Are Long Posts Fun?

I write quite a lot, I'm aware of that. I don't really consider myself a typical "long letter" type of penpal, but I like writing. However often long, condensed, letter-dense posts are simply annoying. One would thing that it doesn't make sense when you like reading - many books, after all, aren't full of pictures, nor have short chapters or segmentations between chapters to help the attention deficient reader keep up with the story - BUT lets face it, letters and posts aren't often just as books.  Yes, it depends on what was written. Two pages, or 80 lines depicting in painful detail your blurry ideas about why peas are better than beans are not enticing. 200 densely written pages following the story of a vicious murderer that manages to decapitate people in a populated city while a brilliant detective is hot on their tracks... that's not nearly enough.

Anyway, this idea came to me just because I'm on this site, and I receive posts by e-mail for different forums, and there's this user who got a posting rush and has send us all ten long posts about sex and tantric sex. Yes, it would normally be very interesting, but... not. Fuck, how do you manage to kill sex?

So, yes, after that I've been brought to reconsider my posting habits, and really, REALLY make an effort to trim them. Not an easy task when your head is full of plotbunnies, or postbunnies or... just bunnies. Do you know what plotbunnies are? It's a word I learned in my fanfic writing days. Those are the ideas for a story that you have rolling around your head, but that haven't evolved into a full story. I have a couple of that... a couple A LOT of those, and some are.... well, they are not plotbunnies, but gara be like plot-horses or plot-dragons. Regarding stories, not posts. Wait, I have post plotbunnies too... Yes, well, anyway. Where was I and where was I going? Yeah, right, so it's not so easy to trim posts when you have a lot of ideas and things to say rolling around in your head. Has that happen to you too or am I the only person with a messy head and undisciplined thoughts?

Anyway, I wanted to tell you all a little piece of news: it's very, very likely that my thesis mate and I will be published. Yay! ^_^ I finally had a meeting yesterday with someone from the faculty, who reviewed our thesis, since we expressed our desire to find a way to publish it either as a book or as an article, and they told me that our work was actually rather good, that needed trimming some segments, but that our approach was actually refreshing and new within the given topic, and it would be great to publish it as an article. They quickly give us suggestions about which parts of the thesis use to construct the 15 page article (out of 195), and pressed on the matter that we should keep our focus where we had it: on the social part.

You see, my mate and I made our thesis about the artisanal fishermen of a given island. We were supposed to do a traditional economical analysis and propose a way to improve their activity, but once we arrived at the island we realized that all of that would have been a bunch of crap. The economical situation of the fishermen is tied tightly to their social circumstances, thus throwing at them all sort of market solutions won't work, as it hasn't been working for 20 years or so. Meanwhile they are vulnerable, exposed to abuse, and the sealife is in inminent danger, which only deepens their problems. As result, my mate and I changed our initial position and leaned heavier on the social side of the equation, explaining as clearly as possible that no model or mathematical proposal, no economical solution would turn this region into a burgeoning hub of commerce, but that inherent social issues had to be addressed first.

It's interesting to think that what's going on here is a miniature of what goes on around the world, and what can be seen in Europe. The "solutions" proposed are like trying to push a cart down a road that no longer exists, when the wheels of the cart have already broken off. You can't pretend a cart to rush smoothly as if it were racing on a highway when you are pushing it down a cliff. Yes it's going to rush in the short term, and it's going to rush downwards, free falling. Most of you are not interested by this topic, I assume so I'll close it by saying this: You know what pisses me off the most about the whole situation? Both European and the fishermen's? That there's this bunch of economists and politicians with big titles, probably prizes and publications too, and they are all so fucking blind about the reality that they think people in real life are no different than their paper modeling, and so they just throw in all sorts of "solutions" without actually thinking them over, almost as if expecting either to buy time to get their capital somewhere safe, or simply see if it works. It's not even like putting a band aid on a gashing wound, it's like having a gashing wound and putting stones on it.

Yeah, well, the important is that we might get published, that the first publications where my name appears won't be as a writer, a work of fiction, but as a scientist. ^_^ That's cool.

Economy, Ecology or Eco-Moron

I write today in hopes of being mistaken. I want to be mistaken, I YEARN to be mistaken, so please if someone out there can honestly prove me wrong - I don't know how - do it!

Sometime ago I received an e-mail denouncing that the German airline Lufthansa was planning on incorporating into their lot planes that operate with biofuel. The idea on one side is quite ludicrous sounding, as most people know that plane fuel (I'm under the understanding that some types are called "jet fuel") is different from what you pump into your car, namely because it has a much higher octane level. In other words - as I understand it - it's much purer. So, the idea of being able to make a fuel of such a quality from crops does seem to defy the logic of simple, pedestrian minds such as mine. When I first read this, I took it with a grain of salt, as, well, I always thought I would see a Gundam, than a plane flying on cooking oil. Perhaps it was also my hoping that I would never see the day when such a thing happens. After all, if you have been following this blog long enough, you probably remember my rants against biofuel for cars.

Things with the news about Lufthansa were cooling down in my head, I was happily chalking it up to yet another "X-Files Type" conspiracy theory thing, when I actually heard in the news how a Mexican airline, Mexicana has started operating flights with biofuel. I checked today on my favorite airline, and they too, Air France, have been "cooperating" in this so-called ecological and "sustainable solution". Yes, it doesn't use brent derivates, and the petroil is running low in the planet, and we have all these machines that work on fossil fuels, and "we can't live without them", and yes, you are welcome to point your finger at me and ask me how do I pretend to travel to Hungary from Costa Rica 'Columbus style' or I'll just go very Christian, pray to God and walk on water. Yeah, yeah, yeah... I'm quite positive there are other methods, for instance - and this is my Sci-Fi proposal of the day - why don't you invent the electronic planes? Can't? Okay, it was just a suggestion. But before you rant on why biofuel and all the technical stuff that I don't really care about, I'll point out AGAIN a thing or two that might be worth keeping in mind.

First of all, let's look at a few things that are happening while the biofuel erupts around the globe. While our cars and planes go lean, slim and vegetarian, FAMINE strikes the poorest regions of the planet. I still remember a picture of a directive from the FAO holding up a red mug, much like the one any of us use for the morning coffee or tea, and telling people that that's the size of the DAILY ration of food a child got from them. There was a serious shortage of food, and on many places there was no fuel to get tractors and farming equipment moving. You would say, "see how good would biofuel be then? Then you can get the farming equipment moving and you could grow crops to feed people again". If you do consider that answer, let me smile fondly at your candor. That's so sweet, really. In those days the biofuel was sounding quite strong, if I recall correctly.

Now, let's not dwell there much, and let's skip ahead to the present. Planes on biofuel and what else do we suddenly find? Famine emergency in Somalia. You can consult the report of the FAO on the matter here. Does one thing have to do with the other? Some will say that no way, that's just humbug and someone is "playing the local conspiracy theorist". Indeed, I would say that you can't take to separate facts and link them together just because they happen almost at the same time. I agree with that. Correlation doesn't mean causality, and we are yet to find out if there's a correlation here. So at this point I would like to point out a few very important questions we should be making.

What kind of crops and how much it is needed to fuel a plane? How much land is used for it? How much is the whole productive chain (farmers, intermediaries, etc) paid for the crops dedicated to fuel compared to those dedicated to produce food for people? There's talk about using forestry waste. What's exactly that and who is taking care that nothing that could be used to feed people is turned to fuel planes?

