 
### Table of Contents

Title Page

Dedication

Introduction

Chapter 1 - Politics & Public Service

Political Parties

Governmental Gridlock

Filibusters

Riders on Legislation

Party Platforms

Electoral College System

Designated Human Electors

Resistence to Compromise

Negative Campaigning

Cyber Vulnerability

Gerrymandering

Early Primaries & Caucuses

Minimum Qualifications

Tax Refund Scams

Presidential Pardoning Powers

Unrelated Fees & Tolls

No Stake in the Game

Diplomatic Immunity

Unabated Fabrication

Chapter 2 - Commercial & Banking

Identity Theft

Opt Out Provisions

Sharing Confidential Information

Paralyzing Policies & Procedures

Over Booking

Effort not Results

Taking the Easy Way Out

Calculated Deception

Mortgage Madness & Mayhem

Non-Supportive Support

No Risk Subtrerfuge

Developer Deseption

Unavoidable & Undesirable Conditions

Knee Jerk Price Hikes

Price Gouging

Charges for Nothing

Disloyalty Bonuses

Markdowns, Testimonials & Claims

Automated Answering Machines

Out of Control Computer Systems

Wide Turns

Packaging and Labeling

Unrequested & Unrelenting Software

Consolidation

Centralization

Chapter 3 - Social & Personal Behavior

Cultural Diversity

Displaced Aggression

Rights over Logic

Road Rage

Looting

Body Count Bravado

Resistence to Change

Propensity to Change

Stupid Actions Requiring Rescue

Molehills to Mountains

Dumbing it Down

Chapter 4 - Legal & Litigation

Class Action Suits

Spurious Litigation

Mental Competence

Inadmissable Evidence

Unessary Efforts & Expense

Capital Punishment

Aiding & Abetting Crime

Peremptory Challenges

Professional Ties to Legislators

Collateral Minutia

Chapter 5 - Journalism & Media

Sensationalism

Insensitivity

Biased Reporting

Retractions

Volume Control

Chapter 6 - The Good News

Vehicles

Retail Shopping

Technology

Health Care

Racial Discrimination

Safety

Commerce & Manufacturing

Information & Knowledge

Chapter 7 - Common Threads

Immediate Gratification

Going to Extremes

Going Nuclear

Deception by Omission

Process vs. Product

Mediocrity

Single Issue Focus

Copy Catnip

Stuck in the Mud

Doing Something

Conclusion

Books by Terry Eade

#

# Random Rants

# for Rational

# Reflection

# Terry Eade

Copyright 2017 Terry Eade

Smashwords Edition

ISBN 9781370947768

# Dedication

Rather than dedicate this book to an individual, I would like to dedicate it to a quest. That quest is to leave this world a little better than we found it. Some of us believe that for the privilege of living on this planet, we have an obligation to make that life count by making a contribution that will live on after we have departed. Perhaps the longer we have lived, and the fuller our life, the greater that obligation becomes. Since I've had a relatively long life and been blessed with opportunity and good fortune, my obligation exceeds the modest contributions I have made so far.

Some people have the good fortune to positively impact large numbers of people and made contributions, which are both widespread and long lasting. Most of us fall far short of that distinction. However, each of us has an opportunity to make some contribution within a small geographic location and sphere of influence. I hope that those I have dealt with in my family, associations, and professional life have been positively impacted, especially those who I've had the privilege to lead or taught in classes and seminars. However, in my case, I would like to have a larger impact than possible with the individuals and groups I've had the opportunity to connect with directly.

The focus of this book is to identify perplexing practices and offer a suggestion on how the situation could be improved. If even one of these situations is improved, because of this book, it will have been worth the effort. I am also counting on others who want to fulfill their obligation to society to make those efforts, within their areas of influence, to actually initiate and facilitate changes that will benefit us all.

# Introduction

Have you ever been bewildered by, angered about, or frustrated with the way things were done by government, businesses, the legal system, the media, or just society in general? If so you have something in common with the author. Some of these things are just holdovers of practices, which continue to govern the way we do things and no longer make sense. Other problems are the result of the way a small group, or powerful entity, control practices, that do not seem appropriate to the majority of us.

Many of our problems are caused by the rigid nature of individuals and groups, who refuse to listen to, or compromise with, those who hold a different opinion. Another reason for these inappropriate practices, is that the company or agency charged with dealing with the problem takes the easy way out and neither provides justice nor precludes the problem from happening again. There are also those practices which are brought about by our desire for immediate gratification over long term results. This book will look at some of these problems and potential ways of dealing with them.

I hope you will find this book interesting, enlightening and entertaining. Writing this book has certainly been therapeutic for the author, who is bewildered by the things, which are covered in the book. Putting these thoughts down in writing forces me to coalesce these random thoughts and put them in some form of semi-cogent prose. It also forces me to consider how we could eliminate these problems or at least make them more palatable.

Even though the topics included in this book have been entitled rants, they are really just critical observations presented in a non-emotional and often humorous manner. Also most of the topics covered in this book are really not the big controversial subjects over which people get extremely emotional. Rather they are the everyday annoyances on which I believe at least 80% to 90% of the population would agree with my assessment and recommendation on any particular rant. The 10% to 20% who would probably disagree are those who are profiting or benefiting by keeping the way things are currently done.

Obviously the viewpoints and biases stated herein are my own and are only substantiated by the limited information and familiarity I have available on these subjects. I also make no apologies about not researching, addressing, or documenting these matters in an academic fashion. At seventy-five years of age I have neither the time nor the inclination to do otherwise. Addressing this information in an academic fashion with references, caveats, and footnotes would also make the book very long, tedious, and extremely boring. The sections in this book are a random selection of practices that impact us all and yet seem to defy common sense. They have been segmented into chapters according to major categories, so that there is some semblance of order and focus. Beyond this, the subjects addressed are neither exhaustive nor addressed in order of importance.

I am basically a centrist and as such have neither left nor right leanings on most subjects. If I do lean one way on a particular subject, it will be a modest lean and I will probably lean the other way on the next subject. Most of my recommendations are an attempt to find some middle ground where everyone's major needs are met without unduly infringing on another group. Thus, I will no doubt alienate both those with political viewpoints on the extreme liberal left and extreme reactionary right by the opinions proffered herein. Since a growing segment of the population is gravitating toward one of these two extremes and becoming vehemently polarized in their viewpoints, the readership of this book should fit comfortably in the waiting room of an unpopular dentist. Also if you are a politician, bureaucrat, business executive, banker, journalist, or lawyer, you might get your feathers ruffled by some of the rants and recommendations

Examples are provided to support the individual rants, however, the narratives have been kept short and to the point. I have also included a recommendation to address (or partially address) each rant in an effort to be constructive. Although it would be rare for you to agree with all my rants and recommendations, hopefully you will find several on which we are in agreement.

So that you don't think I am a total curmudgeon, there is a chapter identifying those things, which I believe have changed for the better over the course of my life. I also believe that our lives in general are much better than they were in the past and my rants and recommendations are just suggestions on how we could tune things up to make our lives even better in the future.

So who is Terry Eade and why did he write this book? By day he is the mild mannered John Q. Public, indistinguishable from any of the millions of other denizens of Ameropolis. However, when the need arises, he steps into a phone booth and emerges as Candorman, wielding his mighty pen against the hordes of bureaucrats, oppressors, and obstructionists to save the day.

You already know how the powerful and influential people feel about things, but how about the guy down the block or the ones you pass everyday on the street. I believe I am much more in touch with the general public than most of those powerful and influential folks. I would also venture to say that I am more in touch with your opinions and values than the folks who are making the decisions, which impact you every day.

I am also an individual who is not looking for you to join my group, support my cause, make a donation, vote for me, or even be my friend. I am writing this book to try and make some contribution to my country and fellow citizens, while I still have the ability. While the rants and recommendations are directed at the United States, Many of the political, commercial, social, legal, and journalistic situations addressed are common to other countries as well. I am interested in your opinions, recommendations, and feedback, which you can send to me at rr4rrbook@gmail.com.

For those who do want to read this book, or recommend it to someone else, it is available to download in ePub format (for nooks, tablets, smartphones, and computers) at Barnes & Noble and the Apple iBook Store. It is also available in Kindle format at Amazon.com. Just go to any of those sites and type "Terry Eade" into the search window.

# Chapter 1

# Politics & Public Service

The rants included in this chapter are directed at the way our political system is structured and operated. It also addresses the way our public services are prioritized, organized and provided. Although many of these practices have been in effect for some time, it seems proficious for us to revisit the original concept and see if it makes sense in light of the current situation.

Even though we live in a democratic society we sometimes think that those elected and appointed leaders at the national, state, county, and municipal levels are our superiors and able to dictate the way things are done. Part of this is engendered by their elevated accoutrements, special privileges, and the awe we afford them when we see them in person, on television, or in a parade. Even though those in the legislative branch are empowered to create the laws, those in the judicial branch to adjudicate the laws, and those in the executive branch to enforce the laws, they are really just employees we have chosen to do these tasks and they are ultimately accountable to the voters and taxpayers who keep them in their positions. If we as citizens allow them to exceed their authority, retaliate against those who disagree with them, use the power of their position to stay in power, and give preference to special interests, lobbyists, and large donors, then we have abrogated our inalienable rights promised by the Constitution.

# Political Parties

##### The Rant

Neither being a politician, nor aspiring to be one, I can only respond to this topic as a private citizen and a taxpayer. As such, my first gripe is about political parties. I do not align myself or identify with any particular political party. When I vote for a candidate, I usually pick the one with the shortest criminal record, most relevant experience, and most logical viewpoints, regardless of party.

In the United States, the only viable political parties we have are the Republicans and the Democrats. Perhaps it would be more forthcoming if these parties changed their designations to the Hatfields and the McCoys. After all, most of their energies are directed at doing battle with each other and increasing the size of their respective power. In this regard, they don't set their goals any higher than even the most basic living organisms, which is to survive, expand their territory, and repopulate their species.

While I don't fault them for being loyal to the members of their own party and trying to be reelected, I do resent the fact that this priority overrides all other interests and endeavors. We taxpayers pay them to facilitate and enhance our inalienable rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, not pursue a red and blue chess game at the expense of solving those problems faced by the people who elected them and pick up the tab for their salaries, the salaries of their staff, and provide them with all the facilities & accoutrements commensurate with their lofty positions.

Anyone who thinks our elected representatives do not vote almost exclusively along party lines on every issue, rather than the best interests of their country and constituency, is quite naive. This lemming like behavior of our congressional brethren is understandable, as the penalty for not doing so is to lose the sponsorship of their party when it comes time for reelection. This would end their political career and insure, by example, that their replacement never consider straying from the herd.

It doesn't matter how dire the problem or vital the contribution, if the solution is from the opposite party it must be ridiculed, rejected, and disparaged at all costs. Thus, if the Republicans come up with a responsible way to cut taxes and balance the budget or the Democrats come up with an environmentally sound and inexpensive source of renewable energy, the other party will fight them tooth and nail, because of the seats they might lose in the House, Senate, Supreme Court, White House, or gubernatorial mansions across the country, as the result of the success of the other party's contribution.

Even if the party does not have the votes or veto power to derail the proposal, it will use its minority status to delay, complicate, and impugn the value of the contribution. If all else fails it can use the time wasting filibuster approach to keep the issue from coming to a vote. Thus, if the party does not have the power to advance its own agenda, it will concentrate its energy on thwarting the efforts of the party in power. This is neither a new problem, nor one that was not anticipated. As our second president, John Adams, observed: "There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."

By keeping things in turmoil, and making sure nothing substantial gets accomplished, the minority party actually improves its chances of gaining power in the next election. It improves its viability by pointing at the lack of progress and accomplishment by the party in power. Of course, once the minority party becomes the majority party, the new minority party sets out to do the same thing and the cycle is continued. This ensures that very little of substance will ever be accomplished, regardless of which party is in power or how the power is split. Even if some legislation or executive order was put in place despite the best defenses of the minority party, they will attempt to reverse this progress as soon as their party becomes the majority.

Where else can an employee earn a nice salary and be rewarded for screwing things up and keeping the wheels of progress from turning? The term "loyal opposition" is the biggest oxymoron ever devised. I agree with Will Rogers when he said: "The more you observe politics, the more you've got to admit that each party is worse than the other."

##### The Recommendation

Eliminate political parties and let candidates run for election on their own merit. This way they can represent the constituency that elects them without any influence from a national party. We have moved closer to that model in the state of Washington. In the past voters needed to identify themselves as belonging to a particular political party if they wanted to have any input on those candidates running in the primary elections. Then they could only vote on those candidates advanced by that party. For those of us who were not aligned with any party and still wanted to have input on the final two candidates placed on the ballot to make sure that the best two candidates would face off in the main election regardless of party, this was a real problem. As a result, all registered voters can now vote in the primary election for the candidate of their choice and select a Republican (or any other recognized party) for one position and a Democrat (or any other recognized party) for another position. The new arrangement also advances the two candidates with the highest vote totals in the primary election to run against each other in the general election, even if they are both from the same party.

If we eliminated political parties at the national level, every piece of legislation introduced would be given a fair and unbiased evaluation, since it would not be tainted (positively or negatively) by the party that brought it to the floor. A good example of this would be the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) put into effect by the Democrats under President Obama. This program was severely criticized by the Republicans even though it was patterned after the Rommneycare program implemented in Massachusetts in 2006 by then Republican Governor Mitt Romney, who became the 2012 Republican presidential candidate running against Obama.

There would still be committees on various subjects, but the membership would be comprised of those with special interest and expertise on the subject without having to balance a committee by party affiliation. You would also have caucuses, but they would be formed by those for or against a particular issue or piece of legislation, and there would be no stigma or reprisal for colluding or voting with those across the aisle. In fact, the aisle would cease to be a dividing line between the waring Hatfields and McCoys and legislators could be seated randomly. If legislators were seated randomly each time they convened (identifying their seat by a key card) they would more likely associate with a wider range of colleagues and not always be flanked by the same cronies.

There would still be a speaker of the house, but that individual would be selected by, represent, and preside over the entire legislative body, without any party bias or disposition toward other representatives, the other legislative body, the supreme court, or the president. These principles would prevail for both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Eliminating political parties would also require people to evaluate the candidate's qualifications and objectives rather than just blindly vote a straight party line. Eliminating the Hatfields and McCoys stigma would also help to unify the increasingly polarized citizenry who feel compelled to side with one of these tribes and completely debase the value and motives of the other.

# Governmental Gridlock

##### The Rant

The problem stated previous section addresses the turmoil and unproductive situation that exists if one party is in power with the other party trying to keep anything productive from being accomplished. It is even worse if the power is diffused by having the various components of the government controlled by, or under the influence of, different parties. Here the parties are able to legally and directly thwart the actions of the opposition party and create a total stalemate.

##### The Recommendation

Even if we are not able to eliminate political parties, we should attempt to eliminate this problem by adopting a political system like the one used in Great Britain that insures that the prime minster and the House of Commons are controlled by the same political party. That system lets the House of Commons select a prime minister that aligns with the controlling party or controlling coalition. A similar model is used in Canada.

# Filibusters

##### The Rant

The filibuster is perhaps one of the most useless and detrimental aspect of our government operation. It allows a minority party or position to block the operation of the Senate and precludes them from conducting any business until the party who has the floor collapses from exhaustion. So by reading names from a phone book or the text of a book, the person with the floor precludes the entire legislative body from conducting any business.

If you owned a business and had an employee who shut down your operation for a protracted period of time, while they read meaningless information from a book you would probably fire that employee. That is because they are not only being unproductive themselves they also preclude every other employee from doing their job.

Well if you are a citizen and a taxpayer, these senators are your employees and they are not only wasting their own time but everyone else as well. Our government is based on majority rule and that is why this governmental body should proceed with the business at hand without being held hostage by some individual or group, which does not want the majority to conduct business. This is a gross misuse of parliamentary rules of order.

##### The Recommendation

Outlaw the filibuster and let the Senate Majority Leader rule a representative out-of-order and require them to relinquish the floor, if they stray from the subject under consideration or spend a protracted period of time to state their point. If the party ruled out-of-order wants to challenge the ruling it may be put to a vote of the entire legislative body and decided by a simple majority vote. As it is now, it takes 60% of the senate to evoke "closure" and end the filibuster. I am also recommending that this action be taken by the Senate Majority Leader rather than the President of the Senate since the majority leader represents the majority party in the Senate, while the President of the Senate is the Vice President of the United States and may align politically with the minority party in the Senate, which is trying to delay a vote on an issue.

# Riders on Legislation

##### The Rant

The term "rider" is quite appropriate for this kind of provision as it gets a free ride on the primary legislative bill rather than having to pass on its own merit. Thus, if a legislator wants to get a bill passed that probably won't get through they can just tack it on a piece of legislation, which will probably pass. So legislator "A" agrees to vote for the primary legislation if the sponsoring legislator "B" puts legislator A's rider provision on the bill. In this way legislator "A" may be able to get the rider approved along with the primary bill. This also helps legislator "B" get enough votes for their primary legislation. To further complicate the mater, numerous riders may be attached to a single piece of primary legislation.

Of course this results in the approval of items, which would not be approved on their own merit. So if you want my support on your primary legislation you will need to include my rider on your bill. A large number of pork barrel provisions get approved in this manner. This also becomes embarrassing to a legislator who is brought to task for approving a piece of legislation, on which they only voted for to get the primary bill passed.

##### The Recommendation

Disallow riders and require all bills pass muster on their own merit. This may not end vote swapping, but at least it would require all legislators to vote on each bill independently rather than sneaking them through on the back of more vital legislation.

# Party Platforms

##### The Rant

A party platform is basically a listing of a particular party's position on various issues. Via its platform, the party is saying that if you elect our candidates, these are the positions they will take on the bills they sponsor and support. However, you need to take the package deal.

Thus, if you like the position the Republicans take on foreign affairs, but dislike their position on domestic issues you are out of luck. If you like the position the Democrats take on domestic issues, but dislike their position of foreign affairs you are also out of luck. Since the parties will take diametrically different approaches to how they deal with foreign policy, taxation, trade, social programs, states rights, gun control, immigration, and a host of other issues you must take the exact mix of what is offered by each party and not be able to deviate from some amalgamated hodgepodge, which is caste in stone like the Ten Commandments.

For those of us who would like to pick and choose how we feel our government should deal with these totally separate issues and elect representatives who more closely represent our values, we are out of luck. That is because the candidates are also stuck with their party's platform and voting for a candidate not aligned with one of the two major parties is a wasted effort.

This is much the same packaging arrangement that some automakers take with the extra cost accessories they market on their cars. If you want the $500 GPS navigation system, but not the $600 DVD players for the rear seat passengers and the $900 upgraded 16 speaker sound system, you may be out of luck as they are only offered together under the $2,000 premium audio-video accessory package.

##### The Recommendation

In conjunction with the recommendation about abolishing political parties, let each candidate identify their own approach to each of the major issues. This way the voters can choose the candidate that best represents their own views on these issues.

# Electoral College System

##### The Rant

The electoral college system of electing a president is a hold over from the days when designated individuals (electors) would need to take the results from a statewide election and represent them in a national assembly. In all states except Nebraska and Maine, the candidate winning the majority of the votes in that state get all of the electoral college votes designated for that state.

The number of electoral college votes assigned to a state is equal to the number of senators and representatives that state sends to Washington, D.C. While the number of representatives is based on the population of the state, every state gets two senators and one representative regardless of the population of that stare.

So the first problem is that this favors small states, like Vermont and Wyoming, who each get a minimum of three electoral college votes regardless of the population of that state. To put that in prospective, a voter in Vermont gets 2.50 votes, a voter in Wyoming gets 2.87 votes while voters in Ohio and Pennsylvania only get a 0.85 vote. The only state where a voter gets a 1.00 vote is Kentucky.

The second problem is that because all of the electoral college votes for a state go to one candidate, even if they only win that state by one vote, it drastically distorts the number of citizens voting for each candidate. So California's 55 electoral college votes go to a single candidate whether every voter in California votes for that candidate or if the candidate only wins by a single vote. This is even more deceptive in those swing states, where close votes are more common and grossly distorts the actual number of citizens voting for a presidential candidate.

This unfairly diminishes the power of some voters and unfairly elevates the power of others. If I am a Republican in California or a Democrat in Texas, my vote will not likely make any difference, because California is consistently democratic and Texas is consistently republican. If, however, I am a resident of one of the traditional seven "swing or battlefield" states, which may go either way, my vote is very important and might well determine the outcome of the election.

Remember the number of recounts and hanging chad disputes in Florida during the 2000 presidential election? Perhaps we could have saved all the cost and efforts of a national election and just let the voters in Florida select our president. So in reality, some votes count while other don't. As it was, Florida selected the candidate who would have lost the election if it were based on popular votes rather than an electoral college system. So far we have had five elections where a candidate was elected president even though more citizens voted for their opponent.

The third problem is that candidates pander to the voters in those swing or battlefield states giving them much more attention and consideration. This also results in campaign promises, which are more important to the voters of that state than they are to the population as a whole. This can also influence the actions of a sitting president who is planning to run for a second term and wants to appeal specifically to those voters in swing states.

##### The Recommendation

The technology now exists where we can see a tabulation of popular votes as soon as they are counted in every electoral precinct across the nation. Thus, we already have a system which quickly, easily, and accurately aggregates the votes of every registered voter in the country. In fact the news media provide up to the minute popular vote totals as voting precincts report them. Thus, there is no logical basis for continuing to use an electoral college system, which is outmoded, unnecessary, and prejudicial.

# Designated Human Electors

##### The Rant

In the previous section we looked at the problems associated with continuing the electoral college system of electing a president and the simple solution to address these shortcomings. An even more arcane, outdated, and totally unnecessary practice is the actual assignment of each electoral college vote to an individual elector.

These 538 individuals are suppose to take the electoral college vote they represent to a national assembly and cast their vote just like they did back in the horse-and-buggy days when this was the only way to consolidate these votes. While the presidential election takes place in early November, the actual voting by these electors does not take place until December. Theoretically these electors are not even bound to vote the way their state's election went.

##### The Recommendation

Eliminate the practice of having individuals designated as electors and having a separate election a month after the actual election.

# Resistance to Compromise

##### The Rant

This rant is where political parties, groups, and individuals are unwilling to compromise with those who have different priorities and values. Here the individual or group is so unyielding in their position that they refuse to compromise even if it means that nothing will get done or that their refusal to cooperate hampers their own interests as well as those of the opposition.

On a recent weekly political commentary program, they revealed that the overlap, where Republicans and Democrats vote with the other party, was shrinking. They pointed out that in 2002 the number of members in the House of Representatives who fell into this overlap was 137 and by 2013 that number had shrunk to just 4. In the Senate that number had shrunk from 7 to 0 over the same period.

This approach by politicians is in many cases a reflection of what they feel their party or constituency wants them to do. In fact many times a politician will state their unwillingness to compromise as a part of their platform. Not only do our political representatives refuse to compromise with those from the other party, they sometimes refuse to compromise with other factions within the same party.

Most of the time, a politician's refusal to compromise comes from a small segment of their constituency, who are so ardent in their beliefs, they don't want to even discus some compromise or deviation from the extreme position. This subject is explored further for all segments of society in the _Common Threads_ chapter of this book.

##### The Recommendation

Let our politicians know that the majority of us know that if our representatives do not compromise, nothing is likely to get done. Thus, even though we would like to see our favored addenda put forward without modification, that movement toward that goal is better than no movement at all.

# Negative Campaigning

##### The Rant

Here candidates for public office concentrate on demeaning and demonizing their opponent rather than focus on their own qualifications, record, and platform. This problem has become increasingly endemic at all levels of government and for all types of elected positions. The concept is to convince your constituency that your opponent is more, incompetent, immoral, unscrupulous, dishonest, and dangerous than you are.

Those few candidates who initially try and run a positive campaign and talk about their own qualifications and platform soon realize that they are at a significant disadvantage to an opponent who uses negative campaign methods. So the politician who tries to be positive ends up either digressing to the mud slinging methods of the opposition candidate or simply just losing the election because of the real or fallacious image of them created by the negative slurs of their opponent.

Of course, the accusation does not have to be true to do the damage to a candidates reputation. The mere assertion will lead voters to consider that "where there is smoke there is fire." Even if the candidate under fire is able to refute the accusation, it may be to late to impact the election. Voters may also doubt the validity of the evidence clearing the candidate of wrongdoing, because the evidence may be considered biased, as it is usually being provided by the candidate under fire or their support group. Also telling a voter to disregard the accusation is like a judge telling a jury to disregard a statement made by a lawyer and then ruled out-of-order. You cannot effectively "unhear" something and telling people to disregard an incriminating accusation is like trying to put the poop back in the goose. This is also why many capable people decide not to pursue public office.

Another negative result is that after all the mud has been slung in both directions, most voters don't want either candidate in the office being sought. So the voters either don't vote at all or just vote for the lesser of two evils. The result is that the new office holder has a very low approval rating and, as a consequence, finds it more difficult to be successful in the office to which they were elected. As the syndicated columnist, author, and political commentator Charles Krauthammer observed: "Every two years the American politics industry fills the airwaves with the most virulent, scurrilous, wall-to-wall character assassination of nearly every political practitioner in the country - and then declares itself puzzled that America has lost trust in its politicians."

##### The Recommendation

Have independent entities observe and rate candidates on the tenor of their campaign. Somehow convince the press and other media to take issue with the negative campaign tactics rather than fanning the flames to get readers or viewers. This could be accomplished circuitously by having advertisers inform these media sources that they would pull adds from those who fanned the flames and perpetuated unsubstantiated rumors and accusations. Also convince those agencies who endorse candidates to withhold endorsement of any candidate who uses these negative campaign techniques.

However, the process has to start with those of us who are sick and tired of having all of the dirty tricks and mud slinging and refuse to vote for anyone who does so. This will change the way campaigns are run very quickly as candidates end up losing votes and elections by dirty politics.

# Cyber Vulnerability

##### The Rant

Although this rant applies to commercial activities, financial institutions, and utilities as well as government agencies, the responsibility to protect the nation from those internet intrusions that threaten our national security rests squarely on the shoulders of our federal government. One of the prime responsibilities of our federal government is to protect us from all enemies foreign and domestic. In the past these threats were primarily manifest in the physical world. Now cyber warfare is as real of a threat to our national security as is a conventional or nuclear attack. Of course it is much easier and cheaper to shut down our nation's power grid, financial institutions, communication centers, transportation facilities, and military bases with a cyber attack than it is to send bombers or missiles to achieve the same results.

It also takes much less sophisticated enemies than those who have the military capabilities to pose a significant threat. Just one skilled hacker with a computer and an internet connection is all that is required to launch a crippling attack on any of our vital national resources. It is also much easier for an adversarial nation or terrorist group to glean top secret intelligence, planning, and weapons information by just breaking into the right data bases than it would be to send spies or assault groups to break into highly secure physical facilities like the CIA headquarters, the Pentagon, or a defense contractor to gain the same information.

Our cyber vulnerability also puts individual citizens at risk as well. When a laptop computer is stolen from the car or house of a Veterans Administration employee, confidential records about millions of veterans are now available to anyone on the dark web. Likewise secure records about those individuals in covert, undercover, and witness protection programs are just a hack away from those who would do these people harm. When you consider all of the information in government data bases from the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, DARPA, USSS, USMS, USN, USAF, USA, USMC, USCG, IRS, CDC and countless others, it becomes very obvious that what we think of as secure, sensitive information is readily available to those who know how to break the necessary codes and passwords.

Why it is necessary for us to let employees, and even top officials, copy sensitive information to laptop computers or access vital information or control mechanisms from locations outside of secure physical locations? Is the convenience of having an employee able to control the functioning of vital resources from their home computer worth the risk of giving a hacker, or a foreign advisory, the same power from anywhere on the globe? If I were a criminal, or an enemy agent, I would not even need to be a sophisticated hacker to achieve this power. Under those circumstances I could just invade the home of the employee, hold a gun to their head (or the head of a loved one) and make them enter the necessary codes, passwords, and commands from their home computer to achieve my evil scenario.

##### The Recommendation

Require that any control or information that could threaten our national security be accessible from only within a facility with adequate physical, electronic, and guarded security. This system should neither be connected to nor accessible from the internet. Thus, the hacker would not only need the necessary codes and passwords to effect the damage, they would need to have them before they mounted a successful intrusion into a protected facility where such a command could be executed. As it is now, they can spend as much time as they like to try and breach the security of a server from a rented apartment halfway around the globe.

