This year ends, along with many other things.
Hunter becomes a teenager today. Nick works his last day at the hospital. I'm uncertain about many things, like how we will cope. But we will (probably). Nick doesn't do evenings, so we start tonight (since he worked day shift today).
A year ends, a new one begins.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Charity knitting
I knit for myself.
I have no problem knitting acrylic sweaters, scarfs, and mittens for my grandsons, and occasionnaly my children and DIL.
But I have never given anything away to charity. What if they don't like it! I like it, and want to keep it (giving to close family is almost keeping it). I rarely give away anything I have made, for this reason. What if it isn't good enough. What if it is too good. What if it isn't like everybody's else's contribution. What if it is just like everybody else's contribution. What if I never hear back. (I probably wouldn't).
Ah, me.
So I made a fairly lightweight cap from sock yarn. It is really cute. I think I should give it away. It is so cute. I won't wear it. It has to be really cold for me to wear a cap, and then I would want something warmer. No one in the family will wear it (see reason above). Julie is the only one who would wear a hat and this one is too light. Plus I have already knitted her two caps, and a third is on the needles (almost).
So give it to a local yarn shop drive. They are collecting hats for St. Judes Children's Hospital, a great charity. Someone there might like this cap. It is warm. I would cover a bald head. It is pretty. i should give it, shouldn't I?
Stay tuned. I guess I said that before.
I have no problem knitting acrylic sweaters, scarfs, and mittens for my grandsons, and occasionnaly my children and DIL.
But I have never given anything away to charity. What if they don't like it! I like it, and want to keep it (giving to close family is almost keeping it). I rarely give away anything I have made, for this reason. What if it isn't good enough. What if it is too good. What if it isn't like everybody's else's contribution. What if it is just like everybody else's contribution. What if I never hear back. (I probably wouldn't).
Ah, me.
So I made a fairly lightweight cap from sock yarn. It is really cute. I think I should give it away. It is so cute. I won't wear it. It has to be really cold for me to wear a cap, and then I would want something warmer. No one in the family will wear it (see reason above). Julie is the only one who would wear a hat and this one is too light. Plus I have already knitted her two caps, and a third is on the needles (almost).
So give it to a local yarn shop drive. They are collecting hats for St. Judes Children's Hospital, a great charity. Someone there might like this cap. It is warm. I would cover a bald head. It is pretty. i should give it, shouldn't I?
Stay tuned. I guess I said that before.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Social Security
They tell us that social security will run out in 2020 or maybe 2030. I'm planning on needing it after that for a number of years.
Here's the thing with Social Security. It was designed as "Insurance". At the time it started, the average worker lived to be 65. This meant that only half of the original PAYERS were expected to collect. And it was meant to SUPPLEMENT other sources of income/equity that the workers managed to accumulate. Instead, many people promptly started depending on social security as their only income in retirement. Also, people started living longer, and wanting to be independent longer. From the first, many people collected more from social security (often much more) than they had contributed (including interest attributable to their contributions). This was no problem as long as more and more workers were available to contribute to the social security fund. When there are three or five or more workers for every retiree, it is not difficult to fund payments for all retirees.
The situation has and is expected to change dramatically. Baby boomers will retire in great numbers and live longer than their parents and grandparents dreamed of. This will create a situation where only one worker (or fewer) may be available to support each retiree. Yet retirees, even if they have ample other sources of income and equity, are and will be demanding that their benefits are paid as promised. Plans to base social security payments on income, or to tax the benefits, are resisted with great angst. "Don't touch our social security."
Too many payees, getting more benefits than the social security fund can provide in perpetuity, means that at some point THE MONEY WILL RUN OUT. OOPS.
You purchase fire insurance for your home, but if your house never burns down, you don't demand your money back. You get automobile insurance, but you know that if you are never in an auto accident, you will not collect. You are generally glad of this. If your automobile is wrecked, or your house burns down, you will receive in benefits far more than you have contributed, but you would still prefer that your house NOT burn down, your automobile NOT be in an accident. The benefit you might receive comes from the premium payments from those who DO NOT receive benefits. This is how insurance works, a lot of people put some money into a pot, and (unlike gambling) the loser, the one whose house burns down or whose car is wrecked, gets the money. (It is a lot like gambling.)