You see, it can be said that the biofuel comes only from the organic waste or the forestry waste, and none of the parts of the crop that are used by the food industry are engaged, or that there's no need to use parts ot the forest that are protected. Personally I would like to see numbers about that. How much is needed to make my car run 100 miles? How much is needed to fly me from Houston to New York? Then, when this "waste" is mentioned, that's because the rest is useless - can't be used - for biofuel, or because there's a decision not to use it? I'll tell you why I ask. Thing is that we all know that fuel is usually much more expensive than food. So, if I'm a farmer and I produce 2 tons of something - let's say corn - and I get paid $1000 a ton if I sell it to those who would make food out of it - the best offer, but I get paid $2000 a ton if I sell it to those who would make fuel out of it, who do you think I'll sell my two tons to? Just think about it. You are a farmer, you have a family to keep, a farm to get running, debts to pay, children to send to a college to get a better life than the one you have... will you go for the $4000 or the $2000? Sure, you can sell one part to one side and another to the other, and say, you get $3000... but you still could have made $4000.

You, as farmer, could ease your soul saying "well, I'll sell it all to fuel, and someone will sell it all to food, Besides we also need fuel. If there's no fuel, our farming machines won't move, and then there would be nothing to sow or harvest because we won't have how to do it". Yes, only how can you make sure all farmers won't take the same decision?

If the biofuel yields a bigger profit - and it probably will - then farmers will seek to grow the crops that can be used to produce biofuel. That will reduce the crops used for food, even if only a part of the crop can be used to fuel, as then instead of separating food from fuel, many farmers will seek to grow crops that yield more to fuel and less to food. It is a rational move, it's not ilegal, but it does make the food more scarce and thus more expensive. With this move a lot of people who live in poverty will slip down to extreme poverty because they won't have that extra cent, that extra dollar, that extra euro to pay for the bread, for the veggies, for the chicken, for the eggs. Sure, if you are a comfy middle class, middle-high class or high class the only thing you'll notice is that things wen't up and now you can't down seven tequilas with your friends on Friday, only five, but that's okay. But if you are not so lucky, if you have much lean resources to survive, you'll find out that now it's bread or milk, but not both of them, and there's no more McDonald's once a month, but if you want to smell french fries you have to stand on the street and inhale the fumes of all the "smart", "eco-cars" that rush past you.

If we go with the general mindset of all those "happy little liberalists", and the neoliberals that love to talk about the market, they will say that the market will regulate itself and there's nothing to worry about, what's needed by the market will be provided and everybody will be happy, and a perfect balance will be established. Yes, that above is the market's "perfect balance". Smarty-pants neoliberals, and their cousins, the happy little libertarians seem to forget that in the market your voice is the money you have. The more money you have, the louder your voice, and the market listens only to the louder voices. What's the biggest part of the money saying? That's how the "perfect market" regulates itself. If you have no money you have no voice, and honestly nobody would be interested in attening your needs or selling you anything if you can't pay. Just imagine you have a store. Two people come in: one want you to go fetch apples and sell them to him/her. That person is loaded and puts on your counter a briefcase full of money. All that for apples. The other one ask you to go fetch pears. That one has no money. Not a dime. You have a store, you must keep that store running. You have a family to mantain, kids to send to school, bills to pay... what will you go to fetch? Exactly.

If you have no money, you can't ask for anything. If things go so expensive you can't pay them, you might as well consider yourself with no money. There are entire regions that have ran out of money. There are countries struggling to get on their feet, control debts that have gone rampant. Decades of irresponsible spending, financially irresponsible behavior are passing the bill and we find out that we fucked the planet, smoked up the fuel like it was eternal, depleted the resources of food, contaminated land, air and water, and what's the solution? Well, basically it seems to be "let's hurry, wolf on what remains and let the richer survive, let the poor die".

So, is the biofuel a nice and gree ecological solution meeting the economical needs, or it is an eco-moron and eco-mocking half assed move to keep on the irresponsible attitude? You know my answer, now ponder yours.

Thoughts about Going Green

In Costa Rica "going green" could be understood in a very, very bad way, as it could mean, that you are turning in favor of the currently ruling political party, a sick, corrupted strain of neoliberal breed no decent human being would ever willingly choose. However, I'm not poundering the thought of going that green, but rather eco-green.

Perhaps you remember, perhaps you don't (in which case you could simply scroll down...) but last week I wrote an entry about our planet (that in which I said Haiti is actually the scale model of the world), and though it had bleak points here and there, it ended up with a list of things you could do to make the difference. From it and through many sources (now from the Zümm too) I received a lot of support and positive comments from my friends, which got me thinking some more. Currently I'm reusing the plastic bags I have and carry around flax, ecofriendly bags for my groceries and on general, for anything I might need a bag for through the day. On Saturdays I visit the local market, where you can buy fresh veggies from the farmers, and as much as I can, choose the national product over the imported one, the green over the genetically or chemically enhanced. I'm still not there in the selective garbage thing, but I'm getting there.

The thing is that a few items from my list made me think that perhaps, as the proposal of them, I should take the idea in my hands and seek ways to make it happen. Among the ideas I choose to start with, there's the idea of gathering with friends, and the friends of our friends to make our own flax ecofriendly shopping bags, (not so likely to happen... at once), and organizing plant-a-tree picnics. This last one, I believe, could have a better acceptance, since you can make it really fun.

I'm putting the idea out there for my friends to consider it (after all it's easier if more of them participate), and will start checking with the local authorities about rules for planting trees and were could we do it. Also will try to contact different organizations, environmentalist organizations and Universities to seek some capacitation on how to plant different trees (I'm actually a poor gardner), and perhaps also get some trees donated for the cause. It's a lot of work, but I hope to get more people involved and the idea spread.

Kari told me in Europe there are Gardner Guerrillas, which are groups of rouge ecologists that pick a place and plant trees, regardless of whether they have permission to do so or not. Well, I don't wanna do something like that, but I do hope to do it within the legal system, in an organized and fun way.

Taking care of the planet doesn't have to be a boring, hard and fruitless thing. It can be fun and rewarding. It doesn't need to be something others do, eco-maniacs do, but it can be something you do. Would you like to do it with me? :-)

Haiti: The World's Scale Model

After the earthquake that leveled Haiti, this tiny Island, always known for aspects such as extreme poverty and voodoo, had become a shining spot, a topic of more and more blogs and blog-entries (has gotten a few of mine as well), political speeches, rescue plans, economical plans and even religious (and moronic) speeches. Pictures of the devastation, of people hurt and corpses flood the media from every angle to the point where I'm almost expecting my penpals to include a note or two on the subject in their next letters or e-mails.

The thing is that the other day I was thinking about Haiti, remembering all the crap mentioned by Mr.Pat Robertson (that stuff about how Haiti deserves this, and how it is their fault because they made a Pact with the Devil), as well as other matters related with the subject, the huge movilization of the US, the taking over they are making, in order to get things done, the condemnation it earns from other governments that see this an attempt of the US to take over the country and so on. Well, as I was mulling on the matter, thinking about what's happening in this country, I started finding paralelisms between Haiti and the rest of the world. Corruption, governments that exploit the population, strangle them in poverty even of the land itself could give so much. Natural disasters beating it up and other people basically stealing their richness, exploiting the cracks in the system for drugs, for hiding, for human trafficking (here thinking about the 33 "orphan kids" - and while it's 'still to be seen', for me it was a huge mistake, an unforgivable mistake to try to take the kids out of the country, particularly through illegal means, and take them from their parents) and so on.

