solidarity with fellow practitioners and like any religion, there's an ever-present need for additional adherents to avoid extinction.

      Anyways, plenty of products exist out there which are naturally kosher but others may fall into a gray area and though I'm not Jewish, my store has a rather large Passover selection when the holiday rolls around. Simple observation shows that Passover has its own requirements, or at least stricter ones, as certain products are labeled as being kosher, but not kosher for Passover and others as kosher always.
      If you want kosher products, you have an easy means for identifying them in the marketplace whether the K in a circle symbol or "parve". You can choose to buy kosher whether you are Jewish or not. There are also no requirements (to my knowledge) that all foods that are kosher be labeled as such. It is a voluntary label for the voluntary adherents of Judaism. It might be good business, but it is not a required business.

      I see the organic label as no different than the kosher label and I view the movement to have GMOs labeled without proper scientific reasoning to back up such a labeling requirement as no different than Jewish leaders petitioning Congress to mandate the labeling of all non-kosher foods in the US marketplace. There's no need to label foods as non-kosher when a kosher label already exists and it would violate the First Amendment of the US Constitution I would assume for the government to mandate such labeling as it would appear to be the sponsoring of a religion.
     There's no science behind kosher, only religious values. There's also no science behind organic labeling, only values. Labeling GMO foods does not educate or inform the consumer, it would only promote ignorance in a manner similar to when people use the lay definition of theory when deriding a scientific theory they disagree with. It is not a safety issue since GMO foods are not substantially different from non-GMO foods nutritionally (and if they are, that would require a label or the modification of an existing one like golden rice for example, the Vitamin A section of the nutrition label would have a different number than ordinary rice). We already happily import non-native plants and animals so it can hardly be considered an environmental issue either.
      The FDA already has a black mark against it because its authorizing act specifically exempted pseudoscience-based homeopathic remedies from scrutiny and Congress has never fixed this. The USDA doesn't need a similar black mark with GMO labeling.

      I guess the point is - assuming I've even been making one - is that if you're promoting your values, advertise the organic label better to both increase your adherents and bring down the cost of organic foodstuffs. But until and unless you have a scientific argument to support GMO labeling, I want you to keep your religion out of my food...

PERHAPS AN EXPLANATION?

      While talking with Winwood the other day, one of her stories reminded me of when Bronx suddenly disappeared from my life. I gave her the quick-version of the story about how we had met online and talked over the phone for close to three years. We had always spoken about meeting but one thing or another would always keep us apart (especially Bronx's lack of money from never having had a job the whole time I had known her) until that one day when we finally did meet and spent an afternoon together in New York City and how then shortly thereafter, she just cast me out of her life.

      I wondered why Bronx had suddenly up and left after that. It was then that Winwood suggested it was because we had met and not that it had anything to do with me but that Bronx had had a notion in her head of what I was supposed to be like and that I didn't meet that expectation. She compared it to reading a novel and having your version of the characters in your head and then seeing them portrayed in a film.

     I have to say that this explanation made a lot of sense to me. Not that I like having lost a friend for so long like that but at least Winwood's logic of why Bronx may have left fit rather well with the scenario.

     I'm still not happy that Bronx is gone. I did like her a lot but I guess I was something to her that I never actually was...

WORKPLACE COMMENTARY...

      My coworker commented the other night that she must have killed someone in a past life in order to explain her luck and predicaments in this life.

      I replied that I must've organized the massacre of a village to explain mine. Not leaving well enough alone, as well as the laugh I got from my friends, I added that I probably had the pregnant women of that village brought forth and ordered my men to cut the babies from their wombs and shown to their respective mothers before having them [the mothers] decapitated.

      It got quiet for a moment; a silence I broke with me saying, "I make statements like that and wonder why girls don't want to talk to me."

      I swear I'm harmless, haha.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY...

     It's Digby's birthday today. It's been a little over three years since I would last see her somewhat regularly hoping for that chance and never getting it. Yeah, I still kinda miss her. I never said I wasn't pathetic...