As an added measure of protection, employees guarding the facility should be able to disable the internal system's deviation from its normal settings and restrict an intruder's ability to make any changes, if they thought a successful breach of the physical facility was underway. I would also suggest that any computers having access to highly sensitive information inside secure facilities have the bluetooth capability as well as the USB ports and DVD/CD drives disabled so that neither employees nor intruders be able to copy this sensitive information onto laptop computers, portable hard drives, thumb drives, DVD/CDs, or smart phones to take off the premises. The internal system should also have recognition capabilities (such as retinal scanning) to insure that only those employees within the facility with proper authority and clearance can access the sensitive information and control resources.

Another suggestion would be to levy cyber sanctions against those nations that conduct, enable, or tolerate cyber crimes, attacks, and scams, which originate within their borders. We now levy economic sanctions against nations who take aggressive acts, are developing nuclear weapons, or support terrorism. Nations like China are successful in limiting the amount of outside cyber information that enters their country. If the United Nations or any other international organization used the same screening, editing, or control mechanisms against information emanating from sanctioned countries, it would reduce those crimes, attacks, and scams and give those sanctioned nations an incentive to clean up their act so that they could be taken off the sanction list. Economic sanctions could also be levied against those nations who use or tolerate serious cyber crimes.

# Gerrymandering

##### The Rant

Here a political party in charge attempts to maintain or enhance its political power by using its authority to revise the geographic boundaries of voting districts to its own advantage. After each ten year census, the boundaries of voting districts are redrawn to reflect the level and distribution of the population. In this case the state legislature may be charged with drawing political district boundaries and creating new political districts to reflect changes in population and distribution. If the state legislature is controlled by a particular party, that party can use that authority select those precincts included in each district to its own advantage. There are three main ways a political party can use gerrymandering to its advantage.

The first method is called "cracking." Here, in an effort to dilute the power of the opposition party, the redistricting authority distributes their enemies into several different districts so that they don't have enough impact to elect a candidate of the opposite party. The second method is called "packing." Here the redistricting authority combines all of their enemies into a single district so that they only lose one seat rather than have those voters impact the outcome of other districts where their enemies could swing a close election. A third method is called "kidnapping." Here the redistricting authority includes the residence of a popular incumbent of the opposing party into a new district where they lose the support of their old district and must face election by an entirely new constituency. These methods can also be used to enhance or degrade the political influence and power of various ethnic, demographic, and economic populations.

Other than the requirement that all of the precincts in a voting district be contiguous, there are few if any restrictions on the use of political gerrymandering as illustrated above. Of course the drawing of district boundaries can be used to control the outcome of elections. For example, in a five district state with fifty precincts where twenty are red and thirty are blue, there could be five blue districts and no red districts, three blue districts and two red districts, or two blue and three red districts, depending on where the district borders are drawn. Thus, the way the election plays out is unfairly controlled by the political redistricting authority rather than by the votes actually cast.

##### The Recommendation

Take the authority to draw district boundaries totally out of the political realm. Have this work done by an outside agency or contractor with strict rules about deviating from more natural geographical boundaries and more logical matrix like divisions. Those who feel that the boundaries have been manipulated for strictly political reasons should be able to have the final redistricting reviewed by a federal appeals court.

# Early Primaries & Caucuses

##### The Rant

Those states who lead off the selection of candidates enjoy an inordinate influence on the selection of a president. This is not because those states have any special prominence, population size, or because they represent a microcosm of the larger population. It is just because of the self selected schedule they have chosen to start their primaries or caucuses.

Those candidates who do well in those small but early primaries and caucuses in states like Iowa and New Hampshire, have a substantial influence on the eventual outcome of a national election. Those candidates who do well in these venues determine to a large extent who the press, party officials, and financial contributors will single out for special attention, financial support, publicity, and prominence. Since the selection of a president is a national office, local notoriety, popularity, and focus can elevate candidates who would not stand out in the rest of the country. However when they do well in those early contests, they have a definite head start and advantage over those who lack those attributes which make them successful in those small venues, which kick off the political season.

Even those candidates who are not from, or well known, in those states with early primaries and caucuses will develop platforms, which favor those states & regions more than they do the general population. There are also notoriety and financial advantages to those states as well because candidates, their staff, and the news media will flock to those states, sometimes, months in advance of the primary or caucasus to start developing their popularity. Thus, there are many advantages and no disadvantages to being the first ones out of the gate. Conversely, those states who are the last to hold their primaries and caucuses have little or no influence on the final candidate selection, as the number of delegates accrued may already be a "fait accompli."

As with the previous rants about the _Electoral College System_ and _Gerrymandering_ , this is just an attempt to level the playing field so that the entire population has an equal change of influencing these important political decisions. As it is now some of the candidates get to start the race early and then have the rest of the field trying to catch up with them before the finish line.

##### The Recommendation

Have a single date when all states have their primary election or caucus. An even better alternative would be to have a national primary so that all the contestants start out from the same starting line and run the same race to the finish line.

# Minimum Qualifications

##### The Rant

Although this rant may seem to run afoul of pure egalitarian principals, I will advance it anyway and attempt to justify my concern. Every job requires that a successful incumbent have the right intelligence, knowledge, experience, people skills, and temperament to be successful. Some jobs might be lower on the scale for these factors while others are quite high. Usually the more critical, encompassing, sensitive, and involved the job the more important the individual's level of competence needs to be to do a credible job.

The only requirement to be a congressman is to be 25 years of age with 7 years of US citizenship, to be a senator you need to be at least 30 years of age with 9 years of US citizenship, and to be president you need to be at least 35 years old and be a natural born citizen. To be a governor, a state legislator, or a mayor may not even have these restrictions. However, all of these positions entail functions, decisions, and interactions which have substantial consequences.

It wouldn't make much sense to spend four years in college studying under professors who were hired because they presented birth certificates proving they were at least 25 years old. Not many of us would feel comfortable going to a doctor or a dentist who's only background was that they were 30 years old. Nor would we be satisfied flying in a commercial aircraft with a pilot who's only qualification was that they were 35 years old, regardless of where they were born. As a result professors, doctors, dentists, commercial aircraft pilots, and a host of other jobs require that applicants have the necessary training, experience, and certification before they are given these positions of responsibility.

We are led to believe that the election process will insure that politicians are well qualified for the positions they are elected to, but that is not always the case. First, many candidates get on the ballot because of their popularity, connections, special interest backing, party loyalty, financial resources, and as a reward for past service. Thus, a voter may be faced with two candidates, neither of which the voter thinks are well qualified to do the job. Second, as pointed out in the _Negative Campaigning_ rant, a candidate may not be elected on their own qualifications, because they have campaigned on the disqualifications and character flaws of their opponent.

Third, we tend to elect politicians using the same criteria we use to buy products, so those who do the most advertising usually come out on top. Fourth, name familiarity is extremely important for a candidate, so a well known actor, musician, television personality, athlete, entrepreneur, or military hero has a big advantage over a well qualified but lesser known candidate, even though the celebrity candidate may not have the necessary knowledge, experience, and temperament to be successful in the office being sought.

We may also think that the lack of knowledge, experience, and temperament of newly elected office holders will be mitigated by their aides, assistants, and advisers. However, the new office holder may appoint individuals to these posts who are personal friends or associates and who may not be any more qualified, stable, or objective than the new office holder. Also many head strong candidates may not take advice or go through the proper channels as they think that is a sign of weakness and lack of control. If the aides, assistants, and advisers detect this kind of attitude, they may exacerbate the problem by becoming yes men (or women) just to keep the boss happy and keep their job. Most elected positions are way to critical to provide on-the-job training to unprepared office holders even if there are competent subordinates available to provide guidance.

##### The Recommendation

We need to treat our selection of leaders and legislators with the same dignity and seriousness that we treat other positions of great responsibility. When we select people for non-political positions we first determine that they have the knowledge, experience, and temperament they need before we even advance them to the final stages of screening and the interview process. This procedure insures that the individual or group making the final decision can select the best candidate out of a field of qualified candidates.

So the first step is to determine what knowledge, experience, and temperament are necessary for the office being sought. In non-political positions those individuals who are applying to be managers need to posses people and organizational skills in addition to any specific skills involved in the activities being managed. Those individuals running for executive positions such as president, governor, or mayor should also have the requisite skills and experience.

In addition, candidates should understand the intricacy of the organization they are applying to lead. Many candidates will run for office based on what they promise the voters they will deliver if they are elected. However, many of these candidates do not understand what is entailed in delivering the promised results and the constraints and obstacles they will encounter. In spite of our educational system, most natural born citizens do not understand how the government works. In this respect they are at a disadvantage to naturalized citizens who must demonstrate this knowledge before they can achieve citizenship and earn the right to vote. If candidates don't understand what resources, processes, and obstacles are involved in delivering a desired outcome, how can they possibly promise to deliver these outcomes once they are elected?

I am not suggesting that we change the Constitution or put legal binding restrictions on what qualifications our politicians need to have to be on the ballot or assume an elected position. What I am suggesting is that we draw up an ideal list of qualifications for the knowledge, experience, people skills, temperament, and other factors we think should be possessed by anyone running for the position being sought. We would then require every candidate to fill out an employment application addressing each of these factors.

Thus, each party advancing a candidate would need to consider how their candidates application would look in the voters pamphlet available to every registered voter. So political parties would be mindful that the voters would see how their candidate stacked up against opponents with regard to the relevant qualifications for each specific position. Armed with this information the voters would be better able to discern how well the candidate could function in the office and their ability to deliver the objectives they were espousing.

# Tax Refund Scams

##### The Rant

Every year the IRS provides warnings to taxpayers to submit their income tax filings early to avoid the chance that a scam artist will fill out a false submission and have the government send your tax refund to the imposter. When that happens the legitimate taxpayer is out of luck as the Internal Revenue Service feels no responsibility for sending your money to the wrong person. As mentioned throughout this book, protecting your social security number and contact information is impossible to accomplish and an unrealistic expectation by the same government who's frequent hacks have made that information available to those who want to conduct these scams.

So if I send money to someone posing as a government agency, I am out the money and still owe the government. However, if the government sends money they owe me to someone posing as me, they are off the hook for their obligation and I am out the money they owe me. If that is not the perfect definition of a double standard, then a definition for that situation just doesn't exist.

##### The Recommendation

If the federal government makes regular payments to you for items like social security, military retirement, and other similar types of disbursements, they make those to your direct deposit account by directing an electronic payment to your bank account using the proper routing number and account number. If you receive a paper check, they send it to your home address. They also allow you to choose one of these options for an annual tax refund. If they allowed people to have their direct deposit information or permanent address on file for all future refunds, it would be impossible for an imposter to have a direct deposit or paper check sent to them rather than to you. Just enable people to have that information on file with the government with regard to any payments or refunds made to them by the government. If you needed to change your direct deposit account information or permanent mailing address, you could do so by going to a local federal office building and showing proper identification.

# Presidential Pardoning Powers

##### The Rant

We are reminded in historical and biblical tales of the king sitting on his throne addressing a humbled subject kneeling in fear while the king considers their fate. A harsh punishment or clemency might depend on a very cursory evaluation of the charge and also upon the mood of the king at that particular point in time. It may also depend on the status and wealth of the accused or those speaking on behalf of the accused. In these situations the king is the judge and jury all in one swift efficient package. Although this practice has disappeared in modern democratic countries it still exists to some extent in those countries, which still have dictators or kings with that level of political power.

In a country, which believes in limited and separated powers, the authority of a president to pardon individuals tried, convicted, and reviewed by the judicial arm of the government seems like an unnecessary and potentially corrupting departure. Most presidential pardons are given at the end of a president's final term, when the political ramifications of the pardons are of no particular consequence. However, there are other situations where the presidential pardoning power is used to obstruct or nullify justice.

In way too many administrations the president has authorized actions or activities, which are illegal and kept secret. If the press or other interested parties find out about these actions or activities the administration will categorically deny any knowledge or complicity in the action or activity. However, when the secrecy starts to unravel, some of those on the lower levels of the administration may have to accept the blame, resign, and face criminal charges. If these endeavors are not adequate, middle or even high level administrative officials may need to be sacrificed to protect the president from impeachment.

To keep lower, middle, and even higher level administrators from flipping and incriminating those higher up in the administration, a presidential pardon is a powerful tool to convince these individuals to accept total blame and not implicate their superiors. However, even if the trail of guilt leads all the way to the president, he can't be convicted of a crime while he is in office. So a president who has been exposed to the light of day for illegal activities and faces impeachment and subsequent trial for his crimes may just resign after arranging for his vice president to issue him a pardon as one of their first acts as president. This was the way Richard Nixon avoided prosecution once he became a private citizen. There has more recently been legal debates about whether a president can pardon himself in advance for any crime he may have committed.

##### The Recommendation

Eliminate presidential pardoning powers. In its place we could give the president the power to have a limited number of cases sent to the Supreme Court for an altruistic review and potential exculpation by a majority of the nine justices. Let the president retain the power to pardon the turkey at Thanksgiving, but put the other clemency powers back into the judicial system where they are more likely to be thoughtful, less politically motivated, as well as part of the judicial process, which created the initial conviction and sentence. In a democratic society such as ours, which is based on laws and the Constitution, nobody should be above the law.

# Unrelated Fees & Tolls

##### The Rant

This section relates to vehicle licenses and other fees, which have no connection to the activity for which they are charged. It also covers tolls, which continue even after the bridge, or other part of the infrastructure, is paid for. The main thing is that these are targets for state, county, and local governments to raise money without putting it to the vote of the people. Most of the things addressed here are not avoidable by the public who must use the bridges and license their cars regardless of the cost.

A good example is the licensing fee charged to for vehicles in the state of Washington. Here there was a basic fee of about $30 to license a vehicle. However, individual counties would tack on charges for non-related services which drove the average fee into the $100 to $300 range for a single vehicle. Every time the county would come up short on funds for some service, the license fee was a popular target. Since the public needed their vehicles to get to school, work, shopping, doctor visits, and a host of other reasons, they had no other choice other than to pay whatever was required.

Because of the situation identified above, a referendum was placed on the statewide ballot to remove all of these tacked on fees and return to the basic $30 license fee. This initiative was approved by the voters and all license fees were rolled back to the basic fee. However, then the counties again started tacking on non-related fees and the cost of licensing a vehicle is approaching the level it was before the referendum was approved.

##### The Recommendation

Have an overall law which restricts all fees & tolls charged to be directly related to the purpose for which they are justified. Thus fees for animal licenses should relate to the cost of maintaining animal control services, fishing licenses should be related to the costs of maintaining hatcheries, game wardens, and so forth for hunting licenses, park fees, boating licenses, etc. Also tolls used to build bridges and toll roads should be eliminated once the bonds for those projects have been retired.

# No Stake in the Game

##### The Rant

Since our senators and congressional representatives have their own retirement and health care systems they have little empathy for those who depend on social security and medicare programs, when they retire. These career politicians also do not usually have to rely upon veterans benefits, medicaid, unemployment compensation, and a host of other programs that they are shielded from, because of their special entitlements. These programs are also the target of both houses of congress, because of the amount of money that they consume from the federal budget.

The cushy benefit packages that they are included in far exceed those available to the majority of the population including the blue and white collar middle class workers who provide most of the taxes, which support their special benefits. It is very rare for an employee in any other field of employment to retire with over 10% of their full-time salary after only six years of service. Also these retirement programs top out at 80% of full pay while most non-congressional retirement programs top out at 50% to 60% of full pay.

In addition our senators, congressmen and the president continue to get paid during a government shutdown, while other government employees are either laid off or have their paychecks withheld until the shutdown is over. For example those government employees who must continue to work like the military, the secret service, air traffic controllers, airport security staff, fire fighters, border patrol, and others, who are required to work to avoid safety and security problems, must continue to work without pay until a budget is passed and they can then collect their back pay. That retroactive pay is also contingent on congressional approval. Since our senators, congressmen, and the president are the ones who's action (or inaction) is the reason for the shutdown in the first place, it seems grossly unfair to continue a practice that insulates them from the consequences of their own actions.

##### The Recommendation

Most of us have seen the emails that are circulated to point out these exceptional benefit packages and special provisions even though they fly in the face of the taxpayers who must fund these entitlements. However, since it is these same congressional leaders who must make a change, which would impact their own benefits, there is little or no hope that this situation will ever be changed via this route. Perhaps we need a federal proposition on this subject that could be voted on by every registered voter in a general election.

# Diplomatic Immunity

##### The Rant

This is basically a get out of jail free card for those who are eligible for this status. In fact this status precludes the offender from being arrested or charged with criminal acts, which would cause arrest, conviction, and incarceration by those who were not covered by diplomatic immunity.

In some cases foreign diplomats and their families have taken advantage of this provision by acting in a reckless way and doing whatever they want without regard to the laws of the host country. This becomes most objectionable when the violator flaunts their diplomatic status and continues to repeat the same offenses with impunity.

However, there is a long history and rationale for providing diplomatic immunity and this is not something, which should be unilaterally tampered with or casually revoked. For that reason, this provision should be modified rather than just eliminated.

##### The Recommendation

Enter into bilateral agreements with those countries with which we share diplomatic relations. That agreement would amend the basic diplomatic arrangements covered by the Geneva Convention. This bilateral agreement would be that the diplomat would be subject to any local law, which was also a law in the sponsoring country as long as the punishment would not be greater than that provided in the sponsoring country. This would be similar to those laws, which now govern extradition, where a country may extradite an individual to a country on the condition that they not receive a death penalty, because the extraditing country does not allow the death penalty.

To be fair, a diplomat should not be charged with a crime or subject to a punishment, which was specific to the host culture. A diplomat who violated a local law involving a dress code that was required (or forbidden) should not be subjected to some exorbitant punishment.

For example, if a diplomat's son were to be convicted of shoplifting in a culture where the punishment for such an offense would be to cut off the child's hand, that would be much more drastic than the punishment the child would incur in their own culture. But if the son were driving recklessly or constantly caught speeding, the host country should certainly be able to revoke the son's driving privileges. It should also be structured to allow the convicted person to serve out their sentence in their own country, as many countries have prisons with deplorable conditions and in some cases do not even provide prisoners with food.

However, in any case the host country would still have the ability to revoke the individuals diplomatic status and return them to their sponsoring country. In all cases, the diplomat should be diplomatic enough to learn, understand, and respect the laws, customs, and conventions of the host country.

# Unabated Fabrication

##### The Rant

As a child I was told about George Washington as a young boy admitting to his father that he could not tell a lie and it was he who chopped down the cherry tree. In school I learned that Abraham Lincoln earned the nickname "Honest Abe" by being so honest, forthright, and truthful that even his advisories didn't refute this designation. Now that I am an adult, it seems that presidents, other politicians, and government bureaucrats tell lies on a regular basis. For many citizens, even used car salesmen and telemarketers have more credibility than our elected and appointed public servants. This is unfortunate in that it is those individuals in whom we have entrusted our very survival and upon whom we must rely to keep us informed about those things which impact our daily lives and our future. However, unless they are testifying under oath, these politicians and appointed administrators can lie with impunity.

The perceived solution is that these liars will be voted out of office or fired by their superiors. However, since they all seem to play fast and easy with the truth, it would be hard to find replacements who would act otherwise. One popular joke is that the way you can tell if a politician is lying is that their lips are moving. Another is that unsuccessful criminals go to jail and successful criminals go to Washington. Unfortunately, there is a great deal of truth to these humorous antidotes and the joke is on us.

##### The Recommendation

We have all heard of families or organizations who have a cuss jar. The concept here is that when a member of this group cusses, they are required to put a dollar into the jar which is then used for some necessity or luxury by the group. This accomplishes two things. First, it cuts down on the use of bad language. Second, it creates a source of revenue for some needed or desired purchase, which would not otherwise be procured.

If we had a "Fabrication Fund" that collected a months salary from any public official who's statements could be documented to be false, we would both cut down on the lying and create a budget savings for the federal, state, county, or municipal government entity involved. We already have independent sources whom we trust to identify and document the lies our public officials espouse. If the individual telling the lie was directed by a superior to do so, then the superior should have to cover the subordinate's fine and incur a fine based on their own monthly salary. Retribution against the subordinate by the superior would be precluded by protections provided under existing whistle blower provisions.

Conversely, if a superior tells a lie based on false information provided to them by a trusted subordinate, then the subordinate should have to cover the superiors fine as well as his own. This practice would not apply to estimates or other statements based on opinion or conditional qualifications. However, if the individual made a false statement that they knew, or should have known, was false, it should be applied.

These provisions should also apply to direct quotes covered in the press, by the media, and via electronic postings and video (social media platforms) directed from the politician or bureaucrats to the general public or any large group of followers. If the press or media misquotes the politician or bureaucrat, that entity should have to pay a fine equivalent to a month's salary for the misquoted politician or bureaucrat. All of the money in the "Fabrication Fund" should become income to the public entity to which the politician or bureaucrat belongs.

# Chapter 2

# Commercial & Banking

The rants included in this chapter are directed at the way our business and financial institutions are structured and operated. It addresses these problems as they relate to the consumer and the general public. Although many of these practices have been in effect for some time, it seems proficious for us to revisit the original concept and see if it makes sense in light of the current situation.

Part of living in a free society is having a free market with competing merchants and other commercial businesses appealing to their customers with quality merchandise or service at the lowest price. Under pure competition customers can vote with their dollars and those providers who are the most responsive to their customers needs survive & prosper while those who fail to do so dwindle & go out of business. Unfortunately there are instances with limited providers, providers who collude on prices or conditions, and commercial laws which favor business interests over consumer interests. Under these conditions the customers need for goods or services forces them to capitulate to arrangements they dislike and fly in the face of the adage "the customer is always right."

# Identity Theft

##### The Rant

The whole concept of identity theft would be laughable if it were not so prevalent, easy to accomplish, and detrimental to the victim. How we can hold people responsible for something they neither did nor facilitated is beyond comprehension. Apparently the concept is that everyone is supposed to protect information that someone could use to steal their identity. Most of this information is very public knowledge, which can be easily gleaned from public records or the integrated databases now available to everyone on the internet.

Even your social security number, which is supposed to be a very guarded piece of information, is easily found. In addition to the numerous governmental databases using this number, my social security number is also my Air Force serial number and my Medicare number. I have also filled out forms, which informed me that I have a right to withhold my social security number, but doing so will restrict or delay the services, which I am requesting. The most recent of these requests was in filing to renew my U.S. passport, which does not have anything to do with the social security program and is administered by a different government department.

Another contributing factor is that the merchant and the identity thief have complementary, and in most cases very congruent, interests. The merchant gains income from making a sale and the identity thief gains by receiving the merchandise or service at no cost. Since the identity thief does not have to pay for the purchase, they are the perfect customer, who will opt for the most expensive products or services with all of the options and extras at the full tendered price. This is ideal for the merchant who finds a customer with unlimited resources and no sales resistance.

This is very similar to the mutualistic, symbiotic arrangements of some organisms found in nature. Thus, the crocodile will lay with its mouth open, while the plover bird eats the food between the crocodile's teeth. Since the bird gets fed and the crocodile gets his mouth cleaned, they coexist and prosper by helping each other out. A similar arrangement exists between the remora fish and the shark, where the shark gets its skin cleaned and the ramora gets to eat the scraps from shark's kill. In this manner the identity thief and the merchant are the commercial equivalent of nature's mutualistic, symbiotic arrangements.

The merchants also provide a perfect platform for identity theft by accepting both internet and phone purchases. In addition, many banks and credit card companies send out unsolicited, pre-approved applications for credit cards, which go into your unprotected mailbox. If an identity thief steals the application and fills it out, they can then intercept the approved credit card from the same unprotected mailbox.

Since the person to whom the credit card is issued never filled out the application or received the issued card, they have no reason to report it stolen. It is only after purchases by the identity thief that the individual learns of the debt and any interest accruing on the credit card. If the application, or the pre-approved card, is discarded by the recipient into the trash, or recycling bin, (without shredding it first), it can be recovered by the identity thief and utilized without even getting material from the mailbox.

Another popular way of stealing your identity is to take the information from the magnetic strip (or chip) on your credit card. Every time you give your credit card to a waiter, or some other clerk or service person, it is out of your control and subject to being scanned for this information. This does not take very sophisticated equipment and can be done in just one second of time. Small credit card readers can be cheaply purchased to plug into the identity thief's cell phone. Some retail clerks have also had such a device behind the counter to swipe the card into their own device, before using it in the proper receptacle to charge for the goods being purchased.

Identity thieves have even placed an interception device in front of the credit card slots on gas pumps and cash machines so that the information they want is scanned and stored on their device as well as in the legitimate device. They then come by and recover the device and all the information collected. This kind of device can also be used for various vending machines, which now accept credit cards. The devices are normally installed and removed during non-business hours when employees are not around to detect this device.

Some identity thieves have put fake cash machines in malls and other public places where workers in coveralls deliver and retrieve these machines during normal business hours without arousing suspicion. These fake cash machines restrict withdrawals to small amounts and are there to capture both the information and pin numbers from debit cards. This information can then be used (by the identity thief) to make large cash withdrawals from legitimate cash machines.

Although the pin number can be stolen as well, at least it provides some level of protection beyond what can be gleaned from public records or the cards themselves. Perhaps if all purchases required a pin number, and the cardholder changed the pin numbers frequently, there would be much less identity theft.

There are also numerous cases where a business is hacked and the credit card numbers and other personal information about a customer are gleaned from the business computers and later used to make fraudulent purchases for which the card holder is ultimately responsible. When discovered, the business may alert you to the situation and advise you to be on the alert for fraudulent charges, however, they are not legally responsible for the breach that they created.

#####

##### The Recommendation

Put the onus on the merchant to insure that they are dealing with the proper party. If I inform you that you owe me money for something I sold to you, the burden of proof is on me to prove that you made the transaction, agreed on a price, and received the product or service. Why should a merchant receive some special treatment, when it is to their advantage to ignore the problem and shift the responsibility to the identity theft victim or their credit card company.

# Opt Out Provisions

##### The Rant

Here the system requires that we take action to achieve what the great majority of us want anyway. The system should work so that the normal situation is what most of us want and what we opt for is something other than that. For example, most people do not want to have sales (or other unsolicited) calls on their telephones, especially on cell phones which may charge the individual for each call over their allowance. However, to not receive these calls you must register to be placed on a "do not call" list. Even here this option is only effective for a specific period of time and must be refiled for after that period has passed.

This rant aligns with and facilitates several of the other rants included in this book. For example the great majority of us do not want their government, those companies we do business with, or organizations we are associated with, to share or sell personal information about us with those outside their operation. Here legislation might require that companies notify their customers about what they share and require that the company have some provision for customers to "opt out" of some of the information they share. However, the company has little interest in making this process any easier or permanent than possible.

Just as we don't want to have sales people invade our privacy (especially at dinner time) or have businesses and governments steal our private information and fence it to someone else, we do not want crooks to invade our home or steal our personal belongings. Now if the criminals were as smart (and organized) as businesses, they would convince the lawmakers that they be allowed to do these things if they divulge to their potential victims what they intended to do and give them the opportunity to "opt out" by going through a process to be temporarily placed on a "do not invade" or "do not rob" list.

##### The Recommendation

Put the shoe on the other foot. The default position should be in favor of the vast majority of the people involved. Thus, the merchant, agency, association or service provider should be precluded from sharing personal information about their clients, customers, or members unless they expressly get permission from the individual involved. If a business wants to provide some prize or perk to the customer to get that agreement, they could use that route with individual customers or clients. Under no circumstances should it be required that the burden be placed on the individual to "opt out" of an arrangement, which virtually nobody wants.

# Sharing Confidential Information

##### The Rant

This is really an extension of the problem cited in the previous section. Here most people do not want their personal information shared with those other than the business or service needing the information to provide the service or complete the transaction. While this is most prevalent in the commercial sector, it is also found in government activities as well. I change my mailing address twice every year when we move from our Washington residence to our Arizona residence in the fall and then return to Washington in the spring. When I do this I get a host of mailers from commercial companies welcoming me to their area and offering me services that I might need for my relocation.

Obviously the Post Office Department is selling this information to commercial businesses. I have tried to use the temporary change of address option, but this requires that I know exactly when I will return to my primary residence in Washington. Since our return depends on the weather, social commitments, availability of someone to pick us up at the airport, and the cost of airline tickets, we don't always know the exact date of our return.

This situation not only exists at the federal level of government, but for state and county governments as well. To make sure that I got my county sewer bill and tax statements from Washington sent to my Arizona address for the six months I would be there, I sent them my temporary address. Shortly afterword I received a notification that my voter registration in Washington was being revoked and that I would need to register to vote in Arizona. I was able to get this situation straightened out, however, it made me aware of how inter-weaved these public data systems have become.

Although this situation exists in public and private entities, it is most prevalent in commercial arrangements, where one company receives a payment for sharing your personal information with other companies who intend to profit from that information. As an example, your commercial tax preparer has a great deal of personal and financial information about you, including your social security number. If you have a broker or investment company, they also have a great deal of this same information.