Remember that social security was designed to be insurance. Lots of people would put money into a pot, and the losers (those whose businesses failed, or who became too sick to work, etc.) would have a little bit to fall back on, and not end up destitute. (There are no poor houses anymore.)
But now people are demanding "MY SHARE" even if they don't need it. They expect to have income from social security to fund not just the bare necessities, but the little luxuries of life also, without having to continue to work after retirement.
Some people point out that if they had invested their social security payments in some certain stocks, they would have enough for a luxurious retirement. However, NOT every investment will return enough to live on, much less enough to live in luxury. PLUS, this is NOT the point of social security.
We MUST decide as a country whether we want a social security INSURANCE program, which will provide a fall back position for those who inadvertently end up broke or unable to work, or whether we want a social security RETIREMENT program, which will return benefits based on what we put into the system, and what choices we make in our investments, and of course, the big unknown, what the economy does in the future. If we want the latter, then we need to change dramatically how we collect and invest social security. If the former, then we need to change (probably also dramatically) how we pay out benefits.
For myself, I would MUCH MUCH rather have a ten percent (Or even, gasp, 20%) decrease in my present benefits, to assure that I will continue receiving a least something throughout my lifetime. If I don't get enough now, I can go back to work. But I don't want to come to depend on social security, only to have it go belly up just as I am getting too old to work.
And NO, I'm not giving it up right now. I worked for it, I'm entitled to it. I just want the country to decide how to manage this elephant we have created so that we can continue to pay out benefits based on rational current actuarial and statistical information, and not depend on future workers to fund this program for current retirees.
Here's the thing with Social Security. It was designed as "Insurance". At the time it started, the average worker lived to be 65. This meant that only half of the original PAYERS were expected to collect. And it was meant to SUPPLEMENT other sources of income/equity that the workers managed to accumulate. Instead, many people promptly started depending on social security as their only income in retirement. Also, people started living longer, and wanting to be independent longer. From the first, many people collected more from social security (often much more) than they had contributed (including interest attributable to their contributions). This was no problem as long as more and more workers were available to contribute to the social security fund. When there are three or five or more workers for every retiree, it is not difficult to fund payments for all retirees.
The situation has and is expected to change dramatically. Baby boomers will retire in great numbers and live longer than their parents and grandparents dreamed of. This will create a situation where only one worker (or fewer) may be available to support each retiree. Yet retirees, even if they have ample other sources of income and equity, are and will be demanding that their benefits are paid as promised. Plans to base social security payments on income, or to tax the benefits, are resisted with great angst. "Don't touch our social security."
Too many payees, getting more benefits than the social security fund can provide in perpetuity, means that at some point THE MONEY WILL RUN OUT. OOPS.
You purchase fire insurance for your home, but if your house never burns down, you don't demand your money back. You get automobile insurance, but you know that if you are never in an auto accident, you will not collect. You are generally glad of this. If your automobile is wrecked, or your house burns down, you will receive in benefits far more than you have contributed, but you would still prefer that your house NOT burn down, your automobile NOT be in an accident. The benefit you might receive comes from the premium payments from those who DO NOT receive benefits. This is how insurance works, a lot of people put some money into a pot, and (unlike gambling) the loser, the one whose house burns down or whose car is wrecked, gets the money. (It is a lot like gambling.)
Remember that social security was designed to be insurance. Lots of people would put money into a pot, and the losers (those whose businesses failed, or who became too sick to work, etc.) would have a little bit to fall back on, and not end up destitute. (There are no poor houses anymore.)
But now people are demanding "MY SHARE" even if they don't need it. They expect to have income from social security to fund not just the bare necessities, but the little luxuries of life also, without having to continue to work after retirement.