It hit me that the world, our "so much better" world is actually the same, on a different scale. Natural disasters are hitting us everywhere. Tsunamis, earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, climate change, snow storms just to mention a few. Corrupt governments are found basically everywhere, and I'd dare to say that some places even have a surproduction of corruption. The things that happen here, in the whole planet, in this age are things that a few years ago we thought completely unspeakable. At some of the things I find in the papers I can't stop but think at my history lessons, at how I was shocked that people in the Middle Age didn't fight,weren't outraged, how they didn't just kill the people imposing those hineous rules, and now here they are and I see the people hardly react, hardly be heard. We have food shortages, and problems with adequate access to food (given how fresh products are often more and more expensive, how farmers in less developped countries are pushed out of the activity thanks to the importing of mass produced, genetically altered, heavily subsidized products from much richer markets, which on a whim can move from food to biofuel producing suddenly cutting off the food supply of quite a huge portion of the world, in favour of cars), education deficiencies, problems with adecuate and timely access to health care, just to mention a few.

I wonder if the Illuminated Spokepersons of the Baptist Church would then say that the World has made a Pact with the Devil, but one thing I would agree in the face of this global case is that, yes, we did brought this upon ourselves. By patronizing corruption acts, by allowing ourselves to be charmed by shiny promises and empty words, by not looking deeper, by not questioning, by becoming lazy and careless. We brought this upon ourselves for not being careful, for thinking that "waste" is a right born out of economical priviledge, instead of looking at it as a crime against the planet. I'm not talking here about the kid who won't eat all its veggies, to whom its parents say that he or she should eat and look at the poor kids who have nothing to eat.  I talk here about the use-and-throw of stuff, the amount of garbage we produce, the consumist need to have more, to replace for the newest, for feeding our wastebaskets more than what we feed our pets.

Haiti isn't a poor little country sharing the Hispaniola Island, because they can't even have a whole Island for themselves, plagued with stupid people that doesn't know how to do things well. No, Haiti isn't like that either because "that's what happen when all you have are black people" (like something I heard some extremely illuminated coworker of mine, with far more insulting words I won't repeat here), or what happens with "Non-Christians", or "people with poor-mentality" or whatever other excuse you want to hold up to basically say that "it won't happen to us". Haiti is the world's little scale model, a fastforward window to where are we going. Haiti is just as beautiful and full of opportunities as our planet. Haiti has a very beautiful language--- just as our planet (well, I'm a full pro-French and I hold French up high, but that's not the point here), and their people are as beautiful, good and heterogeneous as the rest of us, and what happened to Haiti, what's happening, is also happening to the whole planet, to each and every one of our "much better" countries. And you know what? We are going to get leveled. So WAKE UP PLANET and let's do something about it. Not just pep-talk and plans and blog-entries and Tea Parties. No more finger pointing and using the crisis to defend "our righteous thesis and standing point", but lets roll up our sleeves and work.

No idea how? Here are some ideas I have:

1. Prefer fresh products, nationally produced or those produced by countries that also buy our products. If we can't get fresh products for any reason, let's plant them! Yeah, perhaps it's easy for someone with a garden, or gardening skills, but what about people living in an appartment? Well, you can also do something. Have you heard about "plants in pots"? Sure, maybe not an orange tree or a corn plant, but how about your own herbs? Oh, keep it legal, so unless you live in Holland, do not plan your own cannabis.

2. Recycle, reuse all you can and reject products that would only litter the planet. Carry your own bags, for example, and reject the plastic bags at stores. You can go further and even avoid buying at places where you know will enforce the use of unnecesary bags (those that have check points and you have to leave the store with your bag sealed).

3. Talk with your local authorites about places where you can go plant trees, and the types of trees you can plant there, and organize a "greentour" one day with your friends and/or family, or with yourself, or as a date (Guys, this is an awesome way to conquer a chick!) to go plant a few trees. You can totally combine this activity with a picnic! (No plastic at the picnic! So sandwiches in reusable paper bags or wrapped in napkins, natural beverages in reusable containers, lots of fruits, cheese and natural treats for all, and carry always a small bag (or maybe a few for slective garbage) and don't leave your garbage on others!

4. Print less. Think about lending from friends or the local library instead of making copies if you can.

5. Get unplugged. Turn off the computer, the TV, pull everything you don't need from the electrical socket as much as you can (okay, the fridge gara stay). Read during the day, go outdoors, open doors and windows instead of putting on the fan and the air conditioner. Take advantage of the natural light, and if the way your place doesn't allow so, you can always trick in a little bit of light with mirrors! They are completely energy efficient, carbon neutral, and work since the ancient times! At night, from time to time, prefer "mood lighting" with candles and other choices that do not involve electricity or an intensive fossil fuel use.

6. Wake up earlier and get to bed earlier too. The night is pretty, but lets take advantage of all that natural light.

7. Always prefer recycled things.

8. Buy things that will last, be careful with them and don't replace them unless they've stopped, really stopped working. Avoid with this the "fashion" products. Clothes, accesories, devices and all those flashy things that are good because they are new and the "latest". Just think about the space, and all the garbage you will start producing once they are not "in" and you have to replace them. Not to mention all the good money thrown into the garbage.

9. Don't drive unless you really-really-really-really-absolutely-no-way-of-getting-out-of-it have to. Walk, go with a bike, after all it took you a good while and a lot of falling, bruising and crying until you finally got to do it and it would be stupid that now that you can do it, you won't; or take the public transportation, because that's why it created it for. All of them work!

10. As much as you can, apply the DIY: Do It Yourself. If you are insecure, still go ahead! You'd be amazed at all the things you can do. :-)

This are just ten idea, small ideas you can apply wherever you are, but I'm sure that you can find more and more and more! And hey, if you want to share them do so! I'd be happy to hear about more ideas! So, roll'em up and lets get the party started!

Shame to Christians

I think I was actually going to write about something else, but this really deserves my attention, basically due to the outrageous nature of it.

Around the world, there are thousands and thousands of people who actually believe in things like prophecies of the end of the world (like that one of the world ending in 1996, because Nostradamus said so, or this new batch thinking that the world will end in 2012 because the Mayans and a movie said so, and so on), as well as people who do believe that natural phenomenons are God's way to punish people. Yep, in this age, 10 years into the XXIst century, and there's people with the analytic capability of a caveman. So is Pat Robertson, host of the Christian show "700 Club".

He blames Katrina Hurricane on the legalization of the abortion in the U.S., and this current disaster in Haiti on an alleged "pact with the Devil" forged to get the island free from the French. Hn, wonter what's the Sin behind the 2004 Tsunami (known also as the Asian Tsunami, the Indian Ocean Tsunami).

First of all, any midly literate human being, who simply reads the headlines, see an add, gets on the net, knows that, yes, these disasters are our fault (or at least  some of them) because of the climatic change our irresponsible poluting of the environment. We still use more electrical power than needed, still waste water "because we can pay it" and completely disregard the amount of waste we dispose, the amount of carbon monoxid we generate, and so yes, forests die, icebergs and snow blankets melt, wildlife dies and so do we. Others, like earthquakes HAPPEN. I mean, if you are not set in believing that the Bible holds far more acurate historical data than science, geology in this case, you may remember that once upon a time there was ONE Continent: Pangaea. It the broke in two, and then it broke again, the pieces drifted away and so we have our current global topography. Now, this "breaking" wasn't made with a kitchen knife, nor was it because God was punishing the dinosaurs: it happened because that's how the planet behaves. Naturally, in all these years, the planet hasn't been staying nice and still, but it continued shifting. That shifting is called "earthquakes".

So no, no God whipping the world into shape. I mean, after all,what kind of god does he think God is, that punishes the poor people and yet let the abusive, powerful ones get away with murder? Why on Earth would God punish the poor people of New Orléans for the legalization of abortion in the U.S. and not the lawmakers who drew up and passed it? Or why only New Orléans, when around the world other countries have legalized it?