Fifty years ago it would have been considered unprofessional to release any of this information to some other business. That situation has changed, and it is now the rule, rather than the exception, when this kind of information is not shared between companies as part of their normal course of activities. Of course there is a host of other situations and arrangements where you will find your personal information collected and shared. If you have a supermarket customer discount card, they have a record of the types, quantities, and brands you buy as well as the frequency of your consumption. They also have that information linked with your phone number and email address.

Another source of your personal information is gained from your electronic devices, especially your smart phone. If you have ever bothered to read the permissions that you must agree with to use virtually any of the free apps you download on your phone, you are aware of just how much of your personal information you have granted them to legally access. Not only do most of these permissions enable them to have access to your contacts, they also frequently give access to your location, your stored information (ie, passwords), and in some cases enable the apps provider to turn your phone on any time they choose. In rare cases, third parties can access the microphone or camera in your electronic devices to listen in or look in when you are unaware.

##### The Recommendation

Make it the responsibility of the entity sharing the information to gain permission from the client, customer, citizen, or member to share their personal information. Even in those cases where this kind of permission is obtained, it should be readily available to those granting the right, not buried in some lengthy and convoluted legal treatise, which few people will read or understand. Just as a package of cigarettes has a large, predominate warning on the package about smoking being hazardous to your health, these apps should carry a large, predominate warning that the permissions required may be hazardous to your privacy.

# Paralyzing Policies & Procedures

##### The Rant

Here a company has a structure, policy, or procedure, which is not adequate to deal with all of the real world situations encountered by its clients and customers. Sometimes a company has internal policies and procedures that create a problem for employees dealing with other employees or departments. For example, at one firm where I was employed, I informed the manager of the information technology department that none of the employees in my department could log their computers into the company network and we needed to get this addressed in order to get any work done. He informed me the policy was that each of these employees needed to log into the the company network, go to the services required section, describe their problem, and schedule an appointment for a service call. Since the problem was that they couldn't get on the network to even follow this time consuming process, this was a totally ridiculous situation and required that I go to the head of the firm to get the problem addressed expeditiously.

A similar situation was encountered when my wife's brother was diagnosed with early onset Alzheimer's disease and committed to a memory care facility for the rest of his life. At that point he could neither function on his own nor communicate on other than a very primitive level. As a result, we needed to sell his house, car, and other possessions to pay for the very expensive facility where he was placed. One of the things we did was to contact a national telecommunications company and ask them to disconnect his land line, since the house was vacant and the phone was no longer needed. The phone company representative we contacted refused to make the disconnection without authorization from the brother.

Now his mother had been making the payments to the phone company and had a power-of-attorney to conduct business for her son However, the representative would not take her verbal or written instructions to disconnect the phone, even when we offered to fax them a copy of the power-of-attorney. We then talked to the supervisor and explained the situation and the inability of the son to communicate the authorization they wanted. He cited the same requirements as the representative and demanded the authorization from the person who had the phone installed. I ended up writing a letter to the president of the company, with a copy to their chief legal officer, before the situation was resolved.

##### The Recommendation

Those employees who deal with the public must have the authority and responsibility to address those situations which fall outside the very narrow and restrictive policies and procedures they are given. At the very least, supervisors should have more latitude and be able to depart from policies and procedures when the situation warrants.

# Over Booking

##### The Rant

Most airlines sell more tickets on every flight than the seats available on the airplane. They hope that not everyone will show up and they will make additional revenue by booking passengers for non-existent seats. Some hotels also confirm more bookings than they have rooms for the same reason. By selling the same room to more than one customer, they inappropriately increase their profit. In both of these cases, the merchant collects the full price from two customers for the same item or service.

This is a very common practice for airlines, who consistently overbook flights as a routine way of doing business. When passengers arrive who have been booked for the same seats, the airline staff will ask for volunteers to take a later flight and give those passengers a free or discounted flight at some time in the future. They then move one of the confirmed passengers into the newly vacated seats. If there are no volunteers, some of the passengers will be forced to change their travel plans. This can be very detrimental to passengers who have to be somewhere for an important meeting, a medical treatment, a job interview, a family emergency, confirmed reservations for lodging, or a connecting flight. In 2015 forty-three thousand passengers were forced to give up their seats because there were no volunteers.

In 2017 a doctor, with a confirmed ticket, was removed forcefully and dragged down the isle of a crowded, overbooked airplane by airport security, because he refused to give up his seat and get off of the aircraft. This event was recorded on a video, which found its way onto national news broadcasts and prompted an apology by the CEO of a major airline. It also resulted in a lawsuit against the airline because of the physical injuries he received while being removed against his will. If some of the passengers do not show up for the overbooked flight, the airline charges those passengers and the overbooked passengers full price for the same seat.

My wife was an executive secretary for a neighboring school district. She had made arrangements with a hotel in Washington D.C. for members of that district's board of directors. It was important that they be in this particular hotel because of meetings being held there and because of its proximity to the congressional offices where they were scheduled to meet with their senators and congressmen. For that reason she confirmed the booking with late arrival guaranteed, which insured that the rooms would be paid for even if the people never showed up to use the rooms. When the board members arrived late because of flight delays, their rooms had been rented out to someone else. The hotel apologized for the inconvenience and found lodging at other hotels but the board members were angry and my wife very embarrassed. Here they had rented out the same room to two customers and charged them both full rate.

A similar situation occurred when we were traveling with friends and had booked a hotel reservation near the airport in London for two rooms. The rooms were booked on a credit card with late arrival guaranteed. Due to airline delays from Rome to London, we arrived at the hotel later than anticipated. The hotel had rented out both rooms to other customers and we had no place to stay. The hotel apologized and eventually found us two rooms at another hotel quite a distance from the airport. However, the replacement hotel was of much lower quality than the one we had booked, was only procured after several hours of waiting in the offending hotel's lounge, and required two hours of travel by taxi. The late arrival, delay in getting the new rooms, and two hour long taxi rides gave us much less time to sleep before we had to board another flight to Seattle the next morning.

The third example was at a motel in Bellingham, Washington. We had booked a reservation with late arrival guaranteed so that we would have a place to stay when we finished the first leg of an organized long distance bicycle ride. Because we had to stop and fix a number of flat bicycle tires along the 110 mile rural ride from Seattle to Bellingham we arrived late, dirty, sweaty, and exhausted. Again we were told that our rooms had been rented out to someone else and there were no other motels in the area with a vacancy. It was imperative that we have a place to stay as we were scheduled for another long bicycle ride into Vancouver, B.C. early the next morning. We raised such a ruckus, the motel moved someone out of a room and gave us the lodging we had reserved and prepaid rather than turn us away without even a car in which to sleep.

##### The Recommendation

If I sell the same car, boat, or house to more than one customer, I will probably end up in jail. Why should businesses not be held to the same standard? The confirmed airline reservation and the late arrival guaranteed are the businesses' protection to insure that they will not be impacted financially if the confirmed passenger or guest does not show up. If they are able to sell the seat to a standby passenger or rent the room to a guest who did not have a reservation, they have not suffered any loss. Under these conditions they should give the confirmed passenger or guest who did not show up a full refund. That way the airline, hotel, or other business is not rewarded for breaking their contract and the confirmed passenger or guest is not turned away.

# Effort not Results

##### The Rant

Here a business or a contractor is hired to fix something or solve a problem and charges the customer for their time and effort whether the problem is solved or not. If the business or contractor doubts that it can fix the problem, then it should not accept the project. If the business or contractor accepts the project on the basis that they can fix the problem for a specified price, they should be bound by that contractual agreement. If not, the customer has incurred an expense and not received anything in return.

As a young college student, I was poor and had an old car that I used to get to my classes and the jobs I needed to put my way through school. When I had to have a friend jump start my car on a couple occasions, I decided to take it to the local dealership and have it repaired. After running various tests they determined it needed a new generator. After having it repaired the car still wouldn't start properly. I then took it back to the dealership and they then determined that it needed a new voltage regulator, which they proceeded to install. When the car still had the same problems with a new generator and voltage regulator they decided it just needed a new battery, which they then installed.

So I had spent time and money to have the entire electrical system repaired when all I needed was a new battery. The dealership did not feel any responsibility or remorse for the incorrect recommendations they made or their inability to fix the problem the first or second time. In fact, they gained financially by selling unnecessary parts and having the additional work performed. They also charged me for labor time according to a predetermined schedule, not even the actual time they devoted to the repairs. Like with most services and employment arrangements, you end up paying for the effort not the results.

I ran into this problem again at the school district where I worked. The district had the largest high school in the state and had installed a very sophisticated, expensive, and energy efficient heat recovery system to heat and cool the very large building in which the high school was housed. Unfortunately the system never worked as expected and the building was heated with very expensive electrical resistance heating system, which was there as a backup for the heat recovery system. Just before I was hired, the district had received an energy grant to try and resurrect the original energy efficient system. Unfortunately by the time I came on the scene they had hired the same mechanical engineer who had designed and overseen the installation of the original system.

The reason that the original system did not work properly is that it did not generate the right pressure, which was "X" psi. So when I wrote the contract specifications for the renovation, I specified that neither the engineer nor the contractor would be paid until the system generated the appropriate pressure and actually worked. This was considered a gross departure from the normal contracts, which would only state that the work be done in a professional and competent manner. My inclusion of performance related stipulations was apparently an unheard of approach and generated a cry of anguish from both the engineer and the contractor, although they had no other choice but to accept the conditions or withdraw from the contract. Since this project would be executed on "my watch", I was not going to let history repeat itself and end up paying a bundle for a system that did not function properly.

##### The Recommendation

Have consumers enter into a contract with the business, which would specify that the business deliver the expected results for a specified price. Thus, after the business had evaluated the problem it would either reject the project or assure the customer that: (1) they would be able to fix the problem, (2) they could do it for a specified price, and (3) they could finish the work by a specified date.

The business should be able to charge the customer a fee for evaluating the situation, but would then need to take some of the risk and not put the entire burden on the customer, who is at a technical disadvantage to the business which specializes in solving the kind of problems involved. Under no circumstances should a business be able to profit from stringing the customer along and charge for parts and services, which do not solve the problem.

Absent this kind of arrangement, look for a business, which guarantees their work. However, it pays to read the small print as there may be a number of loopholes in their advertised guarantee. For example if the guarantee is only for a short period of time or requires you to preform unrealistic maintenance or inspection rituals, to keep the guarantee, then it is basically just an advertising ploy. Some guarantees may only cover the parts and not the labor to address the needed repair. Also be aware that some companies may blame a failure on the manufacturer and require you to deal directly with that company. Conversely the manufacturer may respond that the product is without fault and that it was the company, which installed the product that should deal with the issue. Under these circumstances, the customer may find themselves in a vicious circle with no relief from either party.

# Taking the Easy Way Out

##### The Rant

Here government agencies, businesses, and financial institutions just take the easy way out rather than take the long range approach and solve the problem on an ongoing basis. Below I will provide two instances that exemplify this problem. The first was with a credit card company and the second was with the county government.

A few years ago I was informed by my credit card company that their records were hacked and as a result they would be issuing me a new credit card with a new number. Within a week of the issue of the new credit card, there were two unauthorized charges made by someone else using the new credit card number. The first was a small purchase from a vendor. The second was a charge for over three hundred dollars to a local county treasurer. When I reported this discrepancy, I told the credit card company representative that whoever made this large charge would be easy to identify. The reason is that if an individual made a three hundred plus dollar charge to a county government, it would have to be to pay their taxes, a license, a fee, or a fine. In any case, the county would have a record of who made the payment using this credit card number. Although the credit card company covered these unauthorized charges, they did not go through the very easy process of determining and taking action against the perpetrator.

Five years after I had purchased my home in Washington, I was informed that the county had placed a lien against my property and the other 27 homes in my development for about $2,500 each. The lien amount was to cover fees that had never been paid to the county for the land on which the houses were built. When I researched the history involved, I found that the developer had arranged with the county to pay this fee, lot-by-lot as the lots were sold. However, when the developer sold the lots to individuals and builders he did not pay the fees promised to the county. The builders were unaware of this unpaid debt and so were the buyers of the houses they built. Why this was not dealt with until some five years later is still a mystery. But the real problem was that the developer was still building houses in the county and they did not go after the developer for the amounts owed from the profits he made on the lots. Instead they just put liens on all the property and passed the costs on to the innocent and unsuspecting property owners. In my case, my title insurance company paid the amount, since they had insured that my title was clear of all liens.

In neither case did I have to pay for a bill that I did not incur. However, neither did the individual responsible for the problem, even though it would have been more justified and appropriate to place the responsibility where it clearly and justly belonged.

##### The Recommendation

If we as a society spent more time seeking justice rather than just taking the easy way out we would have much less crime, corruption, deceit and expense. Even though we have come up with ways of indemnifying the innocent parties directly impacted, with tools like reserves and insurance, all the innocent parties ultimately have to subsidize the crooks by paying the premiums and reserves.

# Calculated Deception

##### The Rant

This rant is really a combination of the Taking the Easy Way Out ** __** and No Risk Subterfuge rants. Here a business or group of related businesses purposely pulls a "bait and switch" operation that they feel they can get away with. The reason they feel they can get away with it is that the effort by, or cost to, the impacted party is not worth what they are out by the deception.

I ran into this situation when I purchased my first house. That house was in a very large development where all the houses were built and sold by a single builder/developer. One of the ploys used by this developer to get home buyers was to advertise that the seller would pay all of the buyers closing costs. When I was presented the earnest money agreement, that stipulation was not included. So made sure that clause was added before I would sign that document. This large developer had an arrangement that all of their sales were conducted by a single real estate firm and closed through a single escrow company. Also included in the earnest money agreement was that we move into the home and pay a stipulated amount of rent to the developer until all the closing documents were completed.

A month or so after we moved in, I was informed that the closing documents were ready for me to sign at the escrow company. When I reviewed the documents and final disbursement instructions, they showed all of the buyer's normal closing costs charged to me. When I pointed out to the escrow agent that this was not in accordance with the earnest money agreement, they indicated that they were instructed by the developer and real estate agency to shift those costs to me. So I refused to sign the closing documents until they were corrected to agree with the developer's advertising documents and stipulated in the earnest money agreement that I had signed. Since they refused to amend the closing documents, I left without signing those documents. A couple of weeks later I was mailed a copy of the closing documents and final disbursements without the proper corrections and upon which my signature had been forged. Actually my copy just had a stamped "signed" on it above my signature block, indicating that the original had been signed by me when that had not been the case.

Since I was using my Veterans Administration (VA) loan to purchase the home, I contacted the VA office to register my outrage over this illegal and totally deceptive practice by this collaborative arrangement between the developer, the real estate agency and the escrow company. The agent at the VA with whom I talked to was as irritated as I was about what these folks were doing to a veteran and indicated the VA would intervene into the mater on my behalf. However, he called back the next day to inform me that his supervisor had reviewed the matter, talked to the escrow company, and decided that since the charges made to me were ones that a buyer would normally pay, that they would not intervene into the situation. Since I had already moved into the house and the cost of pursuing this matter with a lawsuit would probably exceed the costs they had erroneously charged to me (about $1,100 in 1971), I was out the money and party to a scheme they probably used on other purchasers as well.

##### The Recommendation

As with other recommendations advanced in this book, have penalties levied against businesses who are found to be using deceptive practices and give those penalties to the customers and clients who are those impacted by these schemes. While a real estate agent is suppose to represent the seller, they also have an ethical responsibility to make sure the buyer is not deceived. Also the escrow agent is suppose to be an independent agent and has a fiduciary responsibility to make sure that all parties are treated fairly and the conditions espoused in the earnest money agreement are carried out in a fair and legal manner. Having all of these parties colluding to make sure that they get all the business associated with the large developer seems to fly in the face of those responsibilities.

# Mortgage Madness & Mayhem

##### The Rant

This rant involves the way that banks, loan companies, investment rating companies, and Wall Street investment firms manipulate the granting, bundling, rating, and sale of sub-par mortgages without regard to those who rely upon the integrity of these institutions when they make their investment decisions. It also deals with the collection of information, which is not pertinent or that the lending institution already has. After the catastrophic mortgage and security meltdown in 2007 & 2008, the federal government decided to implement stringent loan requirements for all mortgages to insure than another such event would not occur.

However, what resulted was a nonsensical set of conditions and provisions, which added a great deal of complication, delay, and bureaucracy without addressing the real problem. The real problem was that banks and other mortgage lenders were making loans above what the properties were worth and far above what the borrowers were capable of paying. Why did they do this? The lenders knew the risks, but didn't care, because they would peddle the bad loans to another entity and make a quick profit. The loans were then bundled together and rating companies made money by giving them a much higher rating than they deserved. The ultimate patsies were the unsuspecting investors and pension plans which ended up with these worthless loans.

I have had two situations with mortgages which left me scratching my head. The most recent one was after the meltdown referenced above. I went into my bank one day and saw a sign which indicated that they were making conventional 15 year mortgage loans for as low as 2.75%. Since at that time I had two 15 year mortgages with the same bank for my house in Washington at 4.9% and my house in Arizona at 6.3%, I decided to consolidate the loans into a single loan at the lower rate and use the Arizona house as collateral. I had been paying on one loan for over ten years and on the other for over two years and had no problem securing either loan. The combined value of the two properties was $700,000 and the amount owed was less than $100,000.

This should have been a slam dunk loan and the bank's loan officer agreed. However, there was a federal oversight office, which had to review the loan. Since the loans I was consolidating were both from the bank, which would hold the new loan, they already knew my credit history. Also the monthly payments I had been paying on the old loans, via automatic deduction from my checking account with the same bank, totaled $1,100 per month and the new loan payment (that would replace them) would be $650 per month. It would not take a very sophisticated analyst to realize that if I had been faithfully paying the higher amount for several years, I could probably make one $450 per month less. However, they wanted my income tax returns for the current year. After they fiddled around with the evaluation package for over seven months they asked me for the next years tax returns as well. Since our credit rating was excellent, our annual income was greater than the loan amount, the value of the house put up as collateral was over twice the amount of the loan, and the $650 per month was the only payment we had, the financial risk was not a real question.

The reason the process took so long was that they were asking questions and requiring documentation that the lending bank already had. Did I have homeowner's insurance? Yes, and if I didn't, that bank would have been the first to know, since the insurance company would be required to let the bank know if their collateral was uninsured. So many of the questions I was asked required me to get the records from the bank at which I was applying for the loan. There must have been seventy-five requests for information, and supporting documentation, most of which the bank already had. These questions were not all posed at the beginning of the process. As soon as I provided all the information and documents they requested, they would come back weeks later with a whole batch of new ones. Was the house in a flood plain? No, and it wasn't two years ago when we financed the same house at the same bank. After all of the unnecessary documentation was provided, they approved the 15 year loan at 2.85% interest. The bank's loan officer was as flabbergasted as I was, but assured me that this federal agency was doing the same thing with all their refinance mortgage applications, even those which were rock solid.

The previous debacle was many years prior and was probably one of the things which promulgated the mortgage fiasco in 2007 & 2008. In the early eighties, interest rates were soaring and I paid 16.5% interest to secure a loan on a house. I knew that home mortgage interest rates would drop, so I paid an extra 1% to get a loan without a payoff penalty. After a year or so I was informed that my mortgage had been sold to a new loan company, which was common practice for loan companies and did not impact my contract or payment. A few years later the rates did drop to an acceptable level and I made arrangements to refinance the house. However, when I requested the payoff, the new loan company told me that there would be a payoff penalty. Now I had studied enough business law to know that if someone buys a loan they are bound by the same conditions that existed with the previous note holder. I had also provided consideration for that provision, since I paid a higher interest rate to get a loan, which specified that there would be no payoff penalty. So I went to the best real estate lawyer in the area. He told me that my interpretation of the law was correct, but that Congress had just passed legislation, which enabled loan companies to consolidate and bundle mortgages together and thus shed some of the provisions of the original loans. So not only were investors being impacted by these bundling arrangements, homeowners were being impacted as well.

##### The Recommendation

Let the banks and loan companies determine their own criteria about making a loan, but put the controls on any trading or consolidation of these notes. The lender would not have to run every loan through some elaborate process if they knew that both the collateral and borrower were a solid risk. However, If the bank or loan company makes a bad loan, they are stuck with it and can answer to their shareholders for their bad lending practices. If they want to be able to sell that note to someone else, there should be a requirement that the loan be guaranteed by that bank, or an independent company, to insure the outstanding value of the loan, should it default and the value of the collateral not adequate to cover the balance due.

# Non-Supportive Support

##### The Rant

This concern is about the phone support provided by those with little product knowledge or language proficiency, who are only interested in recording metrics about how many calls they handled during their shift. Customers are told that the product or service they are purchasing has a customer support provision, so that if the product malfunctions, or the purchaser has a technical question about the product, they will receive the necessary support to solve the problem or replace the defective product. If the promised support is not adequate to the task, then the product or service has been misrepresented.

The companies promising support often try and do this without spending an adequate amount. Many times those who receive the support calls have little or no knowledge about the product they are supporting. The ill prepared support personnel may work for some contracted firm and may only have a prepared script to respond to the questions they receive. They also are rated by the contractor (and sometimes paid) based on the number of calls they log and have little incentive to spend any protracted time helping the customer solve the problem. In addition, these support people are in many cases not fluent in the language of the customers they are supporting and not able to communicate effectively with the caller.

Combining the lack of product knowledge, an incentive to move to the next caller, and an inability to effectively communicate with the customer easily explains why many of the customer support calls fall short of the mark. When a customer exhausts all of their efforts to get a satisfactory solution to their problem or can't communicate with the support person, they might ask to speak to a supervisor. In most cases the support person is very reticent to let you talk to a supervisor as this could reflect negatively on the support person's evaluation.

In one case, when I had exhausted all my efforts to get the necessary information from the support person, I indicated that I would try and find some other avenue to solve my problem and my intention to end the call. The support person, still reading from their script, asked me if he could be of any further assistance. I then curtly responded that since he had been of no assistance at all it would be impossible to be of any further assistance.

However, I have also been pleasantly surprised by those support people, who had great product knowledge, excellent communication skills, and the patience to lead the caller through the necessary steps to solve the problem regardless of how long it took. These are the companies that I will deal with again and the ones I will recommend to my friends and associates. I also make a point of thanking these support personnel for their patience and helpfulness. In these cases I give them excellent ratings when ratings are available or solicited after the fact.

##### The Recommendation

Require that all support lines provide an option that lets the customer automatically shift the call to the next level of supervision (press 9 at any point to elevate the call to the next level of supervision). If the supervisor is not available, enable the customer to leave a message to be contacted by the supervisor to resolve the issue. If that contact was not made or if the problem was not resolved, then the problem should be elevated to the next level of management or to an officer of the parent company who contracted out the service. In this way, higher levels of management in the parent company become aware of those aspects of the support services which are not effective.

Also have companies enable the customer to rate the support experience and provide subjective input, rather than just some canned objective rating categories that may not relate to the problems encountered. Most of the objective rating categories relate to the scripts provided to the support people. For example, the typical questions asked would be items like "was the support person cheerful and polite, did they give you a case number, did they thank you for calling the support line and buying the product, etc?" Most of the questions are aimed at making sure that the support person was polite, logged the metric, and stuck to the script. The input should also allow you to segment your rating so that if you were happy with the customer service person but unhappy about waiting 80 minutes (listening to bad music) before anyone answered the call, you could indicate specifically what you were unhappy about.

# No Risk Subterfuge

##### The Rant

Here a company can send you a bill and many people will pay it even if they don't understand what it is for. If the person being billed has the knowledge, time, energy, and records to refute the bill, all the company loses is the money it wasn't due anyway. So there is no risk in sending out erroneous bills and picking up some easy money.

Here is a good example of how this can work for a company who wants to take advantage of this no risk subterfuge. My purchasing director came to me with a bill for several hundred dollars for legal books. The books had been delivered and a bill sent for these books. Once I had determined that no one had ordered these books and no purchase order given to the merchant billing for these books, I called them and indicated that there was no way we were going to pay for something we didn't order and didn't need. They then told me to send back the books. I told the company that we would put the books back on the loading dock where they had been delivered and they could come and get them if they wished. I then called several other school districts and found that several others had all gotten the same unordered books and associated billings. A few had already paid the bill and then couldn't find out who had ordered them.

Anyone familiar with publishing knows that the main cost of producing books is developing the content and setting up the presses. Once that has been done, the incremental cost of producing more copies is basically the paper, ink, cover stock, and the electricity to run the presses. I then called the state attorney general to report this scam by an out-of-state vendor. The attorney general's office said they would not pursue the matter as it could be "just an honest mistake."

I have personally had many of these erroneous bills and fortunately had the time and records to refute these charges. As mentioned above, if the customer can prove that the bill is not valid, all the company loses is the money they were not entitled to in the first case. There is no penalty for sending out bogus bills.

In one case, I actually paid a bogus bill. I was the executor of my parents estate. My mother passed away in a memory care unit two months after my father passed away. When I started paying off all their bills I received a credit card charge for $15 for gasoline, which was supposedly purchased after he passed away and several weeks after he had been confined to a hospital bed. Since he was the only one who had that card, it would have been easy enough to prove that the purchase was not legitimate, however, I could not settle the estate until all outstanding bills were paid. Since the amount was so small I just paid the bill rather than deal with the legal hassle and delay which would have been involved to refute the bill.

##### The Recommendation

Have legislation which penalizes the company sending out an erroneous bill by the amount of the bill plus $100. That penalty should then be sent to the customer who had to go to the trouble and effort to refute the bill. Then companies would be very careful to not to send out these bills knowing that at least some of the customers being billed would go to the trouble to research and refute the bill and cost the company a penalty.

# Developer Deception

##### The Rant

This problem occurs when charges are hidden, because they are initially subsidized, and don't emerge until the developer has sold out and moved on to another project or endeavor. By any standard this is subterfuge and deception.

This practice is quite common for the sale of homes in retirement communities. Here a retired couple may be shown a home in a retirement community developed by the offending developer. Of prime importance to the potential purchasers are the facilities and community attributes provided and their cost. Since these retired couples are usually on a reduced, and sometimes fixed income, they are looking for the best place at a price they can afford. In many cases they are shown a lovely clubhouse with swimming pools, workout rooms, restaurants, libraries, craft rooms, meeting rooms, computer rooms, pool tables, and a host of other accoutrements. They are also shown common areas with beautiful lawns, lakes, fountains, covered picnic facilities, walking trails, tennis courts, shuffle board courts, horse shoe pits, bocce ball courts, basketball courts, and other outdoor facilities. They are then told that these facilities and services are all covered by homeowner fees of X dollars per month or per year.

While the retired couple can reasonably assume that these fees will increase over time due to inflation, they certainly don't realize that the developer is artificially understating the ongoing charge by subsidizing these costs temporarily until the development is sold out. Then the unsuspecting couple finds out they can't afford to live in the community where they bought their house. The same thing happens when there is a beautiful golf course in the development with green fees of Y dollars per round. Again the developer may be subsidizing this amount and when the developer sells out, the green fees go up substantially. Here the couple realizes that they can no longer afford to play golf in their own development.

Developers also pull the same tricks in other types of developments. When I was in my late 20's and bought my first house in a development a similar thing happened. One of the advantages of this housing development was that there were street lights throughout the neighborhood. A few years after the developer had sold all the houses and moved on, we were contacted by the local utility company, which told us that the developer had paid for the equipment rental and power to operate the street lights for only five years and it was now our responsibility to pay the utility company an annual amount or have the streetlights removed. To make matters worse, they wanted one person in the community to collect this amount from every homeowner in this development, with over a hundred houses, and pay them with just one check. We finally were able to get the county to allow us to form a rural lighting district and have these charges added to our regular taxes.

##### The Recommendation

It is understandable and reasonable for a developer to temporily subsidize the homeowner fees for the unsold and undeveloped properties within the development. However, here the developer is just subsidizing the unsold units so that the initial residents are just paying their share of what the costs will eventually be when the development is totally sold out. Thus if there will eventually be 1,000 units sharing the facilities & services covered by the homeowner's fee, you should pay no less than 0.1% of those costs. That way your share of the costs will not increase when the development is totally sold out. If the developer is subsidizing more than that amount, then you are being deceived and set up for an eventual, and sometimes overwhelming, price hike.

Make this type of deception illegal. At the very least, require developers to inform potential buyers about how much their costs will increase after the subsidized amounts are removed.

# Unavoidable & Undesirable Conditions

##### The Rant

Here the conditions you must agree to are both unacceptable and unavoidable. The reason that they are unacceptable is that they are not something that you would agree to if you had any other choice. The reason that they are unavoidable is that you need the good or service for which the conditions apply and have no other alternative, since any potential competitor has the same conditions or there are no competitors.