Some people point out that if they had invested their social security payments in some certain stocks, they would have enough for a luxurious retirement. However, NOT every investment will return enough to live on, much less enough to live in luxury. PLUS, this is NOT the point of social security.
We MUST decide as a country whether we want a social security INSURANCE program, which will provide a fall back position for those who inadvertently end up broke or unable to work, or whether we want a social security RETIREMENT program, which will return benefits based on what we put into the system, and what choices we make in our investments, and of course, the big unknown, what the economy does in the future. If we want the latter, then we need to change dramatically how we collect and invest social security. If the former, then we need to change (probably also dramatically) how we pay out benefits.
For myself, I would MUCH MUCH rather have a ten percent (Or even, gasp, 20%) decrease in my present benefits, to assure that I will continue receiving a least something throughout my lifetime. If I don't get enough now, I can go back to work. But I don't want to come to depend on social security, only to have it go belly up just as I am getting too old to work.
And NO, I'm not giving it up right now. I worked for it, I'm entitled to it. I just want the country to decide how to manage this elephant we have created so that we can continue to pay out benefits based on rational current actuarial and statistical information, and not depend on future workers to fund this program for current retirees.
Friday, November 7, 2008
a new federal administration
Okay, I'll just come right out and say it. I am so worried about this country of ours, which I love so much.
I read somewhere, some time ago, that the downfall of a democracy is when legislators (or maybe it was people) start voting themselves benefits in excess of the ability of the government to pay. This is what I see happening.
Our national debt is huge and growing. We spend billions of dollars on items such as agriculture support, social security and medicare, and then get all convoluted when we can't afford it. Support for agriculture is selective support for certain crops (I've heard that they even pay farmers to grow tobacco, how weird is that). The idea is the help family farmers and keep agriculture a thriving business. However, the vast (vast) majority of the payments go to megacorporations and wealthy citizens who happen to own "farms", although they aren't out there tilling the soil personnally, you understand.
However, these payments do not, on the whole, really contribute to making agriculture a thriving business. Just look at the USSR (have we forgotten our history already) and how well the cooperative farms and factories worked. Let agriculture thrive because farmers grow what people need and want to eat. Perhaps some insurance is needed in case there is a total disaster (the entire state of California is underwater due to an earthquake and the rest of the country still needs food)(It could happen.), but let's stop rewarding people for poor decisions and sheltering them from the consequences of their own actions.
Social security is another can of worms. But I'll have to tell you later.
I read somewhere, some time ago, that the downfall of a democracy is when legislators (or maybe it was people) start voting themselves benefits in excess of the ability of the government to pay. This is what I see happening.
Our national debt is huge and growing. We spend billions of dollars on items such as agriculture support, social security and medicare, and then get all convoluted when we can't afford it. Support for agriculture is selective support for certain crops (I've heard that they even pay farmers to grow tobacco, how weird is that). The idea is the help family farmers and keep agriculture a thriving business. However, the vast (vast) majority of the payments go to megacorporations and wealthy citizens who happen to own "farms", although they aren't out there tilling the soil personnally, you understand.
However, these payments do not, on the whole, really contribute to making agriculture a thriving business. Just look at the USSR (have we forgotten our history already) and how well the cooperative farms and factories worked. Let agriculture thrive because farmers grow what people need and want to eat. Perhaps some insurance is needed in case there is a total disaster (the entire state of California is underwater due to an earthquake and the rest of the country still needs food)(It could happen.), but let's stop rewarding people for poor decisions and sheltering them from the consequences of their own actions.
Social security is another can of worms. But I'll have to tell you later.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Patriotism
I am glad that this election is over. I am worried about this country. I would be thrilled if we could find a way to cover preventitive medical/dental care for everyone, but I have so many reservations about how to do this, and how to cover everybody, without making medical costs unreasonably expensive, and/or restricting the availability of good medical care, and the innovation and invention which depends a lot on capitalism. I would also like to make sure that medical decisions, including the abortion issue, remain entirely the province of the "patient" and the medical practicioners, and not become a subject of legislation.