Blaming natural disasters on "the will of the gods" or as "punishment for sins" comes from the time when people had no idea why these phenomenons happened. Now we know, so resourcing to them is plain stupid. However what's despicable is pointing a finger, blame and pretty much say "you deserve it" to people suffering from something that's clearly not their fault and they had no way to prepare for it or foresee it in any way. That's outrageous.

I'd like to kindly request Mr. Robertson to quit calling himself "Christian", for our religion is one based on Love and Mercy. I may not be a regular church goer, nor a Bible thumbler, but I do have present in my heart Jesus' message: "love your fellows as you love yourself". God is a god of love and mercy. He doesn't punish us, but we are subject to the consequences of our actions: we reap what we sow. Someone capable of speaking such hineous words, when the news flood us with pictures of pain and devastation, wounded children in the arms of their parents (or I hope those are their relative, may Gad protect their innocent souls) shall now bear the name of "Christian", not the name of "Human".

Fuel, The Key of the Next Crisis

Every Sunday I receive the local financial paper wrapped up in a plastic bag, held with a rubberband. So much care is really unnecesary due to the poor quality, the parcialized, liar articles it contains. Why do I receive it? Because it's a courtesy, I don't have to pay a dime for it. The paper belongs to the "La Nación" group, which means that it works 100% for the current Government and their personal interests. This is how last week they published a note badmouthing our company with data that's beyond false. Other than these, the paper's other articles are weak, involving little research.

This week the paper has an article where the newest director of the INCAE says a new crisis is to come by 2012, and that this new crisis will be due to the fuel. Okay, lets say it will happen this way. This director, Lawrence Pratt says it's because we have reached the end of the oil reserves, and that it will be incredibly hard to find anymore oil. I think that's something that the world should have known since a while now and that it should have been working on. I believe at some level it is working on it now, but the desperation of the market and people to get cars and travel with cars at any costs is what's pushing the boundaries here.

Pratt, talks that it's time to work on locally producing fuel, looking for alternative sources of fuel, and mentioned "biofuel". I can't believe that someone would dare to bring that up. First of all, if an inminent fossil fuel is coming, the first step, for me, would be to take people off the fuel consuming things. Reduce the number of cars circulating, promote other ways ot transportation, such as electric cars and electric urban trains, replace the taxi lot with electric cars, introduce telenetworking in more places or promote jobs closer to where people live so they can either walk there or bike their way to the office.

Biofuel, in my opinion, should be the last place where an economy should go because the danger exists that the production of food would sensibly decrease in order to produce inputs of biofuel. Less sugar, because it goes mainly for biofuel. Even if the biofuel can be produced from a byproduct, what would pay more? Same with corn. Soon farms of edibles will be transformed because, let's be honest, in a world hooked on fuel consuming things, what will be more profitable, food or fuel?

Maybe it's because I don't have a car, but I do travel often with planes and I need them fueled and afordable to go home, but I believe that it's more important for me to eat, and eat healthy food, real food, than getting a car fueled and provoking traffic jams. However, some people, MBA's probably, don't seem to think the same way. Well, that's what produces crisis.

Behold the Rising Economical Power

You probably know it as "China", but I call it "where are the Huns when the world need them". Truly feel like getting on a horse myself, grab a bow, some arrows and wreck havoc, see if they can find me a "Mulan" to stop me. Hell, it makes my blood boil. On one side of the scope we see China going global with fierce determination. Hosts Olympic Games, gives away money to countries, buys up IBM's hardware business (and totally fucks up the fabulous IBM ThinkPad, which will always be the love of my life), and pushes hard and strong into mobile telecommunications with 3G and 4G solutions through Huawei. This company has gone from unheard to popping up everywhere like a really bad case of swine flu. Before you notice it the red eight-petal lotus flower will be flooding everything like spam. Then again, people are buying, so what's the damage in that?

Now the New York Times tells us that the "land of opportunities" for the American graduates is in no other place than China. Too much unemployment, so go get a jobb in Beijing or Shanghai. Add ot it that this country holds the biggest part of debts in the world. China as the big World Wide Creditor. But what else do we know of this country? How about this: built on forced labor (like in Xinjiang, North West of China), repression of freedom of expression, bullying of the population and particularly activists, censoring of the Internet, near-slavery working conditions, among others. Let's not get into topics such as the forced pregnancy terminations to which the subject women who have more kids than "they should", the still degrading way they look at women, and so on. However let's pull out another topic, published today in CNN: Children snatching. Yes, I guess everywhere you can see that same problem, the human trafficking, selling kids, women, men. Babies and toddlers for adoption, the rest for slave labor, sexual slavery or even for "spare parts". In this article, however, the case is od babies taken away from their families, probably sold to rich families. According to the article, baby boys sell for as high as $1200, while baby girls sell for around $200. Hell, Persian cats are sold for more.

The article continues saying that the parents of these kids have turned to the police, but the police does nothing. Not even with videocamera recordings of the baby snatching. If I were prone to thinking ill, I'd say that's because the police is neck-deep involved in these snatchings. However, why is there no justice for these people? They are not rioting, they are not protesting, they just want their kids back. However police seems effective to search, locate, tail and arrest activists without any actual incriminatory evidence, or they are good at closing a square like Tiananmen, to avoid protesters. They can protect hermetically the interests of the Party, but they won't move a finger to protect their own people. It's almost as if people were nothing but labor bundles that must be squeezed dry, work to the bone, and they can be stashed in whatever little, dingy place.

It suddenly changes the way you see all those videos about mistreating cats and dogs, from which they make food and coats. It's suddenly not so radical, because after all, that's the way they treat people. Now my question is: is this still the "land of opportunities"? And if this is the new Global Economical Power, what will become of the world? Furthermore, how far can they keep it up? There's just so much you can do on slave labor in a world like this, specially because if they slump the world into slavery, who will have money to buy what they sell?

Beware, beware, the Huns might soon be there.

Le Figaro: "Now Americans Will REALLY Have To Reduce Their Gas Consumption"

So yeah, maybe French and Americans don't really like each other, but this headline (freely translated, capital lettering for highliting, entirely mine), I must say, made me smile. Indeed, for years and years we've heard all this baloney about "the need tto reduce contamination" and "the need to reduce our dependance of fossile fuels" and such stuff. Maybe you hear it in CBS or CNN, and in the break for advertising you are rushed head first with "Get your brand new Hunday for only $189 a month". Then again, 16 year-old children get to have a car. There's no way to identify yourself in the US unless it is with your driver's license. So, in order to be an identifiable person, you must have a driver's license, for which you have to learn how to drive, with which, at the end, you'll end up buying a car. So, stop for a moment and think: if you are a foreigner in the US, in order to be recognized, you need to have your passport (the document, not the scotch) and your green card or a visa or some sort (valid visa, you mind). But if you are American, and you are in your own country, it is not nearly enough to be born there to be aknoledged: you have to learn to drive in order to become someone. I mean, I'm Costa Rican, I was born (of course got a birth certificate and the whole shebang) and when I turned 18 and was legal to drink, smoke and vote, I made a line at my local Civil Register Bureau and got, free of charge a plastic card that up to this day works as my I.D. So in Hungary. Me was born, me got birth certificate. Me turned 18, went to my local municipal bureau, made a line, paid no fee and got my ID (which back then was a booklet, and now is a card, so I'll have to change it soon... not to mention my picturein my Hungarian ID is abhorrent).