Many years ago I was buying a house and putting down a sizable down payment. However, I still needed a bank loan for the bulk of the purchase. When the paperwork for the bank loan was presented to me for signature, I read all of the conditions and stipulations (small print) included in the contract. One condition which I found unacceptable was a clause, that gave the lender the right to negotiate directly with the insurance company for the amount the insurance company would settle the claim for if the home were destroyed by fire. Now I had no problem with securing insurance to cover the home (the banks collateral) or that the bank would have first claim to any insurance money paid, in the event that the property was destroyed by fire. What I did have a problem with was that this precluded me from having any say in the settlement.

Thus, If I had a thirty percent equity in the home when it burned down, the bank had a legal right to settle with the insurance company for only their seventy percent and that settlement would free the insurance company from any further obligation. Since it would be in the insurance companies interest to settle for the lowest acceptable amount, and in the bank's interest to settle the claim expeditiously, I could see a real danger in this arrangement. When I pointed this problem out to the bank's loan officer he assured me that, although my interpretation of the clause was correct, they would not do that sort of thing. When I asked him to amend the contract to address my concern, he told me that their contract was not subject to being amended and that if I took my business to another bank, I would find the same clause in their contracts as well.

As mentioned earlier in the rant about identify theft, we are told to zealously protect our social security number. However, their are numerous examples where the public or commercial services we need require that information if we are to receive the service. I recently became a patient of a new doctor. Part of the information needed to be accepted was my social security number, which would be accessible by any of the medical staff, office staff, or IT staff associated with the practice. This requirement did not cause me any pause, since to receive payment for any treatment they might provide they would need my primary and secondary insurance numbers. Since my medicare number is my social security number with an "A" at the end and my Tricare for Life (military) supplemental insurance number is my social security number, they already had that information. However, had I not been on medicare with a military supplement, I would not have wanted to provide my social security number to be accepted by this doctor, when it had no relevance to my medical history or any future treatments.

I faced a similar situation when I called to reconnect my internet connection after a six month absence. I had been doing business with the company for ten years and yet they would not reconnect my internet services unless I provided them with my social security number. Since there were no other companies available to provide a high speed internet connection, they had me over a barrel with an unavoidable and undesirable condition. Even though both the military and social security officials have recently taken steps to keep your social security number off the cards they issue, the main problem is that agencies, merchants, and providers are still requiring that information. So those stealing your identity are getting this information from the numerous data bases where they are recorded, not from someone stealing your wallet.

##### The Recommendation

We have anti-trust laws, which were created to provide competition and avoid a monopoly. However, there are several industries where there are so few competitors as to create an oligopoly, where the major competitors can all see and collude on the other's prices and conditions. Thus, there does not appear to be any way of keeping these entities from all adopting the same conditions, which favor them and not their customers. Since their iron clad boilerplate contracts and conditions are unalterable by policy, the over protection put there by their lawyers is both unavoidable and undesirable for those needing the product or service.

# Knee Jerk Price Hikes

##### The Rant

Here retailers, suppliers, and producers all change their prices immediately whenever there is an event that can be used to justify a price increase. This will be reflected throughout the entire supply chain even though the event might not have any impact on that segment of the supply chain until some time in the future.

Have you ever noticed that the morning after a freeze in Brazil, which damaged the coffee crop, the prices for coffee in your local supermarket immediately increase? Now the coffee in the store, in the warehouse, in the ships delivering coffee, and in the ports ready to be shipped are not impacted by the freeze. So when the grocer jacks up the price of coffee anticipating a future shortage, he is really making an excessive profit on the coffee he already has and which was procured at the lower cost in effect before the freeze. What about the coffee grown in Hawaii or Costa Rica where there was no freeze? All coffee prices will go up immediately using the Brazilian freeze as the justification. This situation is evident with all types of food as well as other goods produced around the world.

A similar situation happens when some political change in the middle east results in an anticipated future shortage in crude oil. All the oil in the ports waiting to be shipped, on tanker ships, already in storage at the refinery or crude oil which has already been processed into gasoline and is stored in holding tanks, on tanker rail cars or tanker trucks, or underground tanks at your local service station are impacted. All of this crude oil and gasoline was procured and processed before the impacts of the new political situation were known. What about crude oil harvested in Venezuela, Canada, Texas, Alaska, or the Dakotas, which are not impacted by the political situation in the middle east? Yet the price of gasoline will go up immediately on those existing supplies not just the ones that will eventually be impacted by the anticipated shortage. As with the grocery store, the gas station reaps an immediate jump in the profitability in the gas they procured at the lower price.

##### The Recommendation

Now as an economics major, I understand how supply and demand influences prices. I also understand how commodities and futures traders fit into the supply line. However, in these cases current supply has not been impacted by the event, only an anticipated impact on future supply. Here we need to rely on the press and the competition between suppliers & retailers to avoid this artificial jump in prices. The press needs to make people aware of this deception and suppliers & retailers need to take advantage of the situation by undercutting those who are taking advantage of huge margins.

Under a healthy competitive environment, knee jerk pricing would not be a problem as the competition between suppliers & retailers to get the end consumer's business would insure normal margins. However, since the number of competitors has diminished in recent years, many markets have become oligopolies and take advantage of this to collude or at least mimic their competitors. Much as I dislike government controls, the threat of these might also be a way to discourage this kind of activity.

# Price Gouging

##### The Rant

Here retailers take advantage of some catastrophic local event to extract an exceptionally high price for necessities and impacted victims have no other option than to capitulate. This is different than the previous rant about Knee Jerk Price Hikes. There the excuse for raising the price is based on an anticipated shortage in supply. With Price Gouging the price hikes are based on a sudden and desperate increase in demand.

We have all seen the news reports of exorbitant prices being charged for water, food, gasoline, batteries, plywood, airline tickets and other necessities, which those in the path of a major storm or flood require to survive or flee. There may be some extenuating circumstances, where to secure the needed supplies in excess of normal demand requires some additional costs to the retailer (emergency deliveries, overtime for employees, procurement of additional warehouse space, etc). These are legitimate costs to the retailer and passing those on to the consumer should not be considered gouging. However, if price increases are not based on legitimate costs, but based strictly on charging whatever the market will bare, then the merchant is taking advantage of the victims precarious situation to extract a cruel and unusual profit, from people who are already facing dire circumstances.

##### The Recommendation

Many governors and mayors try to curb this kind of behavior by enacting temporary restrictions or pressure on retailers. The press and media also expose these unscrupulous practices. However, these efforts do not seem to keep this kind of practice from being used, because of the greed of some merchants and the "golden egg" opportunity presented by the emergency.

During any declared emergency, retailers and other service providers should be fined if they are found to be increasing their margins above what they normally mark their products up. That way the retailer or service provider is not punished for any additional costs they incur, but are also not allowed to extract exorbitant profits, because they have their customers over a barrel. If businesses know that customer complaints will be investigated and they might have to submit records to defend their actions, they will be much more reluctant to price gouge.

# Charges for Nothing

##### The Rant

If utilities can justify charging you for services you did not receive, just because you were on their list of customers, why couldn't a business charge you if you are a regular customer or card holder even if you didn't purchase anything? The rational is that the utility has to send you a bill even if you didn't use any natural gas, electricity, or water. That doesn't make any sense as the utility billing program can just have their computer system not create a bill if there has not been any usage.

As a snowbird I am very aware of this practice and its growing adoption. Initially when I left my home in Arizona I would turn off all my utilities in the spring and not be charged until I reconnected them in the fall. During this period of inactivity there was no need to read my meter or send me a bill. However, the local utilities soon became aware of this potential and sent me a bill each month for a basic fee even though there was no electricity being consumed.

When I leave my house in Washington, I turn off my water at the main valve so there is no water consumed during my six month absence. I still receive a substantial fee from the local water company for my non-usage. I also get a very large sewer bill for the same period of time from the county even though no one is living in the house and no water is being run into the sewer. If I have the water company turn off my water at the main valve or have the sewer services discontinued during my absence, they charge me more for the reconnection fee than I pay for the non-usage charges.

One problem with being charged for nothing is that there is no way I can cut back on my consumption and buy less than nothing. I also can't get any sympathy or support from my city, county, or state government agencies, because they are either providing these services or are collecting taxes on the amount of the charges by the utility company. Also in all cases there is no competitive alternative, since the utility companies usually have a legal monopoly.

If private businesses were to start using this provision just like the utility companies do, they could charge me a basic fee for not purchasing groceries, gasoline, and other products and services I might from time to time purchase from these companies. After all they have their buildings, products, and employees ready to serve me and should not be penalized because I didn't come into their place of business and buy anything this month. If this ever became an acceptable practice the city, county, and state governments would also be rewarded with the sales tax I would pay on the basic fee in lieu of the goods or services I did not purchase.

##### The Recommendation

There needs to be some federal legislation which precludes any utility company, or other business, from being able to charge you for something you did not purchase or receive. It would have to be federal legislation as the state, county, and municipal governments are all getting tax revenue on the basic charges being made.

# Disloyalty Bonuses

##### The Rant

Where special rates are given to those potential customers who are using some other product and those who are long time customers pay a much higher price. Also software that is compatible with a competitors product but not with the earlier version of the same software.

If you are a loyal Brand "C" Motors customer and buy a new Brand "C" automobile or truck every three years, you may pay more for a new Brand "C" vehicle than a customer who has been a Brand "F" or Brand "G" Motors customer and is offered a special price to switch brands. Also if you have subscribed to a particular magazine for many years, you will be charged full price for your renewal subscription while a new customer may get a cut rate for their initial subscription. If you are a new customer of a cable or satellite television provider, you may get several months of free premium channels, but if you are a loyal customer who has been with the provider for years, you will probably not get anything for your continued loyalty.

This situation may impact more than just what you are charged for a product or service. As an example, I have been a loyal Brand "A" computer user for many years. As a consequence I used a Brand "A" word processor, which was developed and sold by the same company that made the computer. When a later generation Brand "A" word processing program was developed, it worked with files created on a Brand "M" word processing program, but was not comparable with those word processing files I had created with the previous Brand "A" word processor. So I was penalized for being a loyal Brand "A" user, while a previously Brand "M" customer was rewarded for not being a loyal Brand "A" customer..

##### The Recommendation

Perhaps those of us who are perplexed by these disloyalty bonuses should just switch to the competitors product when we need to upgrade so that we can get the perks offered for switching brands. Then we can switch back and get more perks the next time we need to replace a product or service.

# Markdowns, Testimonials & Claims

##### The Rant

#### Markdowns

Very few people buy anything at the full retail price. For this reason, merchants put inflated prices on items so that they can offer a sale price and still make a nice profit. In California several major national retailers were proved to be offering sales that were falsely labeled as the items were never sold at the full retail price and the public was mislead by thinking that they were getting a bargain. Also some businesses have been going out of business for years and their going out of business sales were a humorous hoax.

#### Testimonials

Also consider the testimonials by actors who probably never used the product. The young housewife in her apron who testifies how well brand "A" detergent gets her families wash sparkling clean, may not be a wife, have the family shown, and may have never used brand "A" or even done a wash. She may just be an actress, who was hired and given a script and a laundry room setting to get you to buy Brand "A" laundry detergent. The ploy is to get you to buy Brand "A" laundry detergent, because of the way it worked for her and her family.

How about the beautiful movie star who endorses cosmetic "B" and raves about how it makes her skin look radiant or her hair silky and manageable. Do we ever stop to think that she has been a beautiful actress for eighteen years and the product she is endorsing was only developed last year. We are also influenced by athletes who testify that brand "C" breakfast cereal contributes to their health and success on the court or field, when they may not even have ever eaten a bowl of Brand "C" cereal. In most cases, the athlete was already famous before they were contracted to endorse Brand "C" cereal. If the Brand "D" breakfast cereal makers had offered the athlete more money to give them an endorsement, you would be buying Brand "D" on your next trip to the supermarket.

#### Claims

How can a TV program or a movie be the latest blockbuster hit or most popular new program on TV, when it hasn't even been released? Yet the promotional advertisement for the upcoming program or movie may make that claim. How about the Brand "E" dental hygiene product that four out of five dentists prefer and recommend to their patients. Do we ever stop to consider how this equates to the claims from the makers of the competitive Brand "F" who cite that seven out of ten dentist prefer their product and recommend it to their patients.

##### The Recommendation

The observations made above seem so obvious that no one would be convinced that they were genuine. However, if the general population could see through these fabrications, why would they gravitate to the activities and products as a result of the markdowns, testimonials, and claims made by the people who make and distribute the item being touted. If this was not the case, why would those methods be used continuously (sometimes at great expense) to beat out the competition.

Some of us are very skeptical about these markdowns, testimonials, and claims. Perhaps if more people looked at these deceptions with a more jaundiced eye, we would see a reduction in their use and more genuine methods used to inform potential, consumers and viewers.

# Automated Answering Machines

##### The Rant

All of us have dealt with those automated phone messages, which give the customer the option to choose between several choices by pressing a number to select either a department or a category. That in turn usually leads to a series of sub-menus and further choices. The main problem is that if your reason for calling does not fall into one of the categories listed, you may find yourself at a dead end. If the choices include a general category or the ability to speak to an operator you may end up getting an answer or a solution to your problem. However, I have encountered many such lists that do not include such an option, but instead have only the choice of having the list repeated or being taken back to the previous menu.

I have also encountered many of those automated systems, which would attempt to simplify this process by incorporating voice recognition so that the customer could just verbally indicate the purpose for the call and not have to punch in numbers on their phone. Most of these voice recognition systems do not work very well and result in the customer repeating the command over and over without ever getting to the desired location. Now I have no problem with my smartphone's voice recognition system even for an entire sentence. However, I have had considerable problems getting to the right location with just a single word command from their own list of available choices, even though I have neither a quiet voice nor any discernible accent.

Another annoyance is when the answering system gives you a litany of information before it even gives you a chance to make a selection or talk to a person. In most cases this is just to inform the caller about their address and hours of operation. However, some will give a protracted sales pitch about other products or services the company offers or facts about how great the company is and why you should continue to do business with them. If you are dealing with a bank or credit card company they may give you information about your current balance, available credit, and various information about current or past payments.

If you do select the option of talking to an operator or representative, you should be prepared to wait for a considerable period of time. During that time you will be treated to some elevator music to keep you occupied and let you know that you are still connected and on their waiting list. They will usually interrupt that music to tell you to please stay on the line because your call is very important to them. Not important enough to hire more operators or representatives just important enough to mention in their automated message. They may also use this idol time to tell you more about their company and induce you to buy more of their products or services.

It is always a mystery to me that even though you have had to enter your account number, identification number, password, product designation, or some other sixteen digit alpha-numeric identifier into the automated system to identify yourself and/or your product, the first thing the representative asks you for is that same information. Presumably the reason you enter that information is so that it will be available on the screen for the representative along with your file or records to save the representative time in dealing with the caller and their issue. Obviously whoever designed the system and procedure did not make that connection or perhaps one person designed the system and another developed the procedure and they never coordinated their actions.

##### The Recommendation

We will never get rid of these annoying systems so the best we can hope for is that the companies using them make them as efficient and convenient as possible. When one of my department heads requested permission to install an automated answering machine in their office, I permitted it on one condition. That condition was that the first message was that if the caller wanted to talk to the secretary, they could press "0" at any time. Normally that message, when available at all, is made after all of the other options have been presented.

One thing I do like is when the automated system gives me an estimated time that I will need to be on hold before a real person answers my call. That way if that time exceeds the time I have available, I can call back later. Companies will also have much more satisfied customers if they give them the opportunity to talk to a real person and not have to wait for a protracted period of time on hold.

# Out of Control Computer Systems

##### The Rant

Here computer programs, which are relied upon for the basic operation of a business or agency, have glitches that are detrimental to the proper functioning of the operation. In many cases this is not only a problem for the customers of that business, but for the employees as well. For the employees it causes them extra work and embarrasses them, because they must deal with angry customers and not be able to make the situation any better.

Here is a good example of this situation. When we would close down our house in Arizona and go to our house in Washington for six months we would either close down our cable TV and internet services or put them on vacation hold. In both cases I would notify the company the date we would be leaving and wanted to discontinue the service. However, for months after that date, I would receive full bills for these services as though they were still being used. Not only did these charges continue to accumulate, but the computer billing system would add interest, penalties, and issue warnings about impugning our credit rating. When I would call the cable company, they would acknowledge the appropriate shut off date and tell me to disregard the bills and warnings. They indicated that all of the inappropriate charges, penalties, and interest would eventually be removed from my account.

Apparently their computer system was set up so that only the maintenance man responsible for effecting the disconnection was authorized to indicate the shutdown. Because of the number of snowbirds who would all leave Arizona at the same time, this workman was overloaded with disconnection requests and had a very long backlog at that time of year. Once he got around to making the necessary adjustments and logging it into the system, it would discontinue the billings and remove the penalties and interest which had been charged. Not only did this irritate the customers, it put the burden of explaining this ridiculous arrangement to the customers and resulted in cancellations from those customers who were offended and improperly charged.

Another example of computer system not in touch with reality was when I took my motorcycle in for service at the dealership. When I went to pay my bill for the service the cashier handed me a receipt with my name grossly misspelled. Since I would be getting all my future service done at this dealership, I asked her to change the spelling of my name. Although my driver's license and credit card showed the correct spelling she told me no one in the dealership, including the manager, had authority to change my name in their computer system. The mechanic who had entered the information initially was using the hunt & peck method of typing on a very dirty keyboard and made the mistake when he input the data in the shop. Here again the employees knew that the computer system was wrong but were helpless to make the needed changes.

##### The Recommendation

Have an employee who understands the needs and complexities of the operation vitally involved in the initial development and ongoing updating of the software. When I was working for a community college, all of the community colleges in the state belonged to a computer consortium, which was writing new programs for all of our budget, accounting, and reporting requirements. We would get updates on the progress of the new system at our regular monthly meetings.

We constantly had a problem with both the initial software and recommended changes, because the programs the consultant developed did not meet our needs. Then the firm writing the software hired an experienced community college controller, who was in between jobs, to work with them as a full-time consultant. From that point on the system was changed to do what we needed.

# Wide Turns

##### The Rant

I'm sure most of us have experienced a situation where we are stopped at an intersection at a stop sign, or traffic signal, and had a large truck cut across our lane and hit or almost hit our vehicle. In this situation we may be behind the stop line and in the center of our own lane and yet be subject to being struck by a large truck that is way to long to be traversing city streets. During my last incident I was stopped at a stop sign on a two lane road when a large truck turned left into the road I was on and required me to quickly escape onto the shoulder of the road to avoid having the left front sectionof my car crushed by this truck.

Fortunately for me there was no curb or barrier on the right that would have precluded me from quickly taking refuge. On a city street, where I would have had to jump over a curb and perhaps hit a pedestrian, there would have been no way to avoiding a collision. On some four lane streets, or those with a center turning lane, they sometimes put the interior stop line back behind those for the outer lane. However, this can create a visual problem for the driver in the center position.

What I am talking about is not an accident or a truck driver making a dangerous move. This is anticipated by the trucking company and they have a sign on the back of their trucks stating: "Warning this truck makes wide turns." The sign also shows a graphic of a long truck crashing into the corner of a automobile. So the trucking company and the police know that this is a dangerous situation, but they think they are absolved of any responsibility, because they have a warning sign on the back of their truck.

I wonder if you or I put a sign on the back of our car stating: "This vehicle does not obey speed limits or stop for red lights" that would absolve us for any liability or prosecution for not obeying normal traffic laws. In addition to traffic laws, which are put in place to create an orderly flow of traffic and make us safer, there should be a common courtesy that overrides the "I'm bigger than you are so beware." This rant involves just one more example of how our individual safety and rights are subordinated to commercial priorities. I'm sure the trucking lines that can lobby and make political contributions, have more clout in this matter than throngs of voters, who are willing to be intimidated by these large trucks and the companies that put them on routes that require them to pose a threat to other vehicles.

##### The Recommendation

Only use these super long trucks for open highway travel and require that shorter trucks be used for city streets where they can legally stay in their lane. With the common use of containers for ships, trains, and trucks this could be accomplished with containers which would fit safely on the bed of a smaller truck and not require reloading. So put two containers on the highway trucks but restrict those trucks traveling on city or urban streets to a single container. Most delivery trucks and trade vans do not create any wide turn violations.

Absent changes to shorter trucks in city environments, we need to make sure that truck drivers only make a wide turn when there is no other vehicle in the area that they might hit. We have pilot vehicles for highway trucks, which are wider than normal, perhaps we need to require them for long trucks that can't safely navigate tight turns. These pilot vehicles would then make sure the area was safe before the long truck made their wide turn.

# Packaging and Labeling

##### The Rant

Most of us have encountered situations where we bring home a product that is so heavily packaged that it is almost impossible to get the contents out of the package without destroying or damaging the contents. We have also probably faced situations where the label is so inappropriately placed that it obscures information we need to find out about a product before we purchase it or damages the product on which the label is placed. A price label on the lenses of a pair of sunglasses is a good example of the later.

Much of the new packaging involves preformed plastic over cardboard packages that not only protect the product during shipment but also designed to be hung from display hooks in the retail store. The problem is that the plastic is so thick and stiff that it is difficult to remove without damaging the product. If you try and cut through the plastic with scissors you will probably ruin those scissors and still not be able to get the package open. If you use a knife you risk being cut by the knife or even the sharp and stiff plastic surrounding the product. The only way I have been successful is to use a box cutter on a large wooden cutting board. Even then I have to be careful not to cut into the contents of the package. There are probably specialized tools that are made to open packages like the ones described above, but I have not seen them or sure I would buy and store one for this purpose.

##### The Recommendation

Have the manufacturer use sturdy packaging for transportation that include multiples of the product in more user friendly retail packages. The retail store can then remove the sturdy outer packaging used for shipment and display the easy to open packages that are more convenient to their customers. These smaller customer friendly packages would also enable the retailer to stock more of the product in the same space. This is just one more example of where the individual consumer is not given priority over the convenience of the manufacturer. The manufacturer and the retailer should also use labels that are easy to remove and not placed in a spot where they obscure information or leave a residue that can only be removed by buying a product specifically designed for that purpose. Why should the customer have to deal with this situation when it could be easily remedied by the manufacturer or retailer?

# Unrequested & Unrelenting Software

##### The Rant

Your computer probably came with some preloaded demonstration or temporary software. On the surface, this is not a problem as the individual can decide which software to keep once the temporary or trial period has ended. However, even after this software has expired it will continue to interrupt your computer use to try and sell you on the full function, full cost, version. Even if you have this software uninstalled, the sales messages continue to emerge. Many cases the software and sales pitches are downloaded to your computer on the back of a piece of software you intended to install.

While your security software may require your permission before any downloaded software is installed, it will not normally keep these prompts and sales offers from continuing to pop up on your computer. So when the security software asks you for permission to install a particular software program, it may not let you know that there are some other promotional marketing scripts for other products that company offers or even for another company, which is paying for the chance to get into your computer. This is much like the riders on legislation discussed earlier in this book.

In my case, the most egregious prompt is actually from a security program, which came pre-installed on my computer and I do not want. No matter how many times I say no, it comes back later to warn me that my computer is unprotected and gives me a link to install the full version. I find that this problem is more prevalent on my PC than it is on my Mac, however, it is common to both platforms.

##### The Recommendation

Have software which removes these kinds of scripts permanently. Thus, when it asks you if you want to install or download some unsolicited software, you should be able to select an option that says no and another that says permanently get rid of the script that is asking the question and trying to market the product.

There is little motivation for the software developer who has developed this script to make it easy to remove. However, there should be a provision on your operating system to remove a script that you do not want to see again.

# Consolidation

##### The Rant

Here companies combine to gain efficiencies but often accomplish just the opposite, because they become more complex and bureaucratic. It also results in monopolies or oligopolies which make their respective industries less competitive.

Consider the consolidation that has taken place in the American auto industry between 1955 and 2015. In 1955 there were ten auto manufactures producing twenty-four makes of cars. In 2015 there were only three of the ten manufactures still in business and they had reduced the number of makes they produced from fourteen to seven. Gone from the big three automakers are makes like Plymouth, Imperial, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Mercury, Edsel, and Continental.

Much the same happened in the passenger aircraft business. In 1955 there were seven companies manufacturing commercial passenger airliners, in 2015 there was only one. Many of those 1955 companies consolidated to form McDonald-Douglas and Lockheed-Martian before they dropped out of this market and left Boeing as our only domestic passenger airliner manufacturer. Much the same thing happened to foreign producers of passenger aircraft, leaving Airbus as the sole foreign competitor for Boeing.

The examples sited above are just two of the industries, which have been impacted by this wave of consolidations. Airlines, banks, hospitals, retailers, internet services, and a host of other providers have also been bought up or combined with other firms to make them more prominent, efficient, or competitive.

Often companies will consolidate to gain efficiencies in management or administration. The logic is that each of the separate companies had a president and other major executives. However, the new consolidated company may have many more levels of management and those additional middle level managers drive up the administrative costs of the business to a higher level than was required before the consolidation. Also the top executives of the consolidated company will require a much higher salary, because of the expanded size of the operation they are managing. The additional levels of administration also slow down and complicate the internal functioning of the company or agency.

##### The Recommendation

There is no recommendation or way of going back. The government's attempt to breakup the monopoly held by the Bell Telephone Company was such an attempt and had very mixed reviews by both the communications industry and the general public. This undoubtedly has made the government leery of taking this approach with other companies in various segments of the economy.

Therefore, we can only lament the loss of variety and competition, which once existed in these industries and many others. Our only hope is that the efficiency gained by these consolidations outweigh the complexity and loss of competition for the few firms which remain. For those businesses or agencies who are considering consolidation, they need to look realistically at how they will operate after the consolidation and what that will do to their costs and efficiency.

# Centralization

##### The Rant

Here companies put all the controls at the home office and relegate the branch operations to just carrying out the directives of the central office. This stifles the ability of the branch or store to make management decisions and operational changes, which would strengthen the organization and make it more competitive.

Many companies operate in a centralized way, with most decisions being made at company headquarters, while others prefer a more decentralized method where most decisions are made at the individual store or operation. Some come partway in between with many of the decisions made at a branch or regional level. Companies may also alternate between centralization and decentralization to find the best combination or because of a change in leadership.

From having studied about and operated in both types of environment, I much prefer the decentralized model. Here decisions are made at the local level and can be much more flexible and responsive to the circumstance at hand. Of course this means that the company must have more capable managers at the local level and give them the authority to make decisions about their individual units.

I have had occasion to ask a store manager of a retail chain about an item that they normally carried, but appeared to be out of stock. The manager told me that they don't know if, or when, they will get the item again as the main office determines what merchandise they will get and they don't know what they will be getting until they unload the truck. Here the store manager knows they have a demand for a particular product, but is unable to satisfy customer requests for the item. Conversely they may be sent inventory, which none of their customers want and will just sit on the shelves.

On another occasion I went to a chain retail department store in Phoenix and asked about buying a bathing suit. I was informed that they were shipped winter attire and did not have any swimming suits even though the temperature in Phoenix at that time of year was in the mid-eighties. Had I wanted a heavy jacket or earmuffs I would have been in luck.

In many instances, the decisions the store manager makes not only involve the items stocked, or how they will be arranged, but also involve personnel decisions. My son managed a store where he had four assistant managers. He told me that the number four manager was the best assistant and was given the best evaluation. However, when the chain opened up a new store they promoted assistant manager number one (who had more seniority but less capability) to take over the new store, even though the managers were not unionized.

When I was a young Air Force officer stationed in Utah, I found another example of why a centralized model did not meet the needs of the local situation. The base I served on repaired helicopters. There was one small part in the rotor assembly, which would fail frequently. However, the Air Force had determined that if they bought an entire repair assembly, including the rotor blades and all other components necessary to repair the entire assembly, they could get the entire package for $97,000, which was less than what it would cost to buy all of the components individually.

So when a helicopter needed to have that part replaced, they needed to open a complete package to get the needed part. The next time they needed that part they had to open up another package. So to get a part, which probably could be procured for less than $100, they had to open a $97,000 package and just store the rest of the parts. As a result they had several opened packages in stock and several more unopened packages on order.

I was employed at a community college where we had a deep sea diving program. Our training equipment and facilities were located on an older wooden pier on a beach a couple miles from the college. The owner of the pier had been steadily increasing the rent for our use of the pier and had also let the condition of the pier deteriorate to the point where it needed to have major repairs done to ensure the safety of our students and staff. He indicated that any repairs would need to be done by the college and could not be deducted from the rent.

Since we did not want to make long term renovations to a pier for which we only had a short term lease, we decided to construct our own concrete pier. We found some adjacent land and a contractor who would build the pier for an acceptable amount. Here we were operating in a decentralized mode.