     This card is so true :-)

NOTHING LEFT...

     A week ago, my job switched to "lane accountability". Management claimed our supermarket was actually in the minority of stores still not practicing it. While it may be entirely unrelated, our supermarket is also the top one in our area so maybe don't fix what ain't broken?

     I've been through lane accountability before. It's where instead of getting an individual till, you share tills with other employees. The lane itself is proven rather than the individual and if the lane is short/over then those cashiers using the lane go on cash control in an effort to discover the likely culprit which...now that I think about it means the method we had been using all along was like being on permanent cash control and it didn't take two steps to identify the problem.
     But like I said, I've been on this before and I thought it made sense for my department. I was in the Prepared Foods section and there was only one till and I usually manned it as I had prior experience as a cashier. The trouble was, when we had individual tills I had to wait for a coworker to get a till to relieve me for breaks which sometimes never happened. When lane accountability was introduced, I always got my breaks.
     That being said, I think lane accountability makes sense for small stores and small departments within larger stores like my own. Prepared Foods, Pharmacy, and Courtesy would benefit from lane accountability I think whereas the Front End would not. It remains to be seen how this experiment pans out because if too many people end up on cash control, it defeats the point of this practice.

     Normally I wouldn't care about this change but then I really don't like my job anymore. It's been going downhill for a long time now, probably as soon as 2004 when the original owner died leaving his sons fully in charge. I think the father kept his sons' selfishness in check because he built up his empire from the ground, starting as just a fruit stand back in the 1950s. His sons inherited an already successful chain.

     Micromanagement started hitting us almost right away and it became rather apparent by the next contract negotiation when the store was very big on shitting on new hires. This trend has continued and I really cannot recommend working for my supermarket anymore as you are in no way cared about.
     Coupled with the "Great Recession" downturn, it only got worse to work there. I really started feeling like an undesired expense rather than a dedicated asset to the company. I used to care about my company and it has since become clear to me that I have cared about my company long after it had stopped caring about me. I've given a lot of my life to that store that I can't ever get back and the only two things I have ever asked for were to have my hard-work/dedication be recognized by being left alone and by giving me Full Time.

     By left alone, I mean trusted to do my duties because they knew I would not slack off and would commit to my tasks at hand and by having that dedication respected when it came to scheduling. For a long time I got that. My schedule was stable enough that it was like getting a salary and management was happy with my performance. I was rarely sick. I've never been injured. I was happy to come to work. They got good value for my wage. And for ten years, I bid for Full Time. And I wanted Full Time simply to guarantee my hours. As a part-timer, technically I could be cut pretty badly if they wanted to. My seniority will only take me so far but it is that seniority that has kept them from cutting too deeply though cut they have. The past two years have seen an average weekly drop of about 1½ to 2 hours.
     It is only now by looking back on it that I realized I had only begun bidding for Full Time after the original owner had died. It's not possible to prove, but had I started bidding back in 2001 or 2002, would I have received my wish?

     So now we all are increasingly micromanaged, the night shift has to deal with a manager whose continued employment probably counts as a verified miracle leaving him only one more to qualify for sainthood, wages have declined to survival level (not that they were ever fantastic to begin with...I'm still drawing a profit but I don't know how much longer I can keep that up. Last year 98% of my earnings were spoken for before they even got home), workers are made to feel like cogs rather than people, we're judged increasingly on ever less relevant statistics, our union grows weaker each negotiation...it sucks.

     And now to top it all off I have had my identity stripped from me. Like I said, if I were happier in my job, lane accountability would not faze me but I'm not: I'm very unhappy at work. I despise having to go there now. My weekends are no longer enough to recharge me for another workweek. I meet each Wednesday night (my Monday) with dread. The only good about a Wednesday is that the shitty manager is off that night so I at least return to some peace. But it's not enough and I can't afford to take three days off.
     But at least I had a till with my name on it. It was mine. I made it my own. I sorted things the way I like sorting them. It was efficient and orderly. Now I have a till. It is not my till. It belongs to the lane I have been assigned. It has been run through by all those who used it before me. I have to sort now according to a prescription that goes against 13 years of habit. Sure, I'll adapt...but it's like the last straw, y'know?