So, the point it, the Government, my country is not forcing me to learn to drive in order to be aknowledged as a "citizen". I am a citizen because I was born Hungarian/Costa Rican. Period. Having or not a driver's license doesn't make me more or less than my peers. Well, not in America.

Now, I'd like to make a small observation here: it's not only the matter of a lot of advertising and a lot of "peer pressure" being put on American people to have a car, but it's the whole attitude towards cars. The Government is pretty much expecting you to drive, or why else to enforce the driver's licenses? And what will you drive? Your shoes? Your marriage? Gimmie a break. You are to drive a car. To ensure you do so, most city plannings are created thinking about cars and pleople with cars. Trying to get to work, lets say, with bike, PEDAL bike, not a motorcycle, is, well, in most cases something worthy of a Mr. Bean joke.

"To work? With a bike? Who are we? Armstrong? Hahahahahahahaha!!!"

And it's not so much for the effort of biking for miles, but the danger of rolling down those streets packed to the brim with cars rushing at 100+ Mph, which could squeeze you easily into a blurred spot on the asphalt. So, how is this "reduce your consumption of gas" going to work? You certainly can't change jobs to some office closer to home, because, let's be honest, there's a CRISIS out there and you need to claw into your job in order to support yourself, family, car and credit cards. So, that's not viable. You can't move closer to your office because there's people in your home who work somewhere else, or goes to school, or anything, and maybe you reduce your gas consumption, but they increase it, so No. If you have two jobs or more, you won't change them for them to be closer, or resign to have only one and use less gas, because, dude, you have two or jobs because you need them, not because you are doing them as hobbie. Then, even if you could move, do you think the current market could buy your home? At the fair price? And then, are you sure you could afford something sort of like that somewhere else? Yeah, I thought the same. So, again, No. Could you, maybe, use the "public transportation system"? Okay, let's break this into "boxes".

Box #1: You must LOCATE the public transportation portions that could take you from home to office and back. Or from home to office to office to office to school to home... or whatever route you normally follow in your trusty Rusty, Herbie, Jhonny, or whatever you call your car, if you do. Grab a map, Sunshine, and start planning. Oh, no GPS for public transportation, it's 100% Old School.

Box #2: You must SCHEDULE your plan. Yes, public transportation doesn't go straight to where you want to go, unless you take a cab, so you must locate the stops, the parts where you must go on foot from one stop to the next, and consider the time it takes you to do the entire travesy, so you know when you have to leave from one place to reach to the next. Note: Public Transportation can be unpredictable without notice. A 20 minute trip can become a 2 hour journey.

Box #3: Since the times have changed, you probably need to WAKE UP EARLIER, which means that maybe you'll be up at an hour when you weren't before, when everybody was asleep, and you'll be using water, electricity, gas and so on. And if there's more people in your place who may not have to wake up so early, then these things will be running longer in your household. Sure, everybody takes his or her own shower, BUT usually people use the same light, see the same tv, cook in the same pan, drink from the same coffeepot... so, if you must turn on the light for one person, turn on the tv for one person, make coffee for one person, you are using more electricity as a household, not to mention, that all the things you normally did in your car you'll have to do at your home (make up, tie, get your morning coffee...), which means even a longer usage of electricity per person.

Now, what does that have to do with anything? Well, electricity can be generated from several sources, that range from hidraulic, eolic, solar to fossile fuel (gas). Now, I made a bit of research on the matter, for the US, and it happens that, okay, for 2008 the use of petroleum and petroleum coke for generating electricity barely made the 1,11% of the whole. So, maybe there's no sudden threat or inflating the petroleum generated electricity when the demand of electricity per household goes up. Interestingly, though, in the U.S. the 48,52% of the energy comes from coal (not the cleanest source), followed by 19,61% of nuclear. Cleaner, maybe, I'm not a nuclear physicist, but I do can spell Chernobyl. So, leave the car in the garage and put some pressure in these two? Milk them more? Because the the hydroelectric souce makes up only the 6, 04%.

Here's the link for you to cros check if you wish. (The percentages are based on a simple calculus I ran, so download the info in Excel and diy.) Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Box #4: Because there IS a "box #4", okay, you manage. Locate the bus, metro, tramway, cab that can help you make your routes, schedule them, wake up early and light with candles, drink coke, eat Cheerios, don't watch the tv... whatever. All "buts" saved and hammered safely. So, you get on that proverbial "public transportation", and... what about the swine flu?

Oh, I know, problems never end, specially if I'm thinking them. But what's my point? My point is that so far all "solutions", as we all know, have been fake and just to keep up the pretention of "offering solutions". However, as things stand right now, there are no solutions. Electric cars are the solution? Yeah, and how are you planning in charging them up? With coal? Or you'll just slide a Plutonium rod up some slot? (Yes, I'm aware of how obscene that sounded.) And in the middle of a crisis, with carmakers begging for a bail out, people losing their jobs everywhere, wages being cut in any possible way, money running short, banks ravaging wallets worse than the Turks back in the Ottoman Occupation, where is going people to make it to change their old gas slurping Chevys for some hybrid or an electric car?

There's no way you could pull this out the way things are now. New city planning is required, more human cities, where you can walk to the local convenience store, your kids can walk to their schools, you can get to your office with one bus in 30 minutes or less. Ensure security, so your kid can walk freely and play in the street without being shot in the head and you can walk anywhere you want, alone or with friends, family without being afraid of getting robbed, raped, kidnapped or killed. For this specific segment of today's rather long entry, I chose the picture of this young rapper kid, Dolla, a 21 year-old child from Atlanta, who was murdered at a commercial center in Los Angeles, where he arrived to record his first album.

Driving a car doesn't save you from getting gunned, but doesn't make you feel safer? So, will you give it up? Will you take it from your child? Look at this boy, yes, of legal age, but look at his young face and dare to tell me he was due to die. This could be your kid. This could be you. This could be your nephew.

Cars and the consuming of fossile fuels are tied to a lot of things, the U.S. is pretty much wired up tight in gas, so when politicians come up with plans to reduce the gas consumption, they should sit and think about the implications, about how deep and how far runs the gas in the veins to today's America, and then think on a way to tackle all potential problems, so they have an answer for when they head up, and not just a bunch of motions to delay the bill, and crisis here and there lashing the backs of so many Americans just to fan the ego of one politician out of touch with reality.

Heartbroken

This is not whom I love. This is not to whom I gave my heart. My heart is falling into pieces and lies scattered on the floor. I close my eyes filled with tears, tears of anger and wish with what little is left of my heart, of my soul to be all a big, fat lie. I open my eyes and it is still there. My heart is in such excruciating pain I could shout and lose my sanity. Hyne knows I loved you, and I loved you more than anything. I placed my family, PEOPLE beneath you and I would have given everything for you and now you do this? Unspeakable.

It is not a secret for anyone that I love IBM. My first two laptops were IBM ThinkPads. Omi, MY beloved Omi, whom I place above everything and everyone, and who's far more important to me than even my lovely and faithful Nagi, IS an IBM ThinkPad, one of the last true IBM ThinkPads, untainted by the unclean hands of Lenovo, whom I consider a disgusting worm crawling under everything that's pure and beautiful in the world. I have driven both Jules and Shimmy INSANE with my fixation over IBM ThinkPad. Jules wanted me to go "I have no idea, I don't remember", and Shimmy did even the impossible to drive me to the lands of Dell and Mac, and yet I never gave in. I accepted buying Nagi, an Acer Aspiron because I always considered him an assistant, a subordinate of Omi, the brain, the King, The Great, and even said I couldn't care less if Nagi went missing or got damaged during the travel. Omi is my heart and my soul and him I'd care for with all I have. I still think and still believe him to be the best thing that has ever happened to mankind (after me).