When the State of Washington found out about the arrangement, they immediately made us nullify the purchase contract we had negotiated and put the construction of the pier on hold. The State then sent a couple of auditors to do a study and make sure the local yokels at this public, state funded college were not getting ripped off. The study took several months and revealed that the property in question was worth considerably more than what we had arranged to pay. Armed with that information, the property owner then jacked up the price to the college. Also because the construction project had been delayed, the contractor increased his bid for building the pier. And, as I recall, the state charged us for conducting the study. You can clearly see the impact of the centralized intervention.

I have also been in restaurants and hotels where the local manager or employees are authorized to make a decision to reduce your bill or not charge you at all, because the product or service did not meet expectations. Those are the establishments which I will go back to and recommend to my friends. In the long run it is those establishments who are the most receptive to their customers who create satisfaction and repeat business.

##### The Recommendation

In the commercial sector this situation is usually self-correcting in that the businesses, which let the local manager call the shots that best meet their operation and its clients or customers will have the most satisfied customers, the best reputation, and the most repeat business. However, there is certainly economies of scale, which make centralization an attractive alternative. The centralized method also insures more consistency and may protect the company against law suits generated by a local manager who makes a bad decision.

So if all your competitors use a centralized method you can keep your costs down and not lose any sales. You also may have a price advantage over those competitors who use the decentralized model. As far as the federal and state governments, they will probably never get away from the centralized mode, even if they have to pay several hundred dollars for a ten dollar hammer.

# Chapter 3

# Social & Personal Behavior

The rants included in this chapter are directed at the way individuals and groups deal with other individuals and groups. It addresses these problems as they relate to the other individuals and the society as a whole. Although many of these practices have been in effect for some time, it seems proficious for us to revisit the original concept and see if it makes sense in light of the current situation.

# Cultural Diversity

##### The Rant

While the initial concept of cultural diversity seems like a positive attribute, when interpreted to justify those who cling to all aspects of their former culture, it actually flies in the face of the very social ideals for which we purport to be striving. The American dream needs to be more than just the opportunity to prosper economically. On an ideal level it represents the opportunity to evolve into a society, which goes beyond tolerance and actually promotes the desire to enrich our lives by developing a new and improved culture, which embellishes the racial, ethnic, economic, and religious diversity of all its citizens. This new and improved culture takes the best attributes from the contributing cultures and discards the negative attributes.

The New Colossus sonnet, on the plaque under the stature of liberty, not only welcomes potential citizens from all countries, races, ethnic groups, economic classes, and religions, it admonishes them to leave some things behind. We should encourage them to bring in their unique foods, customs, and festivals to share with their new culture, but to divest themselves of those prejudices, class & caste differences, dress restrictions, native languages, intolerances, political loyalties, and other aspects of their former life, which would isolate them from, and embitter them to, those who are different.

In other words, if you want to enjoy the benefits of freedom, opportunity and acceptance offered by the new culture, you need to respect, embellish, and appreciate those who look, dress, act, or worship differently than those to which you are accustomed. Even if you come here temporarily as a student, employee, or tourist, you should respect our culture and not be offended by, or belligerent about, that which is different from what you are accustomed to in your own culture.

Unless you are of Native American decent, either you or your ancestors were immigrants. Actually, since all human migration started from Africa, even our indigenous populations were at one time immigrants. Unfortunately in the early days of our nation, many national, racial, ethnic, and religious groups cloistered together in small communities and ghettos clinging to the prejudices, language, dress, and customs of their old culture. However, over time we have come together and, for the most part, share the common values, language, and other attributes of our new culture. For this we must thank the youngest among us, who have become more progressive, tolerant, integrated, educated, and open minded with each new generation.

What we sometimes fail to recognize is that we now have our own culture with our own unique history, geography, economy, folklore, music, art, sports, holidays, dress, and language. Anyone who does not think we have our own unique language and idioms has most likely not tried to carry on a protracted conversation with someone from Great Britain or any number of other countries such as New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Scotland, or Ireland, who have English as the root of their unique national language. Having members of the same culture speak different languages not only segregates the culture, it also complicates, and drives up the costs of, our personal, commercial, and public activities.

We should expect that those who intend to permanently become part of our culture, identify with, support, and pledge loyalty to that culture and not some foreign country or culture. We should never again have to suffer the indignity and discrimination brought about by forcing citizens into internment camps as we did during World War II. We should also never have to make a soldier worry about the loyalty of the soldier fighting next to them, or a family worry about the loyalty of the family living next door.

##### The Recommendation

Admonish all citizens and other permanent residents to speak the language of, respect the culture of, follow the customs of, and pledge loyalty to our country. We should also make provisions to enable permanent residents to learn the language and other aspects of the culture rather than try and accommodate numerous languages and foreign cultures, which complicate and dis-unify the lives of everyone involved.

# Displaced Aggression

##### The Rant

Taking out your anger on someone, even if that individual or group is not the one which caused the problem. We have seen this problem around the globe, where an international group (like the G8) is meeting in a major city. Those who oppose the international groups policies, current actions, or even the groups legitimacy flock to that city and cause mayhem. Rather than protest peacefully and carry signs, they may block traffic, walk on cars, throw bricks through store windows, start fires and participate in other acts of violence against people and property.

Now the protesters can't get to the members of the group they are unhappy about, because those group members are meeting on the top floor of a building and have police protection for their safety. The people who are impacted are those people who have nothing to do with the group and are punished for something over which they usually have no control or interest. However, the protesters want to demonstrate their dissatisfaction and can't get to those who they feel are responsible, so they take out their anger on whoever is easy to reach. It's sort of like kicking the dog because you are mad at your boss or your spouse.

A similar situation may exist in some cities where a video of police violence against a citizen shown on TV sparks outrage amongst citizens who protest against the police and end up throwing rocks, explosives or shooting police in retaliation. While this may not look like displaced aggression on the surface, it usually is. That is because the citizens are taking out their anger against the good cops, who didn't create the incident, while the bad cops, who did create the incident, sit home, with a cold beer, on paid administrative leave watching the riot on television. This situation also might play out in protests and violence against police in other cities across the nation, who had nothing to do with the incident.

In response to situations like the ones addressed above, a black quarterback for a professional football team in California knelt during the national anthem at the start of a game to register his dissatisfaction with the American Flag and the government it stood for. This sparked similar incidents by other athletes who wanted to show their dissatisfaction with what was happening in other communities. It also sparked a negative reaction from other citizens, some of whom had fought to defend the freedom & rights represented by that flag and thought his actions were inappropriate.

This gesture was done in the quarterback's normal workplace and provided a very public forum to vent his legitimate anger about bad things that were happening in various places around the country. However, I felt that this was displaced aggression, because it was that flag and federal government that marched into Georgia to end slavery, intervened in Alabama to end segregation, marched into Germany to end persecution of Jews, fought in Yugoslavia to end persecution of Muslims, and stood up against Apartheid in South Africa. This flag and the federal government it represents is trying to end intolerance and ethnic cleansing in the Middle East and stood up for the rights of LGBT citizens and other minority groups across the nation. It is also that flag and its constitution, which insured his legitimate right to disrespect that flag and federal government if he chose to do so.

That is not to say that athletes taking a knee at a game to protest social injustice is inappropriate. It is just that there would be more effective and less controversial avenues available to that individual. Like most Americans, I was appalled by the behavior shown on video of police aggression against unarmed people who were not presenting any threat to the police officers who assaulted or killed them. However, I believe that the athlete would have more of a positive impact to solve the problem if they went to the city where the incident took place and peacefully protested along with other citizens to draw public attention to the actual police department and city officials where the incident took place. These are the folks who were responsible for the police officers who were at fault and the folks who can discipline, fire, and convict the guilty parties.

As a professional athlete their celebrity would be noticed at the protest and the national news media would be more likely to cover the protest gathering and not require violence to make it newsworthy. Making a simple gesture at your place of work (the stadium, field, or court) at a disassociated symbol (the flag & anthem) of course is much easier than taking the time and effort to make a meaningful gesture directed at the actual perpetrators. It would also create much less push-back from those who think that this is an affront to these cherished symbols. Any protest should attempt to get as many people as possible to be sympathetic to your cause.

At the time the "Black Lives Matter" movement was being heard across the nation, the President of the United States, the Attorney General of the United States as well as, many of the mayors, prosecutors, police chiefs, and police officers in the cities where these unfortunate incidents occurred were black. To insinuate that these leaders were unsympathetic to this cause and not doing everything they could to address these incidents is unfair to those leaders. What some people do not appreciate is that the government can't insure that every vestige of intolerance, prejudice, and discrimination is abolished from the hearts of every person in the country regardless of how hard it tries. However it is the responsibility of every citizen to make sure that it keeps on trying to achieve liberty and justice for all.

##### The Recommendation

Every individual and protest group needs to ask itself if what they are doing to register their dissatisfaction meets these criteria: (1) Is it directed toward those who caused the problem or those who can make the necessary changes to solve the problem, (2) Does it avoid punishing those who are neither responsible for the problem, nor have any power to effect the necessary changes, and (3) Does it get across the desired message to the general public in a way that will elicit support, rather than alienate people who might otherwise be sympathetic to the cause.

# Rights over Logic

##### The Rant

Throughout history those being governed in a society didn't have many rights at all. They were allowed to do only what the king, emperor, noble, or chief allowed them to do. As a result people have had to fight to establish rights that would guarantee they would be treated fairly and impartially. This would apply to the Magna Carta in 1215 and the Declaration of Independence in 1776, which were both gained by bloody battles against an English king.

Sometimes those rights would only cover a particular segment of the society. As an example, the Magna Carta, signed by King John at Runnymede, only gave rights to the nobility. Even our own constitution initially excluded some members of our society such as women and slaves. So our rights are very important in a free society and we certainly do not want to lose those rights. Now our rights are guaranteed to all citizens.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court has already determined that your right to freedom of speech does not allow you to yell "fire" in a crowded theater when there isn't any fire. The reason is that it would cause panic and injury to those who would be impacted by your actions. It should also not allow you to publish, in print or electronic media, information about how to make a lethal bomb to unleash against your fellow citizens. It should not be a platform to tutor people on how to effectively commit murder or perform acts of terrorism.

Freedom of speech and assembly should also not be subverted or tolerated as a recruiting tool for hate groups and those espousing violence to co-opt vulnerable people to join their vile, subversive or illegal causes. Providing hate groups and foreign enemies a pulpit to entice people to commit acts of violence tears down the fabric of a society, it does not make it better.

Having the right to bear arms, as addressed in the Second Amendment of our Constitution, is also frequently abused and misused. This right was originally established to insure that the militia (National Guard) would be able to function and protect citizens against the kind of tyranny that we fought against in our Revolutionary War. Since then it has been taken as a right for individuals to bear arms for their own protection and survival.

Most citizens do not have a problem with other citizens having firearms for personal protection, hunting, target practice, skeet shooting, and other such activities. However, there is no logical reason for having automatic (or those designed to be easily converted to automatic) assault type weapons and large magazines unless you want give someone the ability to go into a movie theater, shopping mall, sporting arena, church, concert arena, airport, night club, college campus, high school, or elementary school and kill a large number of people.

Then why do we end up with rights which give terrorists, and other violent people, the motivation, instruction, and materials to carry out these horrendous acts of violence against children and other innocent victims? Because some groups and individuals are convinced that any restrictions will create a domino effect, which will cause the pendulum to swing the other way and take away those rights that are not aimed at violence and mayhem. Because there are groups and individuals who would like to take away everyone's rights to express their opinions on controversial subjects or keep non-assault types of firearms for legitimate purposes, it adds credence to the resistance of conservative groups to place any restrictions or conditions on our first and second amendment rights.

##### The Recommendation

I believe that we can protect everyone's right to freedom of speech to express their viewpoints without allowing them a vehicle to promote and enable violence and lawlessness. Enabling and protecting a person or groups right to solicit or provide things like murder, human abduction & slavery, illegal drug trafficking, and other such offenses to society should be disallowed not protected and tolerated.

We also need legislation that protects the rights for those responsible citizens who use their firearms for legitimate purposes and restricts the sale or possession of assault weapons and firearm permits for convicted criminals, individuals suspected of being terrorists, and those who are mentally unbalanced. The law should also provide guidance on how those weapons are stored when not in use. Many of those using weapons in a violent manner are not the owners of those guns, but are family or friends of those who are the owners and did not authorize their use.

To accomplish this task we will have to bring the one or two standard deviations of those of us in the middle to agree on some reasonable compromise. This means that we must abandon those on the extremes of both sides of the argument and come up with a workable arrangement. An arrangement, which meets virtually everybody's needs without encroaching on anyone's legitimate rights. This also protects the interest of the great majority of the population who do not want to see an all or none solution. As Dr. Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) observes in the 1993 movie Jurassic Park, sometimes we get so caught up in what we can do that we forget to consider if it's something we should do.

# Road Rage

##### The Rant

Although some degree of road rage has been present since the invention of the wheel, it seems that this phenomenon has been escalating every year, both in terms of frequency and severity. Perhaps the frequency has been exacerbated, because of the number of vehicles on the road, especially during peak traffic periods such as commute traffic. Although some people still use public transportation, most of us get to work or other destinations using our own vehicles.

Population growth and families with multiple workers have combined to increase the commute traffic in many urban centers. Even in those families who only have one breadwinner, the spouse will usually need a car to get children to school, extra curricular activities, or run other errands like shopping and medical appointments. Once the children get old enough to drive they may get their own vehicle and further add to the volume of traffic on the road.

Our urban sprawl has also resulted in longer commutes exposing the driver to more traffic and more time behind the wheel. Talking and texting on cell phones while driving (or while waiting for a light to change) has also become a factor creating hazardous driving conditions and road rage.

That same population growth and urban sprawl has made it easier for us to show anger to our fellow drivers, as it is less likely that we know the other driver than would be the case in a small town. Because we are dealing with strangers, we are much more likely to let our anger result in fist shaking, horn honking, finger flipping, and verbal threats.

However, road rage has progressed far beyond those traditional forms and includes using our cars to run the other vehicle off the road, following the other vehicle to physically assault the driver, and even brandishing or using a deadly weapon. The staggering number of injuries and deaths resulting from road rage is totally unacceptable in a civilized culture such as ours.

According to the National Safety Council, 218 deaths and 12,610 injuries resulted from road rage over a seven year period. The fact that more drivers are now packing firearms is also leading to more severe road rage incidents. According to the same source, 37% of road rage incidents involved firearms. For too many, the trigger finger has now replaced the middle finger as a way of expressing anger.

##### The Recommendation

We all need to concentrate on not only driving legally, but also driving friendly and politely. Letting someone pull in ahead of us not only makes us feel better it also makes the other driver feel better and more likely to pass the courtesy on to another driver down the road. When a driver cuts someone off, it has just the opposite effect and the cut off driver is more likely to adopt the dog-eat-dog attitude into their own driving style.

There are two things which promulgate the most serious incidents of road rage. The first is inattentive or aggressive driving, which runs the gambit from rude to life threatening. The second is as a result of the offensive driver reacting to the fist shaking, horn honking, finger flipping, or verbal threats of the recipient of their inattentive or aggressive driving. There are certainly not enough policemen to keep people from driving aggressively and most of our law enforcement efforts are directed at catching drivers speeding.

Perhaps if we let drivers use the internet to report incidents (that could have caused an accident) to the state licensing authorities, we would see a decline in aggressive behavior and road rage incidents. If aggressive drivers thought that their antics would be reported and may result in losing their driver's license, they would act as if they knew they were being watched by the police.

Here the police or licensing department would have a form which drivers could fill out to report an incident listing both the information about the driver being reported, the driver doing the reporting and the specifics of the incident. They would then be able to detect a pattern of the same kinds of incidents reported at different times, in different locations, by different people. The increased use of dash cameras in personal vehicles (or cell phone videos) could also be used to document this kind of dangerous driving and incorporated into the reporting format.

As a motorcycle rider for over sixty years, I have adopted a very defensive driving style that I also use when driving my car. Thus, I expect other drivers to act aggressively so am less surprised and angered when they act that way.

However, when I do encounter excessively aggressive and rude drivers who make me angry, I appease my feelings of hostility by picturing this driver pulling the same stunt on another driver who is equally as inattentive, aggressive, rude, and pig headed. My revenge is, thus, knowing that both of those aggressive drivers will be punished for their bad behavior by an accident, which will cause damage to their vehicles and perhaps the revocation of their driver's licenses & insurance policies. 

# Looting

##### The Rant

During times when people are forced to leave their homes or businesses due to fires, floods, storms, or riots they should not have to be worried that their possessions are being stolen. Unfortunately there are those who take advantage of this situation to steal items from stores or private homes, because the stores or homes are unattended, the commotion reduces the chances witnesses could identify them, and the police are preoccupied with the emergency.

The fear of looting is one of the biggest reasons that people are reluctant to abandon their businesses and dwellings during an emergency, even when they are directed to do so by the authorities. It should then be the responsibility of those same authorities to do everything possible to insure that those evacuating are not taken advantage of by those who would see this as an easy opportunity to make off with merchandise and personal belongings.

##### The Recommendation

We have all seen those highway signs, which indicate that fines will double in a construction zone. That is because those working on the highway project are in a particularly vulnerable position and extra efforts are being made to protect them from being injured by excess speed or other driving violations by motorists in the areas where road construction projects are underway.

We need legislation that would double the penalty for crimes that were committed during a designated state of emergency declared by the president, the governor, or the mayor of a city where the emergency is taking place. That way even though the opportunity for looting would be greater during an emergency situation, the greater penalty would balanced out the risk and lessen the looting.

# Body Count Bravado

##### The Rant

This is a disturbing phenomenon, which has been gaining momentum in the United States over the last twenty years. We have always had murders, but with the exception of a few serial killers, those have been carried out against an individual or group for a specific reason. Thus, they involved domestic issues, gang wars, robberies, revenge, or other specific reasons. The incidents I am referring to in this rant are the the one's that take place in grade schools, high schools, colleges, concerts, churches, athletic events, night clubs, shopping malls, airports, subway stations and other such venues, where large numbers of people are gathered and present an opportunity to kill or maim a large number of randomly selected people in a short period of time for no apparent reason. Here the objective appears to be to kill as many people as possible before you are stopped.

The perpetrators are typically white males between the age of 18 to 64, with the majority being at the lower range of that spread. Many times the perpetrator will take their own life so we are left with questions about why they committed this terrible act if it cannot be gleaned from information they left behind or posted on the internet before the crime was committed. The most disturbing thing is that the objective seems likely to be just to set a new record and beat the body count of a previous person to commit such an act. To do this the assailant must have weapons, which enable them to kill a large number of people in the shortest period of time. The weapons of choice appear to be of the assault variety such as the AR-15 or AK-47, which fire rapidly and accommodate large magazines of ammunition. In many cases the individual will have multiple such weapons in case one jams or runs out of bullets. They also may have handguns along as well to enable them to kill and wound as many people as possible. In many cases they have modified these weapons to fire even faster than they were originally designed to fire.

However, guns are not the only weapon which can be used to accomplish this task. Bombs are also a popular method to kill and maim a large number of people in the shortest period of time. Here the assailant does not even have to be present at the time the bomb goes off, however, many use suicide vests to get inside of large crowds without arousing suspicion. Another popular method is to use a truck and mow down pedestrians in a crowded street, many times during a celebration which puts more people on the street than normal. Here the assailant(s) may jump out of the truck once it has reached its limit of destruction and start killing more people with knives or guns. The latest concern is over the use of drones equipped with guns or bombs which could be flown into a large crowd.

In all cases the killer has planned out this event in great detail. Where is a soft target where I can have a large number of people available to assault? How can I get my gun, bomb, truck or drone in position to start the attack without being detected? How can I kill the most people before they disburse, seek shelter, or the police intervene? When do I realize my quest is over and I need to break off the attack, make my getaway, or take my own life? Or should I just continue to press my assault and kill as many people as possible until the swat team takes me out?

##### The Recommendation

As with all serious problems, there are no simple solutions and there are more than one contributing factor. However, even if we are not able to totally eradicate the problem, anything we can do to reduce its incidence or severity is certainly worth considering. As a Boy Scout I was taught that there were three things a fire needed to burn. Those were fuel, oxygen, and heat. Take any of those three items away and the fire would be extinguished. The ** __** Body Count Bravado situation described above appears to have a similar triad of components. Perhaps if we look at what we can reasonable do to reduce any one of these three contributing factors, we can turn this escalating problem around.

#### The Heat

What is the initial spark, situational flashpoint, or smoldering resentment that ignites the perpetrator's plan to carry out a mass murder? If it is just a person having a mental breakdown or wanting to commit suicide, then why the elaborate planning and focus on setting a new record? Perhaps it is a continuation of those video games where the player is armed with devastating weapons and the player to kill the greatest number of enemy combatants, demons, zombies, or aliens wins the game and goes to the top of the list for other players to emulate and admire. One software game developer has even created a very controversial video game, which is played out in a school. With this game, the game player can roam the virtual halls and classrooms of a school with his automatic weapons to see how many students, teachers, and other school personnel can be killed. This game not only glamorizes this kind of violence, it gives potential killers a platform where they can practice their attack and become more proficient and effective at achieving a high body count.

Even though the assailants are the bad guys, they immediately become famous (or infamous). Every body knows about Billy the Kid, Al Capone, Bonnie & Clyde, and Jeffrey Dahmer. These people were terrible, but also more famous than most of the people who have made great positive contributions to our society by their good works, inventions, discoveries, and service over the same period of time. Those perpetrators who have carried out mass murders over the last twenty years are also rewarded with great notoriety and have their photos, history, prattlings, and body count statistics ensconced permanently on the internet long after their notoriety has been replaced in the newspaper and on the television screen by the next person to commit an even more outrageous, devastating, and egregious attack. How we can inform the public about these events without making heroes out of these folks is again a great challenge, but one we need to consider. We know that many of those who carried out attacks, or were prevented from doing so, had followed, exalted, and emulated those who had carried out previous attacks.

#### The Fuel

Soft targets for mass murders are readily available and are like a dry forest waiting for a lightning strike, an unattended campfire, a discarded cigarette, or an arsonist to set them into a raging wildfire. These are the venues which attract large numbers of people and expose them to those who are looking to ensconce their name in infamy by setting the new mass murder record. For that reason we need to consider how we can protect people in those venues with armed guards, physical barriers, metal detection devices, surveillance cameras, bomb sniffing dogs, inspection stations, drones, and other such resources. Defensive drones have recently been developed to protect parades, stadiums, military bases, and airports. These drones have been equipped to operate independently to protect a designated airspace and capture a dangerous drone and take it to a safe place to disarm or detonate the dangerous drone. We also need to encourage and heed information provided by those close to people who have indicated or intimated that they might carry out an attack and make sure it gets to the proper authorities.

Our efforts to harden our schools, athletic pavilions, public gathering places, transportation hubs, entertainment centers and other such high capacity venues has been one of the best ways we can protect those going to those venues from becoming "lambs to the slaughter." Our most recent efforts for highly attended events like the Superbowl and the Winter Olympic Games has been a great logistical effort, which raises the cost of these events and provides some inconvenience to those attending. However, failure to take these precautions is just too much of a risk, considering the bountiful body count bonanza these targets represent to a potential assailant wanting to set a new record.

#### The Oxygen

Like oxygen this third leg of the triangle is one of the hardest to control, because it seems to be everywhere and always available when the fire is ready to burst into flames. The oxygen in this analogy is the weapons, which enable the perpetrator to amass such a large number of casualties. There are two components to the availability of weapons. First, is the availability of the weapons themselves. Not only has the availability of these weapons not been reduced after their utilization in these terrible attacks, the sale has actually spiked after each incident.

Second, is the information on how to take what is readily available and make it even more lethal. So not only are the ingredients for making a bomb available to everyone, so are the detailed instructions on how to use nails, and other materials to get the greatest killing capabilities. There is also information available on where, when, and how to place a bomb to kill the largest number of people. If you want to use a large truck to plow into a crowd, you don't even need to own one. You can just rent one large enough to accomplish your attack from one of several truck rental agencies. And don't worry about taking out extra insurance for damage to the truck, you don't plan to take it back to the rental company when you are through with your little escapade.

Not only is it very easy to get assault weapons and large ammunition magazines, it is easy to get information and accessories that enable an assailant to modify these weapons to make them into fully automatic weapons (machine guns). Armor piercing ammunition is also available for those wishing to hunt deer and other woodland creatures driving around in armored vehicles. Since these weapons, even without modification, are only designed for killing large numbers of people very quickly, many wonder why they are so easy to get, even for folks who are on a no fly list, because they are suspected of being terrorists. At any rate, there is a large and very powerful lobby, which makes it very difficult to restrict the sale of assault weapons and the types of people who can easily procure and modify them. Since that lobby has bought and paid for a great number of our congressional leaders, the reduction of oxygen available to this out of control fire seems highly unlikely, even though this component would be the easiest, cheapest, and least inconvenient way to keep this killing frenzy fire from spreading even faster.

# Resistance to Change

##### The Rant

To some individuals and groups any change must be a bad change just because it forces them to think or do something different. This goes beyond those of us senior citizens, who sometimes become Luddites when it comes to changes in technology that take us out of our comfort zone.

One example which comes to mind is the resistance to new things like genetically engineered foods. In my mind genetically engineered foods are the answer to some of our problems with food, not a further deterioration of the natural foods that we would all like to eat. In the early days of man's existence the population was very migratory since they needed to move to new territories or hunting grounds to secure enough food to survive. Even then many would perish during the winter when food was often scarce. As civilization became more sophisticated, with the domestication of animals and cultivation of crops, people could become less migratory, live longer, and a given parcel of land could support a larger population.

However, even with more sophisticated agriculture and processing methods, there were often famines caused by drought or the infestation of insects, birds, or other animal pests, which would destroy the crops. There was also a great deal of conflict and wars fought over land to determine which nation or tribe would survive and which would perish, or diminish, from lack of food.

As the population continued to grow and the land did not, man's ingenuity would come to the rescue by developing ways to irrigate the land as well as the development of chemical fertilizers to expand the productivity of a parcel of land and chemical pesticides to keep the crops from being damaged by locus and other pests. In addition, chemicals would be used as preservatives to insure that the food would last throughout the year. Chemicals would also be used to increase the size of animals and the meat and dairy products that each animal would contribute to the human food source.

Chemicals were also introduced in the production of processed foods to make them taste better, have less calories, be less obtrusive to those with various allergies, and have a longer shelf life. The problem was that these chemical solutions were not natural and the introduction of these inorganic chemicals into our foods would create problems with human health. Thus, the incidence of cancer and many other diseases could be traced back to the very chemicals, which kept the population from starvation.

Genetically engineered foods are actually a way of creating and preserving enough food to keep the population alive and healthy without the introduction of artificial, inorganic chemicals. If scientists can develop a strain of plants that bugs will not eat, then we can still protect these crops without spraying them with harmful chemical pesticides. The same is the case with animal and plant products that flourish without the utilization of chemical growth hormones and fertilizers.

Actually man has been artificially influencing nature since the beginning of agriculture. When a farmer cross breeds animals or splices together two plants to create a hybrid plant they are actually changing the genetic makeup of those plants. However, when a scientist does the same thing in a laboratory, many people are fearful that something sinister and diabolical is going on with their food.

##### The Recommendation

We as a society need to be more mindful and informed about things before we take a stance against something that is new. Although there is always a natural resistance and apprehension about something different, our education should include the admonishment to fully investigate and understand something before we grab a sign and protest something along side of those who readily protest everything.

# Propensity to Change

##### The Rant

This is on the opposite extreme of the attitude toward change continuum discussed in the previous section on _Resistance to Change_. Here the individual or organization wants to make a change because they want something new or different. A prime example of this would be replacing clothing, furniture, or vehicles, not because they are no longer functional, but they may be dated or out of style. That is why fashion designers and vehicle manufacturers are constantly changing styles and designs. If they only sold clothing, furniture, or vehicles to people who had worn out their old items it would severely curtail their sales.

One computer company was so brazen about this concept that they showed someone intentionally spilling coffee on the keyboard of their laptop so that the old computer would be ruined and require a replacement by a new wiz-bang model made by that manufacturer. Even though people have a propensity to replace something, which is still functional, they feel much more justified if the item needs to be replaced for valid reasons. It is also much easier to convince other parties involved that the change is being done for valid reasons.

Another factor driving this behavior is that it is no longer effective to repair items which break down. Gone are the days when people got their socks darned, their clothing patched, their appliances repaired, their shoes resoled, or their tires retreaded. In fact if a car is more than a couple of years old, it may be economically advantageous to replace the car with a new model rather than have the old model repaired. If your car had to be built from parts from the dealer's parts department, it would probably cost three times as much as a new car of the same make and model, even if the labor to assemble the car were free.