I am also so entirely sick of the negative ad campaigns that I am thrilled that we can go back to regular advertising on tv.
I am also so entirely sick of the negative ad campaigns that I am thrilled that we can go back to regular advertising on tv.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
I keep thinking
But I don't always take the time to write it down. And then I don't always think I should just put it out there for anyone to read, not that anyone is.
I finished the citrus socks, a trial fingerless mitt and started the second (real) one, and am working on the challenge quilt which was not done yesterday and therefore will not be in the quilt show. I don't mind, it is turning out the way I want it too, so will have it together someday.
This Month (October 2008) is turning out to be verrrrry busy, with lots of scheduled events. Which means fun, but less time to work on projects.
My priorty for housework this week is decluttering. I have so much junk, I am to the point where it is tipping over and hitting me on the head (figuratively of course, I'm not really in danger, just overwhelmed). For instance, I brought my walking stuff (waist pack, pouch, hat, bandana, visor, etc.) home from the motor home, and haven't found a home for them, so they are cluttering up the kitchen table.
The waist pack contains my "port-a-john" (I forget what they call it and don't want to interrupt this train of thought to go check) which I intend to practice with here in the privacy of my own home, and when I tried to use it, it was a disaster. So I should take that out, put it in the bathroom, and store the rest of the stuff where it will be out of the way, but easily accessible for next Saturday. Perhaps the front closet. What a novel thought, out of the way, door closable, but easily accessible. Deep sigh.
I finished the citrus socks, a trial fingerless mitt and started the second (real) one, and am working on the challenge quilt which was not done yesterday and therefore will not be in the quilt show. I don't mind, it is turning out the way I want it too, so will have it together someday.
This Month (October 2008) is turning out to be verrrrry busy, with lots of scheduled events. Which means fun, but less time to work on projects.
My priorty for housework this week is decluttering. I have so much junk, I am to the point where it is tipping over and hitting me on the head (figuratively of course, I'm not really in danger, just overwhelmed). For instance, I brought my walking stuff (waist pack, pouch, hat, bandana, visor, etc.) home from the motor home, and haven't found a home for them, so they are cluttering up the kitchen table.
The waist pack contains my "port-a-john" (I forget what they call it and don't want to interrupt this train of thought to go check) which I intend to practice with here in the privacy of my own home, and when I tried to use it, it was a disaster. So I should take that out, put it in the bathroom, and store the rest of the stuff where it will be out of the way, but easily accessible for next Saturday. Perhaps the front closet. What a novel thought, out of the way, door closable, but easily accessible. Deep sigh.
Friday, August 29, 2008
What am I doing here?
DH just home from work. I have been indoors all day. Knitting, made a quilt square, reading on-line stuff and listening to podcasts. Is that busy, or just wasteful?
PS I see that I have previously posted three times, yet I only see two items. Why is that? I know I'm techno challenged, but I can count, can't I?
PPS Okay I found out what I had done, and it wasn't what I thought I was doing. It was when I accidently started this blog. But I just deleted that post, so with this one, I'm back to three posts, showing three posts. I can count.
Accidental Blogger/knitter
PS I see that I have previously posted three times, yet I only see two items. Why is that? I know I'm techno challenged, but I can count, can't I?
PPS Okay I found out what I had done, and it wasn't what I thought I was doing. It was when I accidently started this blog. But I just deleted that post, so with this one, I'm back to three posts, showing three posts. I can count.
Accidental Blogger/knitter
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
technochallenged
I'm trying to show DH my blog and nothing. Then I find out, I have to push this "Publish Post" button to get it to show.
Learning something every day.
School finance, parenting, american dreams, I have lots of threads I want to pursue. Can I get them all down (out of my brain and into print?)?
Learning something every day.
School finance, parenting, american dreams, I have lots of threads I want to pursue. Can I get them all down (out of my brain and into print?)?
Thursday, July 24, 2008
July
So now I'm listening to podcasts and I realize, I don't have to write a book. I can just make a blog. Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)