Well, first they sell out the ThinkPad and all the hardware part to this "Lenovo" character. It made me cry bitterly in the arms of my friend, mourning the loss of hope in the future. A life without IBM ThinkPad was as bleak as you can imagine it to be. There's nothing worse. I came to terms with the loss, survived, and now this.

"IBM Offers To Move Laid Off Workers To India"

The blow has been too much. It's deception upon pain, upon my hurt, upon desolation. Pay close attention, my dear children: This is the end of the American Dream. 4000 people laid off last month, and the solution is to ship them off to the India, where wages are insultingly low. Of course, it looks tremendously nice: for the worker you offer a job, for the economy, you wipe a chunk of unemployment as if it never existed. For you, well, a substantian cut in the expenses. It's pretty simple, you take the unemployed and place them in a part of the world where you can afford to pay him or her a tiny part of their original salary. Well, things are far cheaper there, you mind, so you don't need the whole $4000 you made in the US, but you can make it with the $100 you'll get for your job... which, BTW, has some differences regarding workload, schedules, and, of course, your rights as worker. BUT you get to have a job in what, well, you've been doing. Ummm, of course, nobody is saying a word about RETIREMENT because, well, ummm... that might be managed according to the local customs, you mind. Oh, and learn to speak, what do they speak in India? Oh yes, is that funny language with letters that look like the spatial writings from sci-fi series. Or maybe, is the Elf language?

The good ol' American worker might be outraged and has all the right to be so. He's being taken away from the land where he has all the rights because, baby, the American is the LOCAL in America. In India, he will become the foreigner, the last one, the mocked one, the minority, the one that has to adjust and against whom the law would judge if a dispute of rights is between a Hindu and him. Locals always have the upper hand, homie! So yeah, it looks bleak for the American being laid off, but what can he or she do? Fuck, people has to work in order to support the family, and there are a lot of immigrant in the world, he or she wouldn't be the first, and.. they make it somehow, right? Right? Yes, they do, honey.

Only also think about this: if IBM secures you the job in India, it's a job you are taking from a Hindu. The Government of India might be counting on those jobs to curb their own problems of unemployment. Countries usually also allow the functioning of this kind of enterprises, and make all kinds of concesions in taxes and so, to create job opportunities for their people. Lousily paid, offering terrible conditions, near to the reality of service-sweatshops, but in the national statistics the question is not: is your job fair? Only do you work or not? The more people you have employed, the better. Now, if the Americans start flowing in, and they don't bring their American money, but take the Hindu jobs, and the Hindu lands, and the Hindu houses, what happens with the local population of India? Gets unemployed. Unemployment will start rising there, and at the same time, there will be more people buying, probably people who has no real idea of what things cost, which will probably promote the rising of the prices, which will give the final push to those who could barely survive to go under the surviving level. Hunger, desperation, inflation AND unemployment... export the crisis to some other country you don't really care, as long as they provide you what you need nice and cheap.

Then comes the unavoidable rising in crime. Yeah, yeah, big cities are so dangerous... wanna see dangerous in one of those "exotic lands"?

This is not a solution, this is criminal and shameless.

From this moment on, I break my bond with IBM. They shall take care of Omi, because Omi is not to blame and he's still perfect, but I want nothing more, ever again, with IBM.

News: The Pot of Facts and Lies

I've been wondering recently about the meaning of the news and the media. What's the point of it, and why do we keep reading it? It's fairly clear to all of us, that news are partialized and far more filtered that drinking water, so why do we keep going to them? Well, perhaps because we have really no other way to get an idea of what's going on, but do we really know what's going on through the papers?

News are less and less about the truth, and though I have fiercely advocated the notion that the truth itself doesn't exist, at least not as one and only, there's no resemblance whatsoever of any kind of truth in the papers. We could expect, however, to read, hear and see about facts, but facts are fewer and fewer and the lies that pepper the words spread like mould on bread. If you stick to one paper and one paper only, you may not notice it, but if you read several, specially several from different countries, you soon start to notice the divergences. And it's not only about stuff like what goes on around celebrities, where the fact of the Holly, Bridget and Kendra no longer being with Hugh Hefner has given chance to so many stories and so many versions not even all the Lord of The Rings, all Final Fantasy, all Harry Potter, Smallville and Supernatural fanfiction put together could ever produce, but I'm talking about what goes on with this whole crisis thing. U.S. says it approved one amount for the bailout, and Europe says they aproved a larger one. U.S. papers couterattack saying that the E.U. has aproved an EVEN LARGER amount (fuck it, they have more Central Banks, you moron!), and the E.U. says it wasn't even an aproved bill, but more like a proposal. It just came up as a suggestion. Some say this is going down the sewer and those say, that ain't true, and the ones deep down the sewer are the other ones.

I've been bitching for ages now about the abhorrent mediocricy that swallows everything around here, and nothing hurts me more than the mangling of my career. The prostitution of it would simply send me to my grave with a ban to ever come out of it, to the point that an army of angels should come, restrain me and forcefully pull me out of my grave for the day of the Final Judgment. And I mean it. Being so, I can't possibly believe that someone would honestly chose to become a journalist only to spread lies, twist facts and write endless fanfiction-on-demand about what's really going on. How can someone have the face to pretend to be giving people information, presenting "news" of which they know they are no better than some scribbled up story that isn't happening in this world? How can they live with themselves selling lies as facts, and misinterpreted facts as truth?

I remember CNN the first time the $700 B bailout didn't pass, how there was this blonde woman (who could really use a Fashion Emergency intervention) bitching against the senators about how they could be so "idiotic" and not to pass the bailout, that people were starvign that not passing the bailout would only sink the country in bankrupcy. Well, you've got your bailout, and I hear about it being of $850B. So, how's the country? People are still starving. Medical insurance is no longer among the expenses of people, and they are actually cutting back on Education too. Pulling kids out of college so they can eat? Dude, soon all the U.S. will be like a big India, with families selling their kids to sweatshops as slaves and their daughters to whorehouses in order to have a little income to eat. And the Bailout that would save America has passed! The Bourse is swinging wildly up and down like an EKG. +500, -500, +500,-500... What does it tell you?

Let me tell you: The bubble of speculation has bursted. Did you really thought that bubble could be blown bigger and bigger to the end of times? Did you really, honestly thought that especulation could hold itself and produce for itself and it will never get caught by reality? Dude, you fucked it up real bad. And you want to know something else? The Bailout was also sheer speculation. And instant solution for a country of instant everythings. Because, does someone ACTUALLY has a plan about what to do? Does someone has measured up the size and the implications of the damage? Does someone ACTUALLY know how to address the problem? Or is "keep on the war and send all those paupers to die on Iraq, and hopefully a hurricaine will take care of those who remain here" the only viable solution proposed? And the bail out? To buy up the banks. Nationalization. But that's not feasable, because that's a "communist" solution. The State fixes it and sell it back. Really. How long will it take for the State to fix this mess? With what? Taxpayer's money? Uhum. That would take a lot of time. All that time living in financial communism? Impossible. Sell it back to the banks. At what price? Something arranged?

So, let me see if I get this right:

You take the banks FROM their current owners and make it STATE owned. But since that's a market crime, and there was a whole Cold War over the issue, the banks will be sold to some other private hands, after some taxpayer financed fixings, to some better manager. Like Carlyle Group? Hn... So, if my maths are right... you are giving money to the rich. You give that bailout money to the current owners of the banks, NOT TO THE PEOPLE BEING CHOKED BY THE DEBTS and then fix things up... somehow, and then sell it back, pretty much giving money by charging a small Government Comission to another big money enterprise.