     I have come to feel like a nothing at my job, as though I were no one. Now I am no one. I am a number when I clock in...not a person. I am a number when I sign in...not a person. I am a part of a whole when proven rather than an individual.

     My job has taken away the fun of working there. It has taken away the sense of satisfaction I once derived from working there. It has taken away my dignity by making me into a series of percentages, ratios, and figures. Now it has taken away my identity.

     I don't know why I continue to work for them...

     Oh, that's right. I know why. It's because I don't have a choice. There are no other jobs near me that will pay a living wage, let alone a survival wage. I am bound to them and they know it and the store shows its contempt for all those whom it employs because it can...because it knows we have no place else to go. Why treat employees with respect when your employees are afraid to lose their jobs? Standing up for myself would be a fool's crusade. Yes sir! No sir! Whatever you say sir! Right away sir!

     I hate my job, but I cannot leave my job. My job owns me. There is no escape and it kills me slowly...

SONGS THAT CAN JUST GO AWAY, part XI

     Katy Perry's "Firework" has been annoying the internet for some time now and it annoys the shit out of me too. It's not even because it's a sappy self-empowerment song, the kinds of which I've railed against before. No, what bugs me about it is the shoddily written chorus.

     At first I thought it was just another example of Katy Perry's sometimes odd enunciations (listen to "California Gurls" for a good example of this). At times it feels like she is in a competition with Celine Dion for odd vocalizations. But I digress...

     I had a difficult time understanding the chorus and did my damnedest to try to find words which fit. I should mention that this song plays at work so I've had no choice but to listen to it many, many times. The chorus sounds to the uninitiated like:

♪♫ Baby, you're a firework!

Go on show them what your worth

Make them go (unintelligible three repeated syllables)

As you shoot across the sky-y-y!

Baby, you're a firework!

Go on let your colors burst

Make them go (unintelligible three repeated syllables)

You're gonna leave going (unintelligible three different repeated syllables) ♫♪

     Now hearing "sky-y-y" I assumed the first three misunderstood syllables had to be "high" and that kinda made sense: "Make them go high, high, high // As you shoot across the sky-y-y!" But try as I might, I couldn't come up with a good rhyme scheme. "high, high, high // why-y-y?" Nah...

     Finally after many weeks of this, I managed to remember to dedicate a few moments of my uneventful life to looking up the song's lyrics. What I saw brought this song from tolerable to fuck no, I want it to just go away. Here're the actual lyrics:

♪♫ Baby, you're a firework
Come on, show 'em what you're worth
Make 'em go, "Aah, aah, aah"
As you shoot across the sky-y-y
Baby, you're a firework
Come on, let your colors burst
Make 'em go, "Aah, aah, aah"
You're gonna leave 'em all in awe, awe, awe ♫♪

     Okay, I had a few errors: "Go on" was "Come on" & "You're gonna leave them going" was actually "You're gonna leave 'em all in" Whatever. Divining lyrics is sometimes a complex art. Believe me, I know...I'm a Squeeze fan. But the rhyming couplets are what threw me. "Make them go, 'Ah, ah, ah' // As you shoot across the sky-y-y"? "Make them go, 'Ah, ah, ah' // You're gonna leave 'em all in awe, awe, awe"?

     What the fuck was that? That's just terrible. No wonder my brain couldn't figure out the lyrics. It would have never accepted such a shitty couplet. I'm pretty sure Katy Perry doesn't write her own songs so it leaves me wondering what sort of professional songwriter would've found such couplets acceptable for singing? Hell, even in written poetry they'd suck. She barely differentiates between the words too. How was anyone supposed to know what she was singing? My brain just...no, it can't.

     This song just needs to go away already...

And it's got over 450 million views...