• A new reality

    Have you had one of those moments in your life when you felt you had rounded a corner, and you suspected you’d never see the other side again? I saw my doctor this week – Wednesday in fact – and she told me she thought I might have Leukemia.

    “But my cholesterol is o.k., right?”

    I was in to discuss the results of a routine blood test – part of my routine maintenance program. I had spent the better part of two weeks worrying about my cholesterol. I was sure it was going to be bad. It (the cholesterol) wasn’t.

    My doctor spent five minutes talking about neutrophils, monocytes, red blood cells, and platelets. I was sitting there, stupidly thinking about my diet.

    It just wasn’t real. It still isn’t real. Sure, I feel tired… but I don’t feel like I have Leukemia. At least, I don’t think I do.

    Well fuck me.

  • Exploit

    There are a couple different shades of meaning to the word “exploit,” but when you say it angrily, you rarely mean it in a good way.

    As the dictionary might say:

    Use (a situation or person) in an unfair or selfish way.

    The “e” word has been tossed around today in connection with calls for tighter restrictions on handguns; and to be honest, I wasn’t crazy about the timing… in light of the all-too recent events in Virginia. But “exploitation?” How is it unfair or selfish? Was a gun involved? Can an honest argument be made that the tragedy could have been avoided with tighter regulation of handgun sales? How many of the victims (or their family and friends) would make the same arguments? Was it exploitation (in the bad sense, as defined above) to use 9/11 as an argument for tighter airport security? Is it exploitation to point to outbreaks of salmonella as evidence of greater need to inspect the food supply?

    As I said, the only objection I have is the timing. It’s always safer to debate issues when people are less emotional. Having said that, if debating gun control now is “exploitation,” then the same should be said of the 107th Congress… when they introduced the Patriot Act on October 2, 2001.

  • With Herbert Hoover as my witness

    Taxes are on some folk’s minds… not many, given the events in Virginia, Washington, and the middle east… but they’re on some folks minds.

    According to the Hoover Institution, the share of income taxes paid by the top 5% of wage earners in the U.S. has gone up from 35% in 1980, to 58% in 2004.

    It sure makes me glad I’m not in the top 5%! There’s no telling what that kind of crushing inequality might drive me to do. Hell, I might go out and blow good money on real estate investments.

    Ah, but wait. Maybe la creme de la creme don’t have it so bad. According to a looksie at IRS data, the percent of all income reported which was earned by the top 1% of wage earners doubled from 1980 to 2004. In 1980, the top 1% of income earners earned approximately 10% of all income earned in the U.S. In 2004 they earned approximately 20% of all income.

    Although I haven’t matched my tax brackets perfectly (you can never find the perfect study on Google when you need to), the Hoover numbers sound pretty fair to me. Even under a flat tax (insert gnashing teeth here), if you double your share of the wealth you’re going to double your share of the tax burden.

    Looks like you poor rich folk are just gonna have to suck it up and pay… that or increase your campaign contributions.