Question:

1. What about the people in debt?
2. What about the people who lost their homes to foreclosures?
3. What about the people who's money is taken in taxes to help these big-money sharks? What about the taxpayers?
4. What about all the things that could have been done with that taxmoney?

And perhaps one of the most important questions of all:

FROM WHICH PROJECTS' BUDGET WILL THAT BAILOUT MONEY BE PULLED OUT?

Education? Healthcare? Infrastructure? Unemployment aid? Small business aids? Which current social service or social warranty will cease to exist? Nobody asked that, right? Because the way things go in this administration, I very much doubt that money will come out of the Army budget. Am I right?

But do not expect to read of any of this on the papers. It's too unfiltered to hit the presses. This is what the filters catch and leave out.

Just an observation

Regarding the current "fucked up" market situation into which the U.S. managed to pull the rest of the world (and I hope now the rest of the world learns and next time knows better before trusting all their assets into the hands of one egomaniac nation or group, and stopr thinking the "Memo Zúňiga"way where the future is the problem of the future, thinking they can fuck up stuff, bacause they'll be long dead before hacing to pay for it...), I watch how the different countries get the Government to help their financial systems. It's kinda funny how if Hugo Chávez talks about "nationalization" it means "socialism", "communism" and therefore evil satanic practices left only to cruel, people torturing dictatorships, where people leave in fear, poverty and denied to express themselves. BUT if the US talk about "nationalization", dude, that's okay because that's gonna save us. (The EU does "nationalize" as well, but 1. Yes, I'm partialized about Europe, because for me Europe is beyond perfect, and 2. As far as I know, Europe hasn't gone out of its way to point fingers at nationalization.)

Who is responsible for the crisis... oh, the Democrats for not acting on time at voting the bailout! The Republicans for not acting together, because they didn't need the Democrat votes to pass the bailout (of $700 billion, according to the American Press, $850 billion according to Le Figaro...) Fuck it, people! The bailout ain't the root of the recession. This was lurking since 1995, almost fall into the ditch in 2001, but the 9-11 came "miraculously" to the "rescue", so people didn't pay attention to it. But it was there. Poverty raising... okay, haul over some of those paupers, make them soldiers and have them killed out there. That's actually very, very Hegel. "The way to end with misery is killing the miserbles." Hey, at least there's a philosopher backing it up, right? So, who's responsible? Everybody from the President down.

Like they say in Internal Control, "the responsability is not transferable". You may "empower" someone, and delegate functions and capabilities, but you cannot delegate responsability. So yes, if the President didn't pay attention to it, it IS his responsability still. Sorry, no way out of this hole. It's responsability of the people as well, for electing him. It's responsability of the enterprises for not taking measures, for thinking they could surf through it and take no precautions even if they had a 13-year notice that this wasn't gonna last. It's the fault of people as customers, for pushing for more and more loans, for not living within their means (yeah, me talking), for not demanding the State to keep their hard earned social warranties. Dude, press your representatives! You have Senators to talk for you! Honestly people, for a country of Freedom and Right of Expression, you really don't get to say much. Anyway, you got into a pit, and now you have to pedal back, and you see you have to go against your own preeching. The irony of it it's actually wonderful. And not because I may or may not be a supporter of the Socialist Systems (I'm not really, for I still don't understand them fully), but because this is like in the 30's, with the Great Depression, when John Maynard Keynes finally had the chance to prove that, yes, he was right and Jean-Baptiste Say was wrong.

The markets themselves are imperfect, and you can't leave them do as they see fit, all guided by their own "selfishness" and feed the fools' hope that it will work out fine. The world is not an economical model, starting with the fact that a. products are not homogenic, b. agents are not the same size and evidently those with more power WILL exercise said power (hey, they are SELFISH and we encouraged them to be so!), but above all c. the agents are NOT rational. Selfish doesn't mean they are by default rational. Why? Because they are ran by people, and people is NOT rational. People is irrational, and hell, I'm rather irrational, so of course the rest of the world is irrational! So, will the individual "every man for its own" attitude save the world amd make us live in a better place? Of course not! If we let them, well, you can well see what happens. What do we need to prevent this? Intervention. Institutions, a government that sticks its nose in the market and makes sure the little people are fine and the conditions are fair. What is fair? Well, for me, but that's just "good ol' keynesian thinking", "fair" means welfare, national well being. People able to support their families, capable of providing to satisfy their basic needs secured in the long term, and the tools to get to those means at hand for everybody without discrimination of age, race, gender, political affiliation or ECONOMICAL and SOCIAL CONDITION. Meaning? Education, and I mean ALL education should be free for the people. From kindergarden to the PhD. Access to health and medical assistance should be free, ranging from a cold, a cut to a nutritional consult, a psychological appointment to AIDS, cancer, or any illness in the world... all of them along with the treatment and the medication should be for free for everybody. Maternity leave, sick days, retirement... should ALL be covered by the Government. And this ain't some "she drank too much coke and is hallucinating" kind of speech. This have been existing around the world, so they are very much possible. Oh, and I include up there also the dental stuff.

State provided education and health doesn't have to be poor quality. It becomes poor quality if you LET IT go that way. Pay no bribes, demand enough people working there, go to no private clinics... Start and finish your education in the State universities, and don't go to "easy" schools where you can pay for the diploma, or end medical school in two years instead of six. How can it be that during the 50's and the 60's universal health and state education where the top in quality and now people think of them as the worst it can happen to you? Dude, that's not because the State stuff don't work, but because you let corruption enter. And I won't go there sounding like my Mom and telling you how the corruption is the little "capitalist pig" people have lurking inside (though right now I see her point), so let's leave it like that. (However, ain't that capitalist pig sweet? Oh, I just love it! Made me laugh a lot at the office!)

So, the thing is that "nationalization" and letting the State take care of matters that affect the population has been around for quite a long time. And we have known of what happens in the "wild, wild capitalism" when you take away all restrains and let the burgeoise, the Co.'s and the "Big Private Money" do their bidding. Just in case you have forgotten, please let me refer you to Karl Marx and "Das Kapital" or "The Capital", available in pretty much all languages... as far as I know. It's available since 1867, so it has been around quite some time now. No, no, before you even say so, it is not Socialist Propaganda, and please don't say you don't write stuff written by the Russians or the Soviets, because it is GERMAN. Okay, so stated these facts, I found it utterly amazing to read in the news that this Mr. Gordon Brown, British PM said, and I quote from the CNN

"This is not a time for conventional thinking or outdated dogma, but for the fresh and innovative intervention that gets to the heart of the problem."

(CNN, London, England, "Britain unveils $84B rescue plan".)

Fresh and innovative. Say, I guess if you plan to use slave labour force... LEGAL slave labour force it won't be fresh and innovative anymore, right? C'mon dude! Some common sense here! Don't try to invent the sliced bread. Go back to the books and do things as they are supposed to be done. This ain't no time to go "experimenting" with something that "doesn't look so leftish, specially not so Soviet". It's fucked up, now own it, face it and work on it.

Help Outside, Ignore Inside

The key words for this might be: indifference, lack of priorities, lack of interest in what matters, wish to "make believe". Truth is, this is not a new phenomenon. I'm talking about the case of black people in the US who have AIDS and yet receive less aid than people abroad. It's not really making headlines in the newspapers, though it will work as excellent racist matter for white parents who wish to keep their white kids from "fraternizing" with those "infected monkeys". Oh yeah, racism is still heavy in some of the most developed parts of the world. In the brink of an election where there is a candidate who's said to be black, and really, I would have never known if someone doesn't tell me, and even so, I don't see him black (then again, I don't think Beyoncé or Halle Berry are black...), there are harsh differences made between citizens based on flimsy matters such as skin color.