Technical obsolescence also contributes to this phenomenon as well. Friends of ours had a flat screen, high definition television, which was only a few years old. When they tried to get it repaired, the repairman told them that the board, which needed to be replaced, was no longer available from the manufacturer. I also purchased a new set of hearing aids when the old ones needed repair and the manufacturer no longer made the replacement parts. When electronic items are involved, the replacement of an older model with a newer one is not only economically justified but promises a plethora of new features as well as a new warranty.

Even if the parts are still available, they may be almost as expensive to procure as a new model with new parts. For example, I bought a 12 volt brand "X" cordless drill with a snap off chuck, two batteries, a single charger, and a carrying case from a big box store. When the batteries needed to be replaced after a few years, I went back to the same store for replacement batteries. I was informed that they did not carry the replacement batteries and that I would have to find a brand "X" dealership to purchase the batteries. When I went to the brand "X" dealership the salesperson informed me that the two replacement batteries would cost $70, but for $79 I could get a brand new 14.4 volt brand "X" cordless drill, with a snap off chuck, two batteries, a dual battery charger, and a carrying case. So for nine dollars more I got a new more powerful drill, two new batteries, a dual charger and a carrying case. Since the old snap off chuck worked on the new drill I now had two. We have indeed become a throw away society.

##### The Recommendation

There is no need to solve the situation created by those who purchase items just to have a change or to get the latest style. If people can afford the new items, they enhance their own enjoyment, keep the economy going strong, and provide serviceable surplus items to less fortunate folks at little or no cost.

However, for those who are forced to replace items that they are satisfied with just because they can't be repaired there is a solution. The main reason that it costs more to repair an item than to replace the item is that the repair is much more labor intensive than the production of a new item, which is usually mass produced on a highly mechanized and specialized production line. The solution would be to put people who are unemployed to work fixing things and require manufacturers to stock replacement parts at a reasonable price for at least ten years.

As an example, I bought a brand "Y" camera, which had different capabilities than another brand "Y" camera I already owned. However, both cameras use the same battery. I now have three batteries which work in either camera and two battery chargers, so I don't have to carry a battery charger between my home in Washington and my home in Arizona. Having interchangeable parts is also more profitable for the company to manufacture and stock.

# Stupid Actions Requiring Rescue

##### The Rant

During and after any large storm you are likely to see rescues of people who got themselves in a situation where they needed to be rescued because of their own stupidity. Thus, they want to do something risky and expect the rest of us to foot the bill and risk our lives to get them out of a jam they shouldn't have created in the first place. With the advent of "watch me do this" all weather, helmet mounted video cameras and various social media sites, where they can post their virility videos, this problem will probably only get worse.

There are also numerous examples of rescue efforts being required to come to the aid of people who refuse to comply with official requests and sometimes directives, for people to evacuate in the face of fires, floods, and other natural disasters. Here people are not going into a dangerous situation, but are stubbornly refusing to remove themselves from a dangerous situation when warned or directed to extricate themselves from harms way.

I am aware of one situation where a rescuer lost his life trying to rescue some people who went up a mountain in severe weather conditions, even though this was highly inadvisable. There have even been cases of a helicopter and the entire crew lost during these rescues. In most cases, the people needing rescue are neither responsible for the cost of the rescue effort, nor have any liability, financially or legally, for the death or injury of those effecting the rescue and any equipment lost or damaged due to their negligence.

##### The Recommendation

In Arizona, where I spend five to six months a year, they have a law known as the "Stupid Motorist Law." Basically that law says that if you enter a dip in the road, which has filled with water and need to be rescued, you have to pay the cost of the rescue effort. Throughout Arizona they have these low points in the road (instead of culverts or storm drains), which fill with water when there is a heavy rain. These dips are clearly marked with signs warning motorists not to attempt to drive through these dips when they are filled with water. There are also numerous public service announcements, which convey this information.

For those motorists who disregard this warning, get trapped in the water and require the fire department, police department, or a publicly contracted entity to rescue them and their vehicle, the driver must pay for the rescue effort. The concept is that if you willfully disregard all of the warnings and require public rescue, you should pay for the costs not those taxpayers who are obeying the law and not requiring a rescue effort.

I believe that this concept should be applied not only to driver stupidity but to all other types of emergencies, which the person requiring rescue has intentionally created. That would include mountain climbing, surfing, skydiving, kayaking, boating, or numerous other optional sporting activities in hazardous weather conditions. It would also include those who refuse to remove themselves from a dangerous situation when warned or directed to evacuate designated areas of danger. Perhaps this kind of provision would reduce the loss to life and limb of those showing off, or being obstinate, as well as reduce the danger and expense to those charged with effecting the rescues.

If you get caught in a situation where you didn't know that a storm would arise, that is a different situation. But just to defy the odds and go into a dangerous situation for a thrill, or as a bravado statement, it should apply. It should also be applied to those who refuse to heed public warnings to evacuate as an act of stubborn defiance.

# Molehills to Mountains

##### The Rant

As a child I was admonished by my parents and other adults not to "make mountains out of molehills." That was a way of training me to put things in prospective and not attaching more importance to something than it really deserved. Another such admonishment, directed at the same end, was: "not to make a federal case out of it." However, as adults we sometimes take minor irritants (molehills) and turn them into litigation, which is sometimes elevated through the system all the way to the federal Supreme Court (mountains) just to prove a point or exercise our rights, even if we have an easy way around the problem.

Let's say a same sex couple approaches a wedding planner, photographer, florist, or baker who declines their business based on religious beliefs and convictions. Now if the couple can just go down the block or across town and secure the services of some other merchant or professional for the same price, they can do so without being unduly inconvenienced. It would be no different than if the merchant or professional was not the best one to provide the service, was too expensive, or could not accommodate their schedule. If the couple could not secure the needed products or services without undue inconvenience or cost, that would be an entirely different situation and warrant legal intervention.

Putting myself in the situation of the couple, I would neither be happy with the product or service if the merchant or professional were forced to provide it to me nor with the undue discord it would create in my community. First, I would doubt that they would do their best work if they were forced to do so under duress. Second, I would not want to give them my business and provide them income if they were biased against me or my situation. Third, creating a controversy from an avoidable situation is just one more thing to divide the country as well as creating undue stress, resentment, and discord. Fourth, it slows down the court system which could be dealing with decisions that are aimed at alleviating unavoidable hardships. If I were concerned with creating a precedent, I would want the courts to deal with a similar problem which created a genuine hardship where the plaintiffs had no reasonable alternatives available.

##### The Recommendation

Sometimes in our fervor to make a point, we jump to litigation rather than realizing that the economic reaction is usually faster, more severe, and less involved than the legal route. If a business or a professional turns down business because of their personal bias or beliefs, then they forfeit that business to their competitors. They not only lose that sale but many others because those associated with or sympathetic to the plight of the couple will not deal with the merchant or professional for their future needs.

If the merchant or professional is part of a larger chain, franchise, or association the penalty for their action will be even greater. An incidence of perceived bigotry in one small location can cause the entire business operation to lose favor with a large segment of their clientele and send their stock value into the basement. Under these circumstances the employee will usually be fired (or their franchise withdrawn) and all other employees (or franchise holders) warned about similar behavior. Under those circumstances, a merchant or a professional willing to lose a substantial part of their clientele or risk being fired probably has a deep seated belief, not a just a simple prejudicial whim.

In the Old South where it was publicly acceptable to refuse business to members of minority groups, litigation was required, because the general public was biased and did not punish a business for its prejudicial behavior. In today's society have all seen how quickly a business will fire an executive, spokesperson, or television personality for making a single slur or a negative comment about any particular racial, religious, ethnic, or other minority group. Thus, the economic impact is much quicker, more devastating, cheaper, and easier to initiate than a long drawn-out legal battle. A court ruling in favor of the defendant(s) could also set a precedent that would not prove favorable for to the plaintiff(s) or their future rights.

# Dumbing it Down

##### The Rant

Here in an effort to be impartial, management treats everyone the same and puts constraints on more capable employees to make sure that the less capable employees are properly controlled. It is like putting all students in the slow reading group. Here the students in the higher reading groups (capable employees) are held back, punished, bored, and diminished to the level of the least capable student (incapable employees) in an effort to treat everybody the same.

I saw this in the way some school districts treated their principals. Say one principal overspent their budget or made an unwise comment to a newspaper reporter. Some districts would come out with a policy that all principals must get permission from an assistant superintendent to expend funds from their budget over a certain amount or must pass all communications with the press through an assistant superintendent. Now the great majority of the principals would be able to do their jobs without these restrictions, however, the new policy impacts them in the same way as putting more capable students in the slow reading group.

This is why many institutions, organizations, and businesses revert to the centralization mode covered in the previous chapter. It is not as efficient as a decentralized mode, but is more defensible and easier to control. It also creates much more bureaucracy with a great many more rules, directives, reviews, authorizations, roadblocks, and controls.

##### The Recommendation

Give tailored assistance to, or place restrictions on, only those who need it and stop worrying about everybody being treated exactly the same. Start out with everybody in the capable group and move employees to the less capable group when the situation warrants. Also provide a way for the employee to move back into the capable group after proving that they no longer require special considerations.

# Chapter 4

# Legal & Litigation

The rants included in this chapter are directed at the way our laws, legal system, and courts are interpreted, structured, and operated. It addresses these problems as they relate to litigants, taxpayers, and the general public. Although many of these practices have been in effect for some time, it seems proficious for us to revisit the original concept and see if it makes sense in light of the current situation.

# Class Action Suits

##### The Rant

This is another example of the "opt out" rather than "opt in" problem. Here the individual is considered as a plaintiff in a lawsuit without taking any action to enter into this arrangement. You just get notified that you are part of the litigation and must "opt out" if you do not want to be part of the class action suit. If you do not "opt out," you tacitly agree to take whatever settlement is achieved and are precluded from taking any legal action individually.

I have personally been included in a few class action suits, because I did not want to go through the trouble to file the paperwork necessary be excluded. In none of these cases did I receive anything of value, even when these suits were settled in favor of the plaintiff group. A good example of this was a class action suit against a large retail cooperative. Here the lawyers representing the injured group asserted that customers purchasing gasoline from the retailer were mislead, because in hot weather the volume of gasoline registered on the pump would be higher than it would be in cold weather. Most of us learned in grade school science, long before we started buying gasoline, that liquid expands when exposed to heat and contracts when cold. Since the gasoline is stored in underground tanks, its volume is not appreciably impacted by the warmer daytime surface temperature.

Although this suit was settled in favor of the plaintiffs, there was no monetary restitution to the huge plaintiff group included, by default, in the class action suit. All of the money recovered went to the lawyers who initiated and litigated the class action suit on behalf of a large group of inadvertent plaintiffs. The outcome was that the retailer was required to put a small stick-on label on their gas pumps informing customers that the volume readings would be higher during warm weather.

Perhaps the logic of this stipulated notification was that it would cause us to drive to a colder climate to purchase gasoline or wait until winter to refuel our vehicles, so we could get a few extra drops of gasoline. It would not cause us to purchase gasoline from another vendor, since all gas pumps in the local area were subject to the same weather conditions and did not have any special equipment to address the volume readings. Of course we customers ultimately picked up the costs of the settlement, and the retailer's legal expenses, by paying higher prices for all the goods we would buy from this large retail cooperative.

##### The Recommendation

Do away with class action suits. If I want to sue someone, I should be able to do so individually or as part of a group and choose the lawyers who will represent my interests and secure the restitution I believe is due. I should not be automatically included in a group unless I go through the legal process of being excluded. At the very least, restrict the legal fees and expenses the lawyers litigating the class action suit charge to a percentage of the amount recovered (say 30%) with the remainder going to the plaintiff group.

# Spurious Litigation

##### The Rant

This is litigation, which is frivolous, but is entered into because it is cheap to do so and may result in some settlement even though there is really no merit to the suit. If the defendant has deep pockets they may lose a suit to a plaintiff who has an emotional appeal even if their case is very weak. Even if the defendant is totally innocent they may settle because of the cost of the litigation and possible bad publicity.

The motivation for the plaintiff is that they may win a case based on an emotional appeal and may receive a settlement by a defendant who may be willing to settle out of court to avoid the cost they will have to incur to defend against the suit even if they prevail. On the other hand, the plaintiff may have no risk at all. If they have a lawyer who is unemployed and willing to take the case on a contingency they get a free ride. The unemployed or underemployed lawyer will get a large percentage of any potential settlement, keep their legal skills current, and are out only some of their time plus a few small office supply expenses.

I have been on the receiving end of a few of these spurious lawsuits. In most cases there was not only any basis for the suit and the allegations were almost humorous. However, the plaintiff had an attorney who was willing to represent the suit on a contingency basis and so had no reason not to file the suit. I was informed on a couple of these cases by our school district's contracted attorney that he recommended we settle out of court for a small amount just to save money, as our costs to defend against the suit, and any appeals, could be substantial. Also there was always the off-chance the district could lose the huge amount being sought, because of the emotional appeal of the assertion made in the suit and the deep pockets we represented. Just the allegation might damage our reputation even there was no substance to the allegation.

I convinced our board of directors that we should refuse to tender even a small settlement for three reasons. First, it would reward bad behavior. Second, it would encourage others to file spurious lawsuits, because we would be considered to be an easy mark. Third, it would be a tacit admission that we had some culpability. When our attorney told them we would see them in court they dropped the suit, as apparently they were just after a quick and dirty settlement.

If the law firm just wants to drum up business they might put out a television add telling people who fall into a category that they should consider having the firm represent them regardless of who was at fault and what was the outcome. One local firm's slogan is "In a wreck - need a check?" While watching television the other night. I was informed, by a law firm's advertisement, of two circumstances, where I was encouraged to seek such legal representation. The first was to inform the users of a blood thinning medication, which I am taking and the second was for a filter I had installed several years ago to prevent another blood clot from entering my lungs. They didn't say if you were experiencing any problems with either of these two medical solutions, they just said that you may be eligible for some restitution just for being on the medication or having the filter. My cardiologist is aware of all of this and has not indicated I should discontinue the medication or have the filter removed.

##### The Recommendation

Of course the logical solution would be to eliminate these frivolous lawsuits. But who would decide that they were frivolous, the lawyers, the judges, or the legislators, who are usually in the legal profession themselves. This is indeed a case of the fox guarding the hen-house. In most cases the deep pocket defendant can't even counter-sue the plaintiff, as the plaintiff may not have any resources to pay for the legal costs of the successful defendant. Perhaps if we made the lawyer or legal firm representing the plaintiff a party to the counter-suit they would be more reluctant to represent frivolous lawsuits. However, this is also something that a lawyer laden legislative body is unlikely to enact.

# Mental Competence

##### The Rant

In many cases when the evidence against a person who is being tried for murder is overwhelming, the defense will admit that their client committed the crime, but should not be sent to prison, because they were mentally incompetent and could not tell right from wrong. In these cases the individual convicted is sent to a mental institution for rehabilitation.

These mental institutions are severely overcrowded, expensive, and not as secure as a penitentiary. I would feel much safer having a person incarcerated who went nuts and killed fifty people they didn't know for no logical reason at all than having a person who killed one individual for a highly personal reason walking the street.

##### The Recommendation

Consider that the incarceration of a murderer is more for the protection of the general population than for the punishment of the individual involved. Thus, keeping a mass murderer or serial killer from carrying out another incident should be the prime consideration.

Those who commit these violent crimes because they are mentally deficient, are a much greater risk to society than someone who kills one person for a very selfish reason. This would also apply to those who have a violent temper, or fetish, which temporarily overrides logic and values at the time they committed the murder or murders, For this reason, the individual should not be able to secure a lighter sentence because they either are permanently or temporarily not able to distinguish right from wrong.

# Inadmissible Evidence

##### The Rant

To most people the justice system should do what the title implies and secure justice. In my opinion that means taking all of the information you can collect and verify so that the judge or jury can make the correct finding. However, this is not always the case.

Suppose that someone is missing and foul play is suspected. When the police investigate the case, all of the evidence points to someone who had a motive and opportunity to cause harm to the missing person. Witnesses also have identified the suspect and the suspects car in the area at the time and location where the missing person was last seen.

The police then obtain a search warrant from a judge to search the suspects car. However, the policeman at the scene, knowing that a search warrant is being approved, opens the trunk of the car before the search warrant goes into effect. Even if the police find the victim's body, the murder weapon, the suspects bloody clothing, and the suspects finger prints on the murder weapon, none of this evidence can be admitted in a case against the suspect.

##### The Recommendation

Now there is no doubt that there must be rules for collecting evidence and other rules which govern how an investigation should be conducted to protect an individuals right to privacy. If the police or prosecutor's office do not comply with these rules there should be some fine, repercussion, discipline, or legal action against the individuals or entities who violate these provisions. But the guilty party should not get to walk free, when it is patently obvious that they are guilty.

# Unnecessary Efforts & Expense

##### The Rant

Protracted courtroom proceedings with many expert witnesses, which cost millions of dollars, when the guilt is not in question. A good example of this would be the 2011 trial of Jared Loughner who was ultimately convicted and sentenced to seven consecutive life terms plus 140 years in prison without parole for murder and attempted murder in a supermarket parking lot near Tucson, Arizona.

He had previously indicated in writing his intent to murder U.S. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, purchased the murder weapon and ammunition just prior to the massacre, was caught on surveillance video committing the murder of six people and wounding of thirteen others, had a large crowd of eye witnesses observe the act up close, and was subdued by one of Rep. Giffords staff members and held until the police arrived.

There was no doubt in anyone's mind that he committed the murders and he also pleaded guilty to all counts of murder and assault. However, the cost to the taxpayers for just his legal defense team amounted to $1.1 million. This $1.1 million did not include the investigation costs, court costs, cost of the prosecution team, and the cost of the highly paid expert witnesses who testified during the trial. All of these expenses were paid for by the taxpayers as well, even though his guilt was not in question.

This example is not an isolated incident. Taxpayers pick up the bill for extensive prosecution, court, expert witnesses, and legal defense team for thousands of defendants where guilt is not in question, or even put forward by the defense team in court. Not only are there unnecessary costs involved, but these extensive trials fill up the court's docket and delay other cases, which actually warrant deliberation to determine guilt.

##### The Recommendation

In conjunction with the previous recommendations regarding mental competence and inadmissible evidence, have a jury expeditiously deal with all the relevant evidence available and render judgment. Why the individual committed the murder, and whether it was promulgated by early potty training, having an unhappy childhood, or hearing voices in their head should not be relevant for either determining guilt or the sentence administered. I believe that this also touches on the rant concerning lawyers' professional ties to legislators who are reluctant to pass legislation, which could impact the income and employment opportunities of their fellow lawyers.

# Capital Punishment

##### The Rant

The first problem with capital punishment is that it is an irreversible act. There have been many cases where a person is convicted of first degree murder and later released after new evidence, or DNA testing, showed that they were innocent. If these individuals had been executed, there would be no way to reverse, or at least partially reverse, this error.

The second problem with capital punishment is that it is much more expensive to the taxpayers than having the person spend the rest of their life in prison. Even though an individual receives a death sentence they may spend many years in prison, while all their appeals are considered at various levels of the judicial system. The cost of all the protracted litigation is usually much more than the costs of maintaining a prisoner in a state or federal penitentiary for life.

The third problem with capital punishment is that it is not a deterrent to others who may be considering a crime, which would result in a death sentence. Those states who have capital punishment do not have any lower incidence of capital crimes than those states that don't.

##### The Recommendation

Re-institute the federal restriction on capital punishment. This time not only because it is considered to be cruel and unusual, but because most of the other sophisticated countries around the globe have abolished it for a host of reasons, including those stated above.

Perhaps we could create a separate category of confinement for those crimes, which now qualify for capital punishment. This category would be for life with no path to parole and based totally on punishment not rehabilitation. Thus, these prisoners would be kept separate from the general prison population, as death row prisoners are now, and given much more basic and stringent confinement. No computers, television, entertainment, activities, exercise facilities, socialization, and meager rations. This would also reduce the expense for maintaining these prisoners for their life behind bars.

# Aiding & Abetting Crime

##### The Rant

Aiding and abetting crime is different than committing a crime. A person charged with aiding and abetting a criminal act does not have to be involved with or even present when the crime is committed. However, if they have prior knowledge that the crime will be committed or do nothing to prevent the crime, they may find themselves guilty of aiding and abetting the crime.

Perhaps it is a stretch to accuse law enforcement agencies and public prosecutors of actually aiding and abetting some crimes, however, I will advance that supposition to make my point. The logic behind this flimsy accusation is that these agencies know that certain crimes are being committed on a wide scale and accept that as an unavoidable situation. They also encourage these crimes by not taking any action to arrest and convict these criminals. By doing this they make this type of crime a very low risk endeavor.

Most of the crimes I am talking about are scams which may be committed in person, but most often by mail, over the phone, or on the internet. While these crimes can be very serious, they do not elicit a high priority to law enforcement and the judicial system. This is understandable, as these agencies have limited resources and must devote their time to the most egregious crimes.

However, bilking elderly pensioners out of their life savings is, in my opinion, a much more serious offense for our courts than determining how many weeks a quarterback should be benched for having knowledge of a deflated football or enlisting the services of the FBI, the Texas Rangers, and the Houston Police to find a football jersey stolen from the same quarterback's locker in Houston, Texas. After an extensive investigation taking almost two months, the football jersey thief was brought to justice. I'm sure we can all rest easier knowing that this dangerous criminal is off the street and our laundry is now safe.

In addition to scams are those theft and property damage crimes, which impact ordinary people and small businesses. In all cases the police will allow the victim to fill out a report, which will then be filed and may even be included in the tabulation of crimes for the year end report. Few if any of these crimes are ever investigated or result in the arrest of the perpetrator. Some of these crimes are so easy to solve and be a slam dunk for both the police and the prosecutors that it is hard to understand why they would not take the small amount of time it would take to seek justice for these non-celebrity victims.

One example, which I am personally aware of, involved the son of an employee who had been fired as the manager of a storage facility. Angered about the firing, the son and some of his friends entered the facility and damaged a number of motor-homes and recreational vehicles stored in the gated facility. The proof was that the son used his personal access code to open the gate and appeared on a video camera entering his access code, showed him entering the facility, showed the license of his car and showed he and his friends vandalizing the property on the night of the break-in. He was neither questioned nor arrested for this crime, even though it resulted in thousands of dollars in damage.

##### The Recommendation

Take a random selection of these crimes (perhaps every tenth one) and investigate the crime and prosecute the criminal. That way the criminal would have the risk that their crime may be chosen as the one investigated and that they may end up in jail. This would keep these crimes down, because they would no longer be a no risk or low risk type of offense.

They do this in Italy for riders on trains and water taxis. Every one is required to have a ticket or a pass to ride on the train or water taxi. However, rather than check every passenger they will randomly ask a passenger to show their ticket or pass. If the passenger cannot produce the required documentation they are heavily fined or jailed. As a result, there are very few passengers without the required documents. This is also a process for customs offices at border crossings where every entrant is not selected to have their suitcases inspected but the threat that they might be keeps most people from violating the customs restrictions.

# Peremptory Challenges

##### The Rant

In addition to the unlimited challenges both the prosecutors and the defense attorneys have to insure that jurors are not biased or predisposed about either the defendant, the type of crime, or the penalty being sought, they are allotted a certain number of challenges which do not have to be supported by any legitimate disqualification criteria. Thus, the prosecutor or defense attorney can disqualify any potential juror based on their own prejudice or whim.

However, the whim is usually some characteristic, stereotype, or personality quirk that they feel would make a particular juror less sympathetic to their particular cause. It may be how they feel the potential juror reacts to the individual advancing the questions and not even their response. Conversely, if either the prosecutor or the defense attorney thinks they can establish a positive relationship with a potential juror, then they would definitely not use a peremptory challenge and hope to use that charisma to their advantage in controlling the outcome of the trial.

This has spawned a whole new occupation called "trial science." Here a defense attorney can use the services of psychologists and other behavioral scientists to help them engineer a favorable jury pool. One popular television show is built around this type of manipulation, where mock juries are constructed to replicate a jury pool to see how people with specific ethnic, educational, social, and economic similarities would react to the material and personalities they would encounter during a real trial.

This practice puts a finger on the scale of justice and detracts from the objective "jury of your peers" concept that we are guaranteed under law. So the defendant who can afford an expensive lawyer and a bevy of professional contributors can expect a much better outcome than a defendant who has a public defender with a heavy caseload and limited resources.

##### The Recommendation

Eliminate the peremptory challenges and make both the prosecution and defense attorneys use a challenge for cause to make sure potential jurors are free from bias or predisposition. This would not only make the process more in line with what we construe to be blind justice, but also reduce the size of the jury pools necessary to enable many peremptory challenges.

# Professional Ties to Legislators

##### The Rant

Because a large portion of those who serve in legislative positions at all levels of government are lawyers, they have a strong bias toward that profession. As a result much of the legislation passed cannot be interpreted or effected without the aid of a lawyer. Thus, tort reform and other provisions to simplify the laws are very difficult to secure.

##### The Recommendation

Write all laws and regulations so that a person with 12 years of education and no legal training can understand it without the aid of an attorney. This would be easy to validate by having a group of folks with this level of education review the new laws and regulations. If 80% understand the new legislation, then it should be ready for the general population. Also make it easier for individuals to represent themselves in minor legal disputes. Sort of "Peoples Court" type proceedings for all small actions.

# Collateral Minutia

##### The Rant

This rant is the last one in this section, because it is really just a humorous observation about the way our criminal justice system works. For example, say the police report revealed that several eye witnesses observed an assailant shooting six victims in cold blood without any provocation. Witnesses then reported that the shooter threw the murder weapon into a storm drain, discarded his cigarette, walked across the street, got into his car and speed off toward the center of town. When the prosecutor prepared the charges against the suspect they included six counts of first degree murder, depositing an unauthorized item in a storm drain, littering, jaywalking, speeding, running a red light, and operating a vehicle with an expired license plate.

##### The Recommendation

Deal with the most serious crimes and not spend unnecessary time dealing with these small collateral violations. Thus, If the jury has already decided that the suspect is guilty of murder and will face the death sentence or six life sentences without the possibility of parole, they should not spend time reviewing video shots of the environmental, pedestrian, littering, and vehicle infractions to determine if the murderer should have his driver's license revoked, what fine should be levied for jaywalking, or how many weeks of community service he should serve for the littering infraction.

However, although these offenses need not be filed initially, they should be held in abeyance in case the suspect is found innocent of the more serious crimes. Remember that Al Capone was put in prison for tax evasion, even though his most heinous crimes, like murder, extortion, smuggling, and racketeering, were much worse, but unprovable.

# Chapter 5

# Journalism & Media

The rants included in this chapter are directed at the problems associated with, and created by, those who report the news on various platforms and provide entertainment via video media. It addresses these problems as they relate to the general public. Although many of these practices have been in effect for some time, it seems proficious for us to revisit the original concept and see if it makes sense in light of the current situation.

# Sensationalism

##### The Rant

Here the newspaper, magazine, documentary, or newscast goes beyond the task of informing the reader or viewer to intentionally anger, alarm, or excite them. Thus, the headline or newscast promotion will strive to titillate the reader or viewer to read the article or watch the full news broadcast. In the case of a televised newscast the most titillating story will be covered last so that the person who has tuned in to get the information will watch the entire newscast. While we may count on the newspaper, magazine, documentary, or newscast to provide a realistic depiction of what is going on, we are attracted to those which offer the most alarming approach. That provides the greatest number of readers or viewers and generates the most income and notoriety for those owning these endeavors.

As an example, you have probably noticed those tabloid magazines displayed at the check-out counter of your local supermarket. The headlines on the cover define sensationalism and grab the shoppers interest in reading the article to see the long range paparazzi photos of an adult member of the royal family nude at a secret beach in Malta, the sitings of Elvis lurking on the Graceland grounds years after his fake death, or the alien space ship found in an Indiana farm field and hushed up by the government.

"Is the world coming to an end? Tune in to the six o'clock news and find out the answer to this alarming prediction." However, at the very end of the six o'clock news the news anchor will switch to downtown Podunk, where the on-site reporter shows a very disheveled man walking the street with a sign which proclaims "The End is Near". The news reporter then explains that the news team interviewed the individual and could not confirm that there was any volatility to his assertion. This is certainly a far fetched example, but not that far off from what happens on a regular basis. The lead in will be a very alarming question, which the viewer will be motivated to watch to get the answer.

After each news segment, the news anchor will repeat the question and tell you to stay tuned for the answer. Of course the question is not answered during the next segment either and you are encouraged to stay tuned. When all the other news has been covered, the big question will then be addressed. They will also inform you that only their station or channel is covering this important news story. Blogs and websites on the internet have even more sensationalistic stories, photos, and videos than the mainstream media.

Newscasts will often show a highly alarming clip, which only shows part of the story, but generates the greatest emotional appeal. Thus, the news clip will show the cop tackling the fleeing suspect, but not the previous confrontation that lead up to the tackle. I have often wondered how a jury or review group could possibly acquit the assailant when it was obvious from the video that the rough treatment was unprovoked and unnecessary. Were there extenuating circumstances, which were not reported or shown? It's like the teacher who sees Billy hit Sam and sends Billy to the principals office and consoles Sam. What the teacher did not observe was Sam starting the fight by hitting Billy first.

##### The Recommendation

If you have news stations available, which do not use this gotcha kind of hype or incomplete reporting, switch to those stations who are more accurate and inclusive in their reporting. If not, find one which has the most realistic approach.

# Insensitivity

##### The Rant

Here in an effort to get the in depth story and scoop their competitors, a reporter will often interview a person who has been directly and sometimes very emotionally impacted by a particular event. Here the questions hinge on the cruel and unusual. I remember after one catastrophic space accident a reporter was interviewing the wife of an astronaut who was killed in the incident. Basically his question was how she felt when she witnessed the incident on TV and realized that her young husband was burning up inside of his space capsule. This was not after any significant period of time had passed, but immediately after the incident occurred. The wife was obviously still in shock and had not even had time to deal with her grief, let alone talk about it with the public. As a viewer I thought to myself - how do you think she felt, you insensitive jerk?

The example above is neither an isolated event nor leveled against a single newscaster. After a six year old child has been senselessly killed, because they were caught in the crossfire of a gang related shooting, the distraught mother will be asked how she felt when she was told what happened. Perhaps the reporter is asking an obviously devastated grandfather how he felt when he realized his two year old granddaughter fell into the backyard pool and drowned, because he had been distracted for a few minutes by a phone call. Anyone with any sense of dignity or compassion would not ask these kinds of questions under these circumstances. This is because we are sensitive to peoples feelings and we can already imagine how they felt.

##### The Recommendation

Let these broadcasters know how we feel about this kind of journalism and news reporting. Perhaps if they realize that their readers and viewers are not all a bunch of voyeuristically insensitive ghouls who want to see, or read about, someone totally falling apart because of a devastating tragedy that rips their heart out every time they relive the event, they would stop using these tactics.

# Biased Reporting

##### The Rant

Throughout this book you have read examples of how divided, polarized, and extreme the general population and their elected representatives have become. Newspapers, magazines, radio stations and television stations are also very biased. Some are biased to the left and others biased to the right.

This creates a vicious circle as biased individuals encourage biased journalism and biased journalism creates more, and more committed, biased individuals. Also many people will feel that anything that they read in the paper, hear on the radio, or view on TV must be the truth and can, thus, be relied upon to further bolster their biased opinion. One can only hope that we don't get so caught up in the constant barrage of one-sided facts, and our own prejudices, we fail to live up to Franklin Delano Roosevelt's observation that: "We Americans begin to know the difference between the truth on the one side and the falsehood on the other, no matter how often the falsehood is iterated and reiterated. Repetition does not transform a lie into the truth."

Barack Obama once remarked that if the only television station he watched was the Fox News broadcasts, he would not have even voted for himself. If you watch the news programs on two different stations on the same day you will often get an entirely different spin on the same events. This is also true about the weekly political commentary programs and the coverages of the Republican and Democratic national conventions.

##### The Recommendation

Either watch two opposing news broadcasts or find one which is the least biased. I sometimes will watch a British station broadcast as they are usually less biased.

It would also be helpful if we could re-institute the Federal Communications Commission's Fairness Doctrine, which was eliminated in 1987. That policy dictated that broadcasters present controversial issues in a balanced manner by giving both sides of a controversy equal coverage.

# Retractions

##### The Rant

If the local newspaper reports that you beat up a little old lady on the way to church and stole the money she had saved from her meager pension to put into the collection plate, your reputation would be shot. The story would be front page news and probably come with a bold headline and perhaps a mug shot of you being booked into the local jail. Everyone in town would think you should be tarred & feathered and run out of town. Now the police discover that it was not you, but someone who looked like you. They release you from custody and the paper prints a retraction in small print on a back page of the paper. So everyone reads the big headline story and very few notice the small unspectacular retraction.

A very similar thing happened to my father on his way home from work. The police pulled him over on the street where we lived and then stood him up spread-eagle beside his car and frisked him for weapons or contraband. There were lights flashing, sirens blaring, and at least two police cars involved. The reason they pulled him over was that he was driving a car which fit the description of one driven by a guy who had just robbed a local convenience store. After they had determined that my father was unarmed and non-confrontational, they reported to their supervisor that they had a suspect in custody.

When they were asked to describe the person they had apprehended they reported that he was a six foot tall, 200 pound, white male in his mid 40's and was dressed in the uniform of an army officer. The desk sergeant then told the arresting officers they had the wrong guy, because the store clerk had described the robber as a 5'4" tall, 125 pound, black male in his early 20's wearing blue jeans, tennis shoes, and a hooded sweatshirt.

They let my father go and apologized for the mistake, but the damage had been done as everybody in the neighborhood had witnessed him being apprehended and rushed to their phones to pass the word on to anyone who had not seen the event itself. The funny thing is that my father had never been in trouble with the law and I can't even remember him getting a parking ticket. The point is that the apprehension had been very loud and public while the apology had been very quiet and private.

##### The Recommendation

An individual who's reputation has been besmirched by a news story or newspaper article should be able to sue the broadcaster or publisher if they don't give a retraction at the same level of acclaim that they did with the inaccurate one. When I was in my late twenties, I moved to a new house in the same city and went to the local branch of my bank to make my deposit. All of the checks I wrote that month bounced as the checks went to one branch and the checking account balance was held at the other. I went to the local branch and demanded an explanation.

The branch manager apologized for their mistake and assured me that the non-sufficient funds charges for each check would be immediately be taken off my account. I then told him that if he wanted to keep my business and avoid some bad publicity, he would need to make good on all the returned checks and send a letter of explanation to every business and individual who had gotten one of these bounced checks. He did just that and I kept my account with that bank for several years thereafter.

# Volume Control

##### The Rant

I realize that this rant is much more applicable to us older folks, who's hearing is not what it used to be, but include it anyway because sooner or later you will all get to this point yourselves. The complaint is that the music and sound effects on DVD or digital movies, and many TV programs as well, is so loud that it will drive you out of the room if the volume is very high. However, if you turn down the volume, then you can't hear the dialog and can't follow the plot.

The TV stations already know this, so they boost the broadcast volume up when they are showing a commercial. They don't want anyone to miss the message during the commercial, but are less concerned if you can't understand what the people are saying during a movie or a regular program. Do we really need music, sound effects, and commercials that will rock the house off its foundation?

However, when I was a teenager and we were listening to rock & roll records on our 45 rpm record players, our parents would tell us to turn the volume down. Apparently this appetite for volume among the young has even gotten more voracious over the years, or perhaps it just seems that way. Our youngest son had a huge sound system installed in his car that cost a fortune and took up half of his trunk. Sitting at a stoplight one day I could not hear the music, but could feel the base. Apparently someone a few cars behind me had a similar sound system installed in their car.

##### The Recommendation

First turn down the volume on the music and sound effects to at least a reasonable level. The best answer would be to have the dialog on one sound track and the music and sound effects on another. Viewers could then purchase audio-visual equipment (TVs, CD players, etc.) with volume controls for each separate track. That way each viewer or listener can control the balance between the two and the kids can have the booming music & thundering sound effects, the older folks can hear the dialog, and those in between can have the perfect mix of both.

# Chapter 6

# The Good News

The observations included in this chapter are directed at the way our lives in general have improved over the last seventy-five years. It addresses these topics as they relate to individuals, organizations, and the society as a whole. Although many of these things do not impact everyone exactly the same, they all impact us in some way during our daily life.

# Vehicles

##### In the Past

When I started driving, cars had to get an oil change and lube job every 1,000 miles and tuned up every 10,000 miles. Cars would frequently need to be replaced every five years and tires would last about 20,000 miles. In the past, air conditioning was a luxury and the few features offered were manual and analog. Cars did not have safety belts or airbags and anti-lock brakes were not available.

##### In the Present

Cars only need an oil change every 7,500 miles, never need a lube job, and may not need to be tuned up until 100,000 miles. Most modern cars last fifteen years and tires last about 60,000 miles. Almost all new cars have air conditioning, intermittent windshield wipers, cruise control, and have many automated conveniences and safety features not even available as an option on older cars. Some cars will even parallel park themselves automatically. Many of the new cars offer safety features that can dim your lights automatically, provide rear video images, alert you if you cross into another lane without signaling, reveal vehicles in your blind spot, and even stop the car if it detects an obstacle in its path.

##### In the Future

Self driving cars.

# Retail Shopping

##### In the Past

Stores were typically only open from 9:00AM to 5:00 PM on week days, 9:00 AM till noon on Saturdays, and closed on Sundays. Most stores required customers to find parking on city streets with parking meters, which often involved walking several blocks to the store and back with the items purchased. Returning items to the retailer for a refund was only allowed by a few companies and usually required some justification. There was also no provision to make an easy comparison between food products and no listings on food as to ingredients and dietary data.

Refunds were only done by mail, required an elaborate process of including product labels and took many weeks to receive the refund. Their was no online shopping and mail order purchases, by the few companies who had catalogs, required phone ordering and long delivery times. All payments were by cash or checks. Some retailers did not accept checks and those who did required several items of identification. Items purchased were rung up on a cash register and the cash register tape only showed the amounts charged and not a description the items relating to the charge..

##### In the Present

Most stores are open from 9:00 AM till 9:00 PM during the week with similar hours on weekends. Most stores located in malls and retail centers have adequate parking close to the stores and are provided free. Almost all retailers will give a full cash refund without any questions and some do not even require the sales receipt as the purchase is recorded in the stores computer system. All food products now state the ingredients, unit pricing, and the dietary data of the product on the product label.

Many merchants give instant refunds or provide a way to register online for refunds and get a quick response. Online shopping is available from many brick & mortar retailers and some retailers who sell exclusively online. Information available online about a product is usually much more detailed than that previously listed in a catalog and frequently includes customer ratings and comments on both the product and the retailer. Price and quality comparisons are available online. If you have a shopping app on your smartphone you can take a picture of the bar code and get all the online information cited above, plus information about what other retailers are selling the item for, while you are evaluating the product at the store.

In addition to cash and checks, most retailers accept credit cards. Credit card purchases are usually much quicker and more convenient than using either cash or checks. Bar code scanning makes checkout much quicker, more accurate, and provides the purchaser with a listing of the product description along with the price on the receipt tape. Credit cards and bar codes also enable purchasers to use the self-checkout stations now offered by a growing number of retailers.

##### In the Future

Drone and robot deliveries.

# Technology

##### In the Past

Phones were heavy, analog, and tied to a given location with a cord or a wall mount. In some cases you shared a party line with other people and had to pay a large fee to make a long distance call. Switching was done manually by human operators. Computers were large, crude, had vacuum tubes and required air conditioning. When I was a junior in college they were switching all of our college records onto a computer. Many of us were concerned that if they no longer kept paper records and the computer crashed we would have to repeat the courses we took during the previous two years. After I graduated from college and entered the Air Force, the latest IBM computer system was nothing more than a punch card sorter with the ability to preform rudimentary mathematical functions.

Radios and televisions were analog and used vacuum tubes. Televisions used a cathode ray picture tube, required an antenna, and the standard size, for those families who could afford one, was a twelve inch screen. The resolution of these screens was also very crude and only available in black and white. There were only a few channels and they only had programs in the evenings. The rest of the time they just showed a test pattern so viewers could adjust their set manually to get a proper image. People opened their garage doors manually and only the very rich had security systems or more than one television. We took our black & white photos with film cameras that had to be adjusted and focused manually. Our watches were mechanical, analog, and had to be wound every day.

Manufacturing was almost entirely a manual operation done on production lines. The only thing we knew about robots was that they were prominent in books, comic strips and films like Buck Rogers. Space travel was also a future fantasy as was Dick Tracy's wrist radio. Planes were equipped with propellers and passenger trains were steam powered and went only sixty miles per hour.

##### In the Present

Smartphones are now so ubiquitous around the globe, that we sometimes take for granted that everyone has one. In the United States it is common for every member of the family to have one, even kids in grade school. These small untethered items are much, much more powerful than the mainframe computers of the past. Consider that this small device, which fits in your pocket, replaces a great many things we used independently in the past. It not only functions as a phone, but as a camera, a calendar, an address book, a book, a magazine, a newspaper, a dictionary, an encyclopedia, a radio, a tape recorder, a video camera, a watch, a stop watch, a level, a television, an alarm clock, a remote controller for a digital camera, a photo album, a flash light, a record player, a map, a diary, a typewriter, a calculator, a pulse monitor, a shopping list, a key, a television remote control, a baby monitor, and a global positioning system.

It can also become the remote controller for a smart house system so that you can see inside your house or refrigerator, lock or unlock your doors, turn on the heat or air conditioning, turn on or off your lights, set up your DVR to record a television show, see who is at your front door, and enable you to see and communicate with people inside or outside of the house. It will enable you to do these things from anywhere on the globe with a wi-fi connection. In addition to these tools, it has apps that save us trips to the shopping mall, bank, movie theater, library, and post office to conduct everyday activities. Not only does it do all those things, but you can speak to it and it will provide a response visually and sometimes verbally as well.

Even our land line phones are much more sophisticated. Most inexpensive home phone systems will provide several mobile phones, which can be docked around the house anywhere there is an electrical outlet. These phone systems can function as a hands free speaker phone and can record an incoming message as well as enable things like call waiting, conference calls, and the ability to link to your cell phone. Most homes have at least one personal computer and also may have tablets that have capabilities somewhere between a computer and a smartphone. Many households also have devices that will respond to your verbal inquiries to answer questions, alert you to appointments, control your home systems, play music and even tell you a joke. Televisions are now smart with wi-fi capabilities that enable people to stream content over the internet. They are also very large, very light, very thin, relatively inexpensive, and have very high resolutions. Ultra HD televisions are now taking over from regular HD televisions and more and more and more providers are offering programs in 4K resolution.

For those who wish to go beyond our cell phone cameras, today's modern electronic cameras record thousands of high definition, color still and video images digitally to a small chip about the size of your thumb nail. They also enable us to print color photos on our home printers or view them on our tablets, computers, or televisions. In addition to fast auto focus, some of these cameras have optical zoom capabilities up to 83 power, with 16 megabyte resolution, and a 32 gigabyte memory card all for less than $600. Even our digital wrist watches are small, inexpensive, water & shock resistant, and offer a great deal more information than the old analog watches. A growing number of people have smartwatches, which link to your smartphone via bluetooth and give you emails, text messages, phone calls, calendars, reminders, and have apps that do many of the same things as smartphone apps. In addition they can be used to track your exercise routine, monitor your heart rate & blood pressure, keep track of your sleep patterns, navigate your golf course, and even alert you if you have been inactive for too long.

The technological advances listed above are just a sampling of what we have available in our own homes. The technical advances in manufacturing, communication, transportation, scientific research, medical care, space travel, human resources, education, and military applications would take volumes to describe.

##### In the Future

Household robots.

# Health Care

##### In the Past

When I was young I didn't even know that there were specialist in the medical profession. In fact the doctor who treated me wasn't a pediatrician and didn't even have a medical degree, even though he used the title "Doctor" and practiced general medicine in the small town where he lived. People were still concerned with tuberculosis, smallpox, polio and a host of other diseases that were prevalent at that time. We had aspirin, cod liver oil, iodine, sulfur tablets and penicillin, but collected donations for the March of Dimes that would fund research to come up with a cure for polio.

We had surgeons and operating rooms, but they were focused on taking things out like tonsils and appendixes that were not needed or other body parts, which became damaged and could be taken out or repaired without killing the patient. Cesarean section deliveries, where both the baby and the mother survived, were the marvel of the age. If a patient had a bad knee or hip, the treatment was a cane, a crutch, or a wheelchair.

##### In the Present

The medical specialists and medicines, as well as the medical tools and facilities available today, are so advanced it is hard to imagine that they advanced so far in just seventy-five years. The transplant of human organs has become commonplace and enables people to live, who would have certainly died when I was young. In fact, some transplants are from animals or are artificiality created.

The treatment of cancer has advanced to the stage where they can take out a patient's white blood cells and train them to recognize and attack cancer cells without harming normal cells. They then inject these cells back into the cancer victim who can then fight off the cancer with little or no side effects. Some of these trained cells can even reproduce new trained white blood cells, thus, negating further treatments. Among my elderly friends, hip and knee replacements are quite common. Veterans, and others who have lost arms and legs, are now able to get mechanical parts which enable them to function in ways that would have been impossible just a few years ago. The use of stem cells has enabled the repair and regeneration of damaged organs.

Medical research is advancing so fast that new medicines and treatments are being developed at a blinding pace. The result is that patients are living longer, feeling better, and able to function with less restriction than ever thought possible. Babies are not only delivered with more sophisticated methods, they are often created with the help of in vitro fertilization, stored eggs, stored sperm, and surrogate mothers. Cloning of animals opens the door to the creation of exact replicas of humans by inserting a persons DNA into a sterilized egg.

##### In the Future

Genetic & nanotechnology tools to identify, prevent, and treat disease at the cellular level.

# Racial Discrimination

##### In the Past

When I was a child, racial discrimination was extremely rampant and tolerated both legally and socially. Although this existed to some extent with all racial minorities, it was most prevalent with those of African American decent. Although a problem in all sectors of the country, it was most egregious in the South. Black citizens were not allowed to eat at lunch counters at most public restaurants. Public facilities such as restrooms were designated as either white or colored and black citizens were relegated to the back of the bus. Black citizens were discriminated against in the job market for all but the most menial jobs. Separate schools and military units were created to keep the black and white populations from integrating.

Even though I lived primarily in the North, where these atrocities were less prevalent (or at least less flagrant), I was aware of this problem. Since I was an army brat and lived around military facilities in the United States and abroad, I saw more tolerance and integration because the military was one of the first segments of society to see integration take root.

##### In the Present

As a college student in the early sixties I was part of the younger generation, which was appalled by this discrimination and we voiced our repudiation of these practices. This was a great period of change and the protests and public outcry led to the integration of schools and most other public facilities. This was a period when federal legislation and sometimes intervention was needed to make these changes take effect. Since then both social acceptance and legal rights have moved progressively toward equality. The integration of, and access to, higher education and the job market has also lessened the economic division between the races.

There are those who lament that prejudice and racial intolerance still exists and that we have made little progress over the years. I doubt that we will ever be able to totally eliminate this problem from society just as we will never be able to totally eliminate crime. Whenever there is a significant instance of discrimination or racial injustice it will usually be covered in the news and posted on the internet. This leaves us wringing our hands and wondering if all of our efforts to banish this kind of behavior has been in vain. However, the very fact that the incident was newsworthy is testament to the fact that it is less prevalent and more unacceptable than in the past.

The fact that this kind of behavior is neither socially nor legally acceptable anywhere in the country is evidence that we are making progress as a society. This is not to say that we have reached our goal, only that we continue to move toward that goal both legally and socially.

##### In the Future

Hopefully, a continued effort to eradicate all vestiges of prejudice and discrimination.

# Safety

##### In the Past

When I was young we were oblivious to many of the dangers our environment represented or perhaps we just thought they were unavoidable. Factories vented polluting smoke directly into the air we breathed and sewer systems poured raw sewage directly into rivers or the ocean. Whether we were at home, at school, or at work, we were confronted with lead in our pipes or paints and with asbestos everywhere. However, most of us survived unscathed and never thought much about what we just took as the way things were.

Our homes didn't have smoke alarms, carbon monoxide alarms, or intrusion alarms and were not constructed with fire retardant materials. Electrical and other construction codes were subject to very lenient standards compared to what would come later. Children and adults were exposed to second hand smoke as smoking was allowed in stores, restaurants, airplanes, waiting rooms, and very common in people's homes.

No one thought we should wear helmets to ride bicycles or motorcycles. Our cars did not have seat belts, air bags, anti-lock brakes, or any of the modern safety equipment which provides warnings to the driver or cause the vehicle to avoid danger without the aid of the driver. Small children riding in the front bench seat were only protected by the driver's outreached right arm as they hit the brakes.

##### In the Present

Most of the safety items mentioned above are now addressed by those who manufacture products and erect the structures we live in, study in, and work in. Some of those precautions are made to meet the concerns of more informed and demanding customers, others are required by code and by law. Motorcycle riders are required to wear helmets in most states and even most adults wear helmets when riding bicycles.

Children are required to be seated in approved child seats when riding in cars. Airbags and seat belts are installed in all new cars and seat belts are required by law to be worn by all passengers in most states. Intersections and railroad crossings are now much safer due to design, signage, and better controlled by electronic devices.

Home and industrial building codes are very strict about the type of materials used and ridged standards are enforced for wiring, natural gas lines, and plumbing. Automatic sprinkler systems are required in most commercial buildings. Industrial pollution and water quality are also controlled by law across the nation. Also smoking is not allowed in most public places.

##### In the Future

An expanding bubble of safety driven by lawsuits, compassion, science, and publicity.

# Commerce & Manufacturing

##### In the Past

In the 1940s when I was a child the most sophisticated equipment most businesses had was a cash register. Most business transactions were done with paper documents and most record keeping was done manually (or with typewriters) and kept in physical files. Thus, orders, inventory, and sales records were all paper based.

When I went to college in the 1960s I learned mechanical drawing using paper, a drawing board, and a T-square. In accounting class we were taught to post entries on paper ledgers. However, about that time businesses started using very crude computers to keep track of orders, inventory, and sales records. When I submitted my Ph.D. dissertation in 1977, I was able to make photocopies of the original typewritten document. Just a few years earlier, copies required were prepared using carbon paper and prepared on the typewriter along with the original.

Even as businesses started using computers to conduct internal business transactions and records, all of the outputs were printed on paper when they involved an outside entity or another business. Orders were printed out on paper and sent to the company providing the items requested. Those paper orders were then entered into the providing companies computer and the necessary shipping documents and billing documents prepared and sent to the buyer along with the product. The buying company would then add the item to their inventory as well as produce a paper check and send it to the providing company. Thus, even though the internal processes became more sophisticated, the transactions between companies and with end customers were still basically paper driven and time consuming.

##### In the Present

Many governmental agencies and businesses are using electronic commerce. Here both entities are able to exchange all necessary communications electronically rather than having them reduced to paper sent to the other entity and reentered into another computer system. Along with electronic funds transfers, this substantially speeds up the entire process. It also cuts down on errors as every time the information is reentered into a new computer system it is subject to entry errors.

This process also works well with the technical aspects of design and manufacturing. Here a company can develop specifications on their computer and send them electronically to a potential supplier. Engineers and scientists in both of the companies can then work collaboratively using the same technical data and documents. Thus, blueprints and design specifications can be quickly and accurately transferred between companies. Using this process between suppliers, subcontractors, and their own operations, the Boeing Company significantly reduced the design and production time needed to produce the Boeing 777 commercial aircraft.

This process also helps companies deal directly with individuals. Customers can shop on a company's website and complete all shipping and payment transactions on their home computer. Likewise people applying for a job can fill out the employment application and their resume data directly on the online forms of companies posting job openings. Thus, the job postings, resume submissions, and application forms are done seamlessly and quickly without any paper documents being prepared or transmitted.

##### In the Future

Broader utilization of electronic commerce between businesses and for dealing with customers, clients, and providers. 

# Information & Knowledge

##### In the Past

When I was a child, all information came from books, newspapers, magazines, the radio, phone calls or word of mouth. Thus the knowledge we acquired was provided by our textbooks and what the teacher talked about or wrote on the blackboard. In high school we had labs where we could perform physical experiments. There were also times when we would take field trips to observe things outside or our normal classroom setting.

Knowledge was passed down from generation to generation in written form as it had been done since written languages were developed. With the exception of the printing press and the Dewey decimal system, colleges and libraries were much as they had been throughout history. If individuals or families were prosperous enough they might have a set of encyclopedias available, which was the holy grail of all knowledge readily available to the individual.

However, all of the aforementioned sources of information and knowledge were finite and fixed, so they became obsolete as things changed and new discoveries or data became available. Thus, written textbooks had to be replaced and yearbooks printed to keep encyclopedias up to date on the latest knowledge.

##### In the Present

Almost all knowledge and information has been digitized and is readily available to everyone who has an electronic device and access to the internet. Not only is this information instantly available anywhere on the globe, it is current and includes all the latest changes and updates. So instead of a grade school student having access to an encyclopedia, they have access to all the public databases and libraries around the world from any of their home devices, those at school, or at a public library. All that is necessary is an electronic device and an internet connection.

Many schools are issuing electronic tablets to students rather than a bevy of textbooks. This enables the student to address up to date information on all of their subjects, take notes, communicate with the teacher, take tests, and collaborate with other students. Thus, the student has a single lightweight device that replaces all their textbooks and notebooks and will never have to be replaced because the material is out of date.

Since knowledge and discovery is a process of taking what is already known and adding to the existing knowledge, having instant updates on the latest knowledge speeds up the aggregation of new knowledge and enables collaboration of scholars and scientists from different parts of the world. It also makes the latest knowledge available to those who will apply it to real world situations in commerce, transportation, education, health care and numerous other applications. Since all of the improvements in this chapter are based on an ever increasing pool of knowledge, this section could be considered to be the most important improvement, even though it is covered last.

##### In the Future

Even more advanced methods of aggregating, recording, and transmitting information, using electronic devices and instantaneous methods of communication.

# Chapter 7

# Common Threads

Throughout various chapters of this book you have seen rants, which follow a common thread, regardless of the segment of society that they impact. Many of those threads start in one section of society and impact other sections. Those major threads are addressed in this chapter.

# Immediate Gratification

This thread is where the entity involved chooses the short term benefit over the long term results. One aspect of this is to make things seem easier or cheaper than they actually are. Another aspect is to assume that things will be better in the future when the results or costs must be dealt with. This can be at the government level, at the business level, by organizations, and at the individual level as well. Examples of immediate gratification problems at all these levels are examined in this section.

##### By Government

Going into debt is the best example of immediate gratification in government. Our national debt is a serious threat to the future economic health of the country, but is a very effective way to promise new services, improve existing services, and still cut taxes. The political advantage of doing things this way is obvious and so the utilization of this technique by our elected officials is to be expected wherever possible.

A prime example of this phenomenon is where programs are implemented before the funding for them is available. The basic concept for our social security system is a very logical and worthwhile effort. Here the government has every employee set aside a portion of their earnings, plus a matching amount from their employer, to be invested and provide a small source of income at age 65, when most people have retired from their regular jobs. However, when the program was initiated it was given to those who reached this age even though they had only participated for a few years. Thus, their contributions, and the contributions of their employers, did not provide enough funds to support their benefits. So rather than subsidizing this excess from general revenue until it became solvent on its own, the government used the contributions from younger workers to pay those who turned 65 with very little in their retirement account. As long as the workforce was growing this diversion of funds was not so obvious. As the large baby boomer population retires this becomes more obvious. This was a good example of immediate gratification by paying benefits to people who had only contributed to the fund for a few years and not fund the excess from general revenue.

Going into debt to cope with emergency situations may be an unavoidable situation. A prime example of this was the Second World War, where the nation had little choice other than to gear up for war and handle the debt after the war was over. Fortunately the industrial capacity, expanded workforce, and pent up demand for commercial products created by the War helped the economy recover, although it did not pay off the debt. However, the Second World War only lasted four years, while some of our current military conflicts have gone on for over four times that long. Not having an exit strategy, or any economic gain from a victory, makes anything other than a get in, get done, and get out approach a constant financial, social, and political drain.

Another valid reason for incurring debt would be to make investments in the economic health and infrastructure of the country, which would pay for itself in future business and individual tax revenues. But to just create additional debt to fund ongoing expenses, without such a plan, is to stick our head in the hole like an ostrich and worry about it later. Funding a popular program from debt rather than revenue gives the current politician a feather in their cap and makes their successors look bad because they pick up the bill for the program and don't get credit for its success.

In addition to the financial incentives discussed above, are the expedient political objectives, which in many cases create even more problems in the future. Our support of the "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan, when they were fighting the Russians, backfired when the safe-havens and weapons we provided were used against us after the same group launched the 911 attacks. Perpetuating this behavior we provided weapons to former soviet block countries adjacent to Afghanistan in return for allowing us to use their countries to launch our attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan. The Iran-Contra scandal was another example of where an expedient solution resulted in a very bad outcome.