In an article about the efforts made by the US Government to aid in the fight against AIDS, the reporter mentions that there are more black people in the US with AIDS than in some of the "target nations" the Government is helping. Why is the Goverment spending $19 billion in these people and let their own black citizens struggle? The article says that if they were a separated nation, the US would surely help them, and that the percentage of adults with this virus comes close to that of Uganda. Dude, that sounds bad. Why, oh why is it so? The American black population is at risk with this virus due to the fact that many black men have several sexual partners, and so the percentage of people infected among them is higher. Okay, first of all, why talk about "Black America" and "America"? Let's start with the unavoidable FACT that AMERICA is not a country, but a continent, mainly LATIN, so you are screwed. Then the U.S. is the U.S., same and only to all its citizens. It is, at the same time, rather interesting that different politics have to be issued for different groups of citizens based on the skin color. Does it means that in the US there's a "white law" and a "black law"? Or is it that you are to help the black in detriment of the white? Or the white in detriment of the black? Segregate straights from gays, Republicans from Democrats as if they were not the same? The Government should be one and only for the entire population, helping the poor and establiching the conditions for dignified living for all citizens.

For me, the schism between citizens and the aid they get separated from skin color is just another veil upon a larger fact: the people who elect the Government, and finance it with taxes, is the first neglected. It's not a matter of black or white, but a matter that good American taxes, paid with the working effort of American citizens and residents is shipped abroad to fund wars that give little to non to negative benefits for the taxpayers, and now, on top of that, after education is crumbling into abismal medicrity and there's no "health" or "care" in the taxing American Healthcare, a good chunk of that tax money is spent in other countries, to help people that did not elected the Government and didn't pay the taxes that fund that aid. All Christian values fade here. Hell, one thing is to be a rich country aidng with its excess to poorer countries, but the US has long since been a real "rich country". Wealth is concentrated in a few hands and the large portion of the population is slipping into poverty rather fast. Arrange your home first and then help others later. Stop with this campaign to get the favor of other nations, pretending to be the Big Rescuer and for once, rescue your own people.

E-bay's win a win for customers

My first thought was "fuck, I really should improve my French, because that sounded so wicked". But then, after reading it a tiny bit more carefully, I realized that, no fucking shit, e-bay actually claims that winning this trial against Tiffany's for letting people use the name of the brand on fake jewelry, and not be punished IS a step up for the rights of the customer. Fuck yeah! We are entitled to be taken for fools and cheated with cheap knock-offs in the name of fucking capitalism. Fuck dude, this makes my day! There's a company on the Internet, where trust is vital like air and fragile and expensive like a beautiful Lalique glass pendand, that ensures our right to be sold a lemon, to be tricked, cheated, robbed, misguided and subjects of forgery and fraud. Really, how can I thank them? Oh, I know! I'll never buy from them!!! Geez, that would be awesome, don't you think? ^_^ It would be just great! And since they lost a similar case in France, where those "stick-up-noses" pretend to protect the customer by forcing the enterprise to punish knock off sellers and disclaim faux products,, yet in American soil they where given the right to let their customers be cheated, well... would I buy something pricey or of a good brand from any Internet company? Oh, you can sit and wait for that to happen! Adidas sportswear from Internet? Not in my life time. Out of the cart!!! Lovely Swarowsky glass pendant ring? Give-It-Back! Lalique pendant for Christmas? Hahahahahahahahaha!!! Yeah right.

One case won sets a precedent, which will be brought up over and over and over in each long case, and meanwhile Internet companies, which should be the first ones to ensure the up-most quality and the most precise information (since you can't actually see the product and properly inspect it before purchasing it), let the veil of doubt fall upon their merchandise. It is easy to shake off their responsabilities and say that "the customer should know better", or that it a provider is bad it will eventually disappear because people will notice how bad business is with him or her. Suuuuuuuure! And rumors do not affect the stock market because eventually brokers will realize it was a rumor and they won't listen to it again.

I would like to say that the world, and the market, is not like in the books, so please don't be as stupid as to think that the perfect competition can be made a reality. I know there are a lot of imbecilic people out there, many of them product of purchasing their degrees or grouping up with "the right people" to get a job or get the school projects done instead of studying of Hyne forbid, "working". I mean, yes, I am a 108 Narcissist, but I am not stupid, and all in all my results are perfectly normal (someone as smart and hot as me NORMALLY will turn out to be narcissistic. Or what? Do you EXPECT ME to consider myself equal to my peers and just as STUPID? HA!!). So, I know about morons and imbeciles. I work at the very core of their civilization. Yeah, lazy and ignorant people, like those who think that "maths" have no use, and "history" is a waste of time, or that the "literature and language" class is a bunch of useless crap, and so, are likely to think that "perfect competition" is duable. However, the ones pushing these ideas into people's mind, pretending to have the key to get there, are not necesarily imbeciles, but rather corrupted people who need a smoke screen to ste their crooked business. Open markets so they can have a share of a former public enterprise. Sell State assets so they can get a "bonus" for it. Sure, they are imbeciles but that's not the matter. Their imbecility is shadowed by the smashing magnitude of their corruption. At least in the past, in the Ancient and Medieval times, these corrupts in power claimed to have a Divine Right, but what do these claim to have? The aproval of the people? The people they are squeezing into poverty and death?

World, where are the daughters and sons that once stepped up in France, in America and around the world in revolution for their right to be human?

How Must We Take This?

I'm really at loss. While I was cleaning my closet (and kissing good-bye so many old animé videos!!! ^_^) I put on one of my favorite channels, mainly to keep me distracted when teh work got too heavy or too much to cope at once (and you have no idea how many times that was!!! There was a point where not only I couldn't see the floor, but I wasn't sure about how could I get down of the stool I was standing on and put my foot safely on something without sliding and breaking my head open!). Oh this quite G rated channel, there were A FUCKING LOT of advertisements directed to Americans asking them to donate for different causes. All advertisements brought tears to your eyes. The poor African kids that had to sleep on plastic sheets, the mistreated animals that needed help to be rescued from abusive owners, the poor Polar bears were Mamma Bear and Baby Bear were about to die of hunger and so... and what do they requested from the viewers? Money. Send $X per month and help this or that. Two things struck me:

1. These advertisements seem to tell that Americans believe that money solve all problems, so they can literally "buy" piece of mind by giving money, but not involving themselves with the problem.

2. All these causes are directed to something "foreign" to their actual, human reality. Kids in Africa, polar bears, abused animals... but none of them were requesting help for the poor IN the U.S., the abused kids, the drugaddicts' rehab programs (charity programs and all those that should be ran by the Government), single mothers, orphans... because there are American orphans too, only they are not as fashionable as the Latin and the Asian orphans, or the tiny Russian babies you can let die in the backseat of your car. After all, when you get a little orphan, what's more cool, say that it comes from Alabama, or that it comes from Vietnam? Say it was born with the name "Katie" or the name "Soledad"?

Money is not the solution, not for this problem, and I can't believe how people can't suspected of getting ripped off with a thing like this. Do you really, really think they are going to help those kids? Those animals? When they are making such expensive advertisings? Yeah, right. Like the money from the Teleton's all go to the children's hospital to buy that cardiac-something machine they are using as an excuse for already ten years IN A ROW???

If you want to help, GET INVOLVED! There are things where muscle and will can do more than money.