##### By Business

Smoke and mirrors profits are one of the ways some businesses opt for immediate gratification over long term success. For example a new chief executive officer is hired by a company, because the stockholders want to see a bigger bottom line. Perhaps the new executive is promised a bonus if they can make a significant impact on the annual profit. One thing that can be done to achieve this goal is to artificially increase sales, by having customers order next years needs during the current year and get a price reduction for doing this. The effect will be to increase sales during the current fiscal period at the detriment of next years sales. Another thing the executive could do would be to reduce expenditures on research for new products and preventative maintenance for buildings and equipment. While the detrimental aspects of these actions will not be evident in the short run, they will be disastrous for the company's future. However, the short run increase in profits will provide the executive with a bonus and the stockholders with a better annual dividend.

A second example would be a company, which expands rapidly, relies heavily on debt, and does not hold enough funds in reserve for business fluctuations. Growing a business is one way to generate greater profits and funding that debt by borrowing money, rather than issuing common stock, is also a very popular approach. However, if the company cuts its cash reserves too close, it may not be able to react to a temporary, unexpected downturn in sales or some unexpected costs. In many cases this will trigger a default in debt payments and put the company into receivership.

A third example of immediate gratification in business would be a company, which expands its sales by extending an overly generous line of credit to its business customers. If that customer goes out of business, the company will only receive pennies on the dollar if anything at all. For a business, which has a limited number of business customers and provides a large line of credit, this can be disastrous. If a large number of companies are linked in this fashion, it can easily create a domino impact that creates problems for an entire component of the economy.

Of course most retail business use immediate gratification to entice customers to buy their products. Buy now pay later is the way the retailer can get a customer who can't afford to buy the product any other way. To carry this process even further the merchant may offer payment periods which greatly exceed the life of the product. Many of the products sold by direct sales telemarketing schemes do not even quote the price of the item just "three easy payments of $XX.xx. Since used furniture has very little resale value and you don't need to make any payments until two years in the future, there is no collateral for any legitimate loan. The merchant just lines up another company to buy up the loans and then adds that cost to the furniture price.

##### By Organizations

Organizations such as associations, clubs, and union locals usually change officers more frequently than either government or business. That is because those in these positions are frequently elected for a single year in office. This creates an atmosphere very conducive to immediate gratification over long term success since those in charge have no long term responsibilities.

A good example would be a union that went on strike and secured a labor contract above what the company could afford on an ongoing basis. That might provide immediate gratification for the workers and the union in the short run, but could create a situation where the company becomes uncompetitive and ends up shutting down and laying off all its workers.

I consulted with a school district where the local chapter of a teacher's union secured a salary settlement several years before that made them the highest paid teachers in the area. However, the district was then so strapped for cash in subsequent years that it could not afford to invest in self-insurance, computerization, training employees to replace outside contractors, and other such efficiencies, which cut costs in neighboring districts. The neighboring districts then used these cost savings to increase the wages of their teachers. So by forcing a settlement, which made them the highest paid teachers in the area over the short run, it eventually made them the lowest paid teachers in the area over the long run.

##### By Individuals

Many individuals who end up in financial difficulty got that way by falling into the immediate gratification trap. Many of these folks were lulled into this situation by merchants and money lenders who assured them that they were qualified to enter into these financing arrangements and reinforced the individuals desire to secure what they were told they needed and could afford.

Many advertisements assure the potential customer that they can get credit to purchase an item regardless of their credit history and financial situation. "No one will be turned down" is a common ploy by those who will sell the note to another entity and don't care if it ever gets paid. There are also advertisements, which assure the debtor that the debt consolidation and/or loan negotiation company will rescue them from their difficult financial situation. If all else fails, they are assured by adds from lawyers (in states that allow lawyers to advertise) promising total relief by filing for bankruptcy.

There are also businesses that specifically facilitate and exacerbate those who get caught up in the spiraling debt trap. Payday loan companies are a good example of this, because they offer to solve your immediate need (or desire) for cash by drawing against your next paycheck. Now if you can't meet your expenses from the salary you have already earned, how will you be able to meet them next month when a significant portion of your next check will be required to pay back the principal and interest on the loan you used to pay for last months expenses. So you now need to borrow even more against the following month's check.

The same is the case when you are assured, by an ad from an automotive title loan company, that you will be able to borrow money against your car title to satisfy your immediate cash needs, even if everyone else has turned you down. Now if you can't meet your expenses on your current income, how are you going to do so after your car has been repossessed and you can't even get to work?

Overly permissive, overly protective, and overly passive parenting are also an example of immediate gratification by individuals and families. The overly permissive parent gains the privilege of being the child's "friend" and not having to deal with those undesirable situations where discipline is met with anger by the child being disciplined. Overly protective parenting also provides immediate gratification, because the parent doesn't have to deal with the disappointments, failures, and bruises, which the child would normally face growing up in the real world. Overly passive parenting also provides immediate gratification by not having to deal with the child's problems, ignoring the situation, and letting the child deal with these issues on their own.

All of these immediate gratification aspects of parenting spell disaster in the long run, when the child may not be physically, mentally, or emotionally equipped to handle what they will eventually face. Overly permissive, protective, and passive parenting can also deprive a child of the motivation, work ethic, financial independence, and parenting skills they need to be a successful adult. All three of these parenting scenarios can provide a child the idea that they can do what they want and always get their way. This attitude can be disastrous when they face employment, service, and social situations where it will be necessary to perform, conform, or compromise to survive.

# Going to Extremes

Here there is a tendency to swing from one extreme to the other. This causes major shifts in the way society handles various situations. When one extreme does not solve the problem there is a tendency to go to the opposite extreme to correct the situation. This shift is usually promulgated by those on the opposite extreme, who are quick to point out the disadvantages of the current way of doing things.

On a recent weekly political commentary program, one panel member lamented that politics used to be played between the forty yard lines, with most of the movement between the conservative and liberal politicians taking place in the middle of the field. Now it seems as though our political struggles are taking place in the "red zone" at one end of the field or the other with many of the scrimmages looking like "goal line stands," where the whole game is up for grabs. Continuing the football analogy, if those proponents of one extreme (the offense) are stopped from achieving their goal and forced to turn the initiative (the ball) over to the opposition, they become the defense and try to keep the other party from moving closer to the opposition goal.

Throughout this book you have been exposed to numerous problems caused by remaining at an extreme position or shifting from one extreme to the other. The best way to do things is seldom found at either end of the continuum. The small minority that clings fervently to each extreme point usually ends up initiating the swing. Since neither extreme provides the answer, the opposing minority points out the problems with the prevailing extreme and convinces the majority that a change is needed. Thus, the majority is drawn toward the opposite extreme.

One professor, and political pundit, has been able to correctly predict the victories of several presidential elections by a checklist of items, which reflect enough dissatisfaction to assure that a presidential candidate from the opposing party be elected. In the 2016 presidential election, this professor predicted the successful candidate even though all of the other predictions gave that candidate less than a 32% chance of winning, the night before the election.

Since there are a shrinking number of people who pull toward the middle, that position is usually never achieved for any length of time. We all know fervent conservatives and fervent liberals, but I don't know many fervent centrists.

# Going Nuclear

Here the individual, group, company, or political entity is willing to pull out all the stops if they don't get their way. Just as nobody wins in the event of a nuclear war, nobody wins if one party is willing to destroy everything to get their way or make their point.

When I was a child we didn't have organized teams like the little league operation that was prevalent in the next generation. We played "sand lot" baseball. We would get a bunch of us, pool our resources, go to a vacant lot, find things to mark the bases, create base lines with our heals in the dirt and then use the alternating pick method to form two teams. I remember on occasion that one of the players would demand to be the pitcher, or some other coveted position, and would take their ball or bat and go home if they didn't get their way. Of course this would usually kill the game and none of us would get to play that day. After that we would make sure that someone else brought the needed equipment so that the spoiled kid would not ruin our game.

We have all seen instances where much older kids and adults would be willing to take drastic action, disrupt thousands of people, destroy property, and even kill people to protest or block something they didn't like. In many cases that resulted in dire consequences for those doing the protesting as well as those who held an opposing opinion or perhaps no opinion at all. How many unions have held strikes that closed down their companies and resulted in unemployment just to get a raise or benefit they wanted.

As a young Air Force officer stationed in England, I recall that one American manufacturer opened a plant in England and gave the employees two fifteen minute coffee breaks and an hour long lunch break. The employees agreed that the fifteen minute breaks were adequate to have their tea, but that additional time was needed to heat the water and seep the tea. To address the problem, the manufacturer installed vending machines, which would dispense hot tea (plain as well as with milk, sugar, extra sugar, or lemon). The employees and their union rejected the tea machines and demanded that they be allowed to prepare their tea the old fashion way. After a protracted strike over this disagreement, the manufacturer closed the plant and moved the operation to another country.

Thus, by "going nuclear" and not accepting the compromise alternative, all of the out of work employees then had a lot of time to prepare and drink their tea any way they wanted. This impacted the entire local area as those support people who depended on the expenditures from the factory workers for their income were also out of work. Many economists will defend a multiplier impact of three to estimate the impact of the loss of a primary job. Thus, for every factory worker who lost their job two other support people (e.g., grocers, barbers, pub owners, repairmen, policemen, etc.) also lost their jobs.

On the corporate level I was quite surprised that one company, which was going out of business, let a very expensive communication satellite crash into the ocean rather than sell it to another firm that offered the company less than they wanted for the satellite. How often have we seen political parties willing to shut down the government or defund a vital service (like Homeland Security) if the budget did not include something that they wanted or was out of line with what they desired.

If a group is willing to destroy everything when they don't get their way, this represents a grave threat to everyone involved as well as others not directly involved. This is especially the case when some other entity has an opposing addenda and is also willing to create bedlam if they don't get their way. This stalemate between two rival groups who have demonstrated inability to compromise and put things in prospective, promises dire consequences wherever and whenever it is encountered.

I saw this kind of attitude during the televised initial screening for a popular nationwide vocal performance contest. Here some of the contestants would go ballistic and tell the judges they didn't know what they were talking about if they did not select the contestant for continuation in the competition. As justification for this attitude they would site their friends and relatives who praised the individual for their tremendous talent and golden voice.

There does not appear to be an easy answer to this problem, especially when the individual or entity gets their way by using this kind of leverage. The solution finds root in the way a child is raised. If they are successful in holding their breath until their parents agree to get them a pony, they grow up thinking that they should always get their way and can use tantrums, threats of mayhem, and violence to achieve their demands.

# Deception by Omission

In this thread the individual, group, company, or political entity deceives people, not by giving false information, but by leaving out vital information that the deceiving entity does not want the recipient to consider. Thus, while appearing to cover the subject in great detail, the deceiver gives the impression that all of the vital information has been provided.

For example, if I am looking at purchasing a condo in Hawaii, most real estate sites on the internet will show me a great deal of information about properties, which they are representing. For each listing they will state the price of the property and even give me a tool where I can calculate my expected payment down to the penny. They will also give me estimates of the costs for taxes, utilities, television cable, and even the local newspaper, again in great detail. What they have omitted is the large and substantial fees that I am obligated to pay to the condo association every month. That fee may be larger than all of my other costs put together.

So even though they know what that monthly fee is, they will hope that since it has been omitted I will think I can afford the condo and respond to their advertisement. Even If I later discover that I can't afford that property, they have my contact information and may be able to sell me another cheaper one.

You might be enticed to sign up for a phone service or television cable service for just $XX.xx per month. However, if mentioned at all in the advertisement, that is only for the first year. After that the cost will go up to some undisclosed amount. Of course, to get the wiz bang price, you have to sign up for three years.

Other commercial examples are products sold on television. Here the advertisement will state that the product will cost you a mere $X.xx plus shipping and handling. While shipping and handling may seem like just a small add on to the basic price, it can be just as much as the price of the item itself. Of course the clincher is that you can double your order for free, just pay separate shipping and handling for the second item.

You may also encounter this situation when searching for lodging either directly from a hotel or through one of the sites which combine various hotels and other travel booking sites. Here you will be shown a price for a particular room at a particular hotel. However, when you actually put in the dates you want to stay the price goes up substantially. For us the price of a specific hotel room in New York city went up from $208 to $508 per night.

On the federal government level, a politician may try entice you with a medical plan that would let you choose any doctor you wish and then have the federal government reimburse you for their share of the cost rather than have the government cover you under Medicare. However, what this ignores is that the major benefit of Medicare is that they have the leverage to negotiate prices well below what the market wants to charge, but a price they are willing to accept and still make a nice profit.

Whenever I have a medical bill, Medicare approves only about one fifth of what the hospital or doctor bills for and they cover 80% of that amount. Thus, for a $25,000 billed procedure, Medicare will only pay $4,000 and I will only have to pay $1,000. If I were dealing with the hospital or doctor directly, the government would send me the $4,000 and I would be stuck with a $21,000 out-of-pocket expense. Since I have not run into a hospital or doctor who would not accept Medicare, I am dead against switching to a reimbursement system.

I ran into this kind of deception at the state level as well. At a public meeting I was asked how we planned to spend the additional $2 million dollars that the state was sending us that year. Apparently the individual asking this question had just been to a gathering where the local state senator had boasted that the state was giving our school district an additional $2 million that year. I agreed that what the senator had said was technically correct but fiscally misleading.

In all previous years the district had received $2 million per year in local real estate excise taxes and those amounts were then deducted from our state allocation amount. The state had then directed that those taxes be sent directly to the state. Since we no longer got those taxes directly, but also did not have to deduct them from our state allocation, the transaction was a wash. We were still getting the same $2 million, but now through a different pipeline. That omission made the senator's constituents think that the state was increasing its support for education and that the school district was getting an additional $2 million.

On an individual level, your son may tell you the reason he is late getting home from school is that he stopped by the library to look at some books for a class assignment and then stopped at the drugstore to shop for some school supplies. What he may have omitted is the hour he spent with his buddies smoking behind the pool hall.

# Process vs. Product

In this thread the individual, group, company, or political entity concentrates on the process and relegates the product to the status of a dependent variable. This problem is one of the cornerstones of bureaucracy and explains why a bureaucratic entity can consume resources, time, and attention, yet produce little or no product. By concentrating on activity and process the entity defends it existence in governments, businesses, organizations, and even in families. As long as the entity is busy we sometimes fail to hold them to task for not producing anything meaningful.

For example, when I submitted my Ph.D. dissertation I was much more concerned about how the clerk in the graduate school office would respond to the format and margins of the document (process) than I was about the panel of professors who would question me about my research, calculations, and findings (product). In another situation, I and two of my business partners submitted a very lengthy patent application to the U.S. Patent Office. The most difficulty we had was in making sure that the format and clarity of the drawings were pristine (process), not that the concepts, design, and calculations were correct or that the invention would work as designed (product).

Anyone who has dealt with any large commercial or public entity knows the most important part is in the paperwork, procedures, and protocol. The proper forms, typeface, spelling, number of copies and routing of the documents (process) are much more important than the content of the report or submission (product). The reason for this bureaucratic reality is that it is much easier to look at the details and procedures, which are highly objective and measurable than it is to look at content or concept, which is more subjective and, thus, more difficult to understand and evaluate.

In the first example given above, the professors judging a complicated doctoral dissertation would need to have years of training and preparation to understand and evaluate the content, while the clerk in the graduate school office would only need a ruler and five minutes of training. When this dissertation was submitted forty years ago, documents such as these were prepared on a typewriter and format, margins, grammar, spelling, and punctuation were checked manually. Now computers and word processing have further diminished that clerk's very perfunctory job.

Thus, by highlighting the process that the individual or group went through to develop the decision or recommendation, we imply that the process is the crucial factor and relegate the outcome to the status of a dependent variable. My father once told me that the person who knows how is always working for the person who knows why. In today's centralized, bureaucratic organizations there are way too few people who know (or care) why. As indicated in the _Efforts not Results_ rant, people, business, and government are usually paid (or funded) for the time they spend on the endeavor, not on what they produce.

# Mediocrity

This is something which seems to infect a great number of organizations, businesses and government entities. Here the level of quality and productivity deteriorates to the lowest acceptable level. In a highly competitive environment this situation is often self-correcting in that the entire operation will cease to exist. However if the entire segment is mediocre, then all providers can continue to operate at a less than stellar level and the norm becomes one that is minimalistic.

Although this phenomenon is found in business operations, especially large ones, it is more prevalent in public and government operations where there are no competitors and employee's job security and remuneration are not as directly related to output and customer service as they would be in a commercial activity. I have seen this up close in a number of different settings. The first was in the Air Force as a junior officer. Even though I served in positions above my actual pay grade, I was promoted to first lieutenant and captain at exactly the same time in grade as all of the other officers I served with. Thus, the fact that I performed well in my assigned positions and had a great number of additional duty assignments had no impact on my pay and promotions.

As long as these junior officers stayed out of trouble and performed at an acceptable level they would get the same pay and promotions as those who were performing at a much higher level. I'm sure that my service in positions above my grade, additional duties, excellent evaluations, and four decorations for exceptional performance would have been to my benefit if I had stayed in the Air Force as a career and competed for higher grades, where promotions were much more influenced by performance rather than just time in grade. However, when you are assigned additional duties that your compatriots had failed at and see others rewarded for mediocrity it makes you wonder why you are putting in long hours and extra effort.

I found this same situation in civilian positions as well, however, there I stayed long enough to see my extra efforts pay off with pay raises and promotions. Most of my fellow workers were quite complacent to just do the minimum and stay at the same job for their entire career. I think that is unfortunately a prevalent attitude even among those who hold jobs that require a college education.

As an assistant superintendent in two different public school districts, I put into effect a system to try and change this situation. There I required all of my department heads to submit an annual list of accomplishments their departments had achieved within five major thrust objectives during that year. Those thrusts required that they show improvement in their services, efficiency, methods, technology and customer service, as well as to improve their own level of competence and that of their staff through staff development and training. Along with that I had each of our school principals rate each of these departments on several criteria relating to various aspects of the services they received from those service departments. The results of these annual goals and objectives and customer ratings were then reflected on the evaluations and pay raises I gave them each year.

The result was that the department heads and their staff were required to constantly improve on a number of fronts every year to show that they were getting better not just performing business as usual. Between the goals & objectives submission and the ratings, the departments were always looking for new ways to improve their operation and keep their customers happy. Thus, instead of the previous response that something is outside of our normal responsibility or we will take care of your problem when we get around to it, employees were looking for ways to go out of their way to be of assistance to their "customers" and go above and beyond their previous efforts. One of the main problems with public and government services is that they normally don't have either competitors or customers - just a job description. As long as an employee and even a manager perform adequately, and don't violate any rules or laws, they don't have to worry about losing their jobs or qualifying for routine salary increases.

Even if an organization can get beyond the normal mediocrity, they might not stay there. In both of the school districts referenced above, my successor did away with both the annual goals & objectives submissions and the ratings. I was told that this enabled the departments to just go back to taking care of the day to day business and providing the routine minimal levels of service. Most workers and even managers will not go out of their way to do the extra level of effort unless there is some incentive or reward for taking the high road. There is also the peer pressure on both workers and managers to not be a high performer and make the other workers or managers look bad in comparison.

# Single Issue Focus

This observation is addressed here, because it cuts across several of the topics addressed in previous chapters. In politics it might be a candidate who is voted into office because of a single issue, which they champion, are elected on, and focus on to the exclusion of all other issues and activities. So if I am a gun rights or gay rights fanatic, I might donate to, campaign for, and vote for the candidate who has the most strident position on my pet issue even if that candidate is less qualified to deal with all the other issues that they may have to contend with.

On a state and local level it may deal with even more specific issues than at the national level. The weakest school board members I had to deal with were those who ran for the school board because their child was in a program such as special or gifted education or in an activity like football or the band. Their objective was to get more funding for, impact the direction of, and even get involved in the hiring or firing of personnel related to their pet program. As a result they were less interested in the other issues facing the school district than those board members who were focused on the overall interests of the district. In our gated, golf course retirement community we had residents who got themselves elected to the architectural committee of the owners association just so they could get approval for a specific modification to their own property. Once they had achieved that objective they would either resign or serve out the remainder of their term with little interest in the other matters coming before the committee.

It always baffled me why union members would consistently reelect union leaders even after those union leaders had been caught stealing from the union pension fund. I was also bemused by those citizens who would continuously reelect a congressman that blatantly shirked his duties and very seldom even showed up for work. A good example of single issue focus in the military was portrayed in the movie "The Caine Mutiny" where the captain was so focused on berating a sailor over the appearance of his uniform, that he ignored the warnings of other crew members and ran over his own tow line.

In business it may be that a company is so focused on cutting costs that it makes decisions to save a few pennies on production costs that it exposes the company to significant costs in the long run. Say an auto manufacturer cuts manufacturing costs by using an inferior component or shoddy assembly process. While it cuts its manufacturing costs it may result in serious safety issues which bring on law suits, recalls, fines, and a significant blow to their brands esteem in the eyes of potential customers. For a food processing plant, a minor savings in the inspection or handling of the product can cause sickness or death to those consuming the product. This will lead to lawsuits, product recalls, fines, FDA sanctions and a serious detriment to the image of all the products produced by that company. These focus issues not only cause financial losses, but more importantly the loss of life, injury, or serious health issues to those impacted by these myopic decisions.

In sports it may be the emphasis by a special team coach to reduce his defenders time to get down field on a punt return. At top speed their momentum often keeps them from being able to quickly change direction and tackle an agile ball carrier who is able to navigate through the defenders to make an outstanding run-back or a touchdown. For the bating coach on a baseball team it may be the focus on hitting a home run ball that results in most of those attempts becoming easy outs, because of their high trajectory and long hang times. Many of the most successful hits are the broken bat hits, which clear the infield and are too short to be caught by the outfielders.

# Copy Catnip

As a young child, I remember that kids would tease other kids who blindly followed someone else by calling them a "copy cat." However, as they became older this admonishment seem to fade and junior high school girls were all calling each other to see what their classmates were wearing to school or for a social event. That same behavior seems to impact our adult activities and business operations as well.

Why will four competing service stations all choose the same intersection to place their business? How about two drug stores located across the street from their competitor. How about two retail stores who all carry the same basic items for approximately the same price. The same is true for styles of cars and clothes as well as the attributes of various consumer products. Why will countless companies all sell a twelve cup coffee maker which operates the same way, looks the same way, and costs about the same as all their competitors?

The answer appears that one individual or company takes a risk and if they are successful an army of competitors follow suit rather than take a risk on something unique which may result in criticism or failure. So if wild west programs, police programs, hospital programs, detective programs, or reality programs are garnering an audience at any one point in time, they will predominate your TV until some new craze becomes popular.

On an individual level we see that behavior because the majority of people don't want to be the first one to raise their hand and ask a question, speak out against authority, or be the first couple on the dance floor. Once some brave sole breaks the ice, then there will usually be a bevy of followers who all follow suit. We see this behavior in nature where fish travel in schools, land animals travel in packs or herds, and birds travel in flocks for protection and survival. In these situations there is always the alpha animal who leads the way for the others to follow.

# Stuck in the Mud

This thread is when we continue to do the same things because they are habit, tradition, or law, when we can change them and they don't make sense in light of the current situation. Perhaps when they were first instituted they were logical, but now they are not what we should be doing. The rant about continuing the electoral college system of electing a president and the actual designation of people as electors from each state who would gather at some central place and vote a month after the general election, is a prime example of how we continue a practice, which is no longer needed or effective.

I remember a very interesting and humorous column, which was carried in a number of newspapers, that highlighted this phenomenon. The column cited crazy laws that were still on the books, but ridiculous in terms of current circumstances. So the law in a particular city or town would require that you tie your horse to the hitching post with a particular knot, even though the town had not had hitching posts or the need for them for over fifty years. Another law still on the books in a different jurisdiction required men to wear hats when they were outside in public. Although the reason for these laws had long past they were still on the books and could theoretically be enforced.

In one retirement community in Arizona, after the developer had sold out all the units in the development he charged the residents several hundred thousand dollars for the clubhouse, swimming pool, tennis courts, shuffle board courts, and horseshoe pits. However, he wanted to retain the golf course, which he continued to operate for several years afterword. Since he no longer owned the clubhouse, but wanted to keep the golf course office and pro shop in the clubhouse, he rented space back from the homeowners for this purpose. Not being happy with the developer, the homeowners association charged him a very high rental rate for the space in the clubhouse he used for his golf course operations. Years later the developer wanted to sell the golf course. Not wanting another outside owner, about 200 of the residents all chipped in and bought the golf course and operated it as a non-profit entity.

Now the golf course belonged exclusively to the residents of the community and all residents and their guests could play at a rate below that for any outside players. However, the original contract stated that the golf course had to pay rent in the clubhouse at a high rate. Thus, the resident owners now had to pay the same rental rate for space in their own clubhouse as was charged to the greedy developer. Homeowner fees supported free rent and upkeep of the tennis courts, shuffle board courts, pool tables, craft rooms, swimming pool, exercise room, restaurant, post office, and other facilities for the residents, but did not contribute at all to the pro shop or upkeep of the golf course, even though more residents used the golf course than most of the other facilities.

Here the conditions, which promulgated the original separation & agreement, had gone away and yet they continued to dictate a practice, which was no longer appropriate. The justification by the homeowner association for maintaining this arrangement was that it was specified in their bylaws, even though the reason for those provisions no longer existed and could be modified at any time by the association.

# Doing Something

Here an organization or government agency develops a plan to solve a problem. The action resulting may not be properly researched & tested before it is implemented and may not do anything (or very little) to solve the basic problem. However, the organization can point to the action as proof that they are doing something to address the problem. Busing students between schools to achieve integration and equality is an example of something, which impacted the entire society, cost a lot of money, and yet didn't alleviate the original problems.

Even if it appears that the plan is not well thought out, detractors will be told to withhold their criticism until the plan has been implemented and operated for a satisfactory time to determine its impact. Until that time, those responsible for solving the problem can take a break from criticism and the accusation that they are not doing anything to address the problem.

We as a society need to hold those responsible for solving problems to not only do something, but to do something that actually fixes or addresses the problem. This requires that those implementing the problem make sure that the solution implemented actually works before a great deal of money and disruption is created by an action, which is not well thought out.

# Conclusion

If you have reached this point in the book, you must have looked at some of the material and possibly all of the rants and recommendations covered. Hopefully this has been a worthwhile endeavor that you found both interesting and informative. Sometimes we as a society just muddle along and find ourselves continuing to do business in a way that is no longer relevant or appropriate. If anything this book is a call to stop and reexamine what we are doing and see if there is a better way to proceed in the future.

Some of the recommendations made will take a concerted effort by those groups involved in deciding how things are done within the specific areas involved. Even if those folks like the way things are currently done (or are just too lazy to make a change), they can be influenced by the majority who know there is a better way to proceed. Other recommendations, especially those in the _Social & Personal_ chapter, can be done individually by a single person or a family group. There the trick is just to follow your mother's advice (or parts of the Boy Scout Law) and be kind, courteous, helpful, cheerful, truthful, compassionate, and understanding. Too often in today's society people are so eager to stretch their conduct to the extremes of their legal rights, sometimes just to counter those on the opposite extreme, that they often create unnecessary strife and upheaval for those in the middle who are just trying to get along and have a safe, uncomplicated, and happy life.

The impersonal and anonymous nature of the internet, and various social network platforms, also facilitate bullying and negative interactions, which are less likely to surface in face-to-face interactions with people we know and interact with frequently. These text and video forms of communication enable an individual to express their bias and anger instantly to the entire online community without allowing for any reasonable intervention or editing by anyone else. They also do not provide any time for reflection before they are published, so even if the individual feels remorse after they have calmed down, researched, or reconsidered, the heated accusation, attack, or retort has already been disseminated.

As indicated in the introduction, I do not hold myself out to be any kind of authority on any of the subjects covered. So the book is just a reflection of one individual's thoughts about the way things appear and seem to conflict with the way he thinks things could and should be done. Perhaps if more than just a few people agree with the rants and recommendations covered in this book, some changes might actually occur to move to a more sensible and logical approach. At least this typical citizen and taxpayer has lent his two cents worth to the general discussion.

# Books by Terry Eade

Available in ePub Format at Barnes & Noble or The Apple iBookstore and in Kindle format at Amazon.com

Management & Miscellaneous

The Last Minute Manager

Faultless Fuel

The Glories of Geezerhood

Random Rants for Rational Reflection

The Frightening Fruition of Frumpis

Dave's Adventures in the Afterlife

Finance Series

Basic Nercology

Basic Sarcology

Eade's Law's of Budgeting

Poker Series

Pokerish: The Language and Logic of Poker

More Pokerish: Poker Skills and Insights

Terry's Joke Collection Series

Volume I - Animal to Bar Jokes

Volume II - Barber to Domestic Staff Jokes

Volume III - Drugstore to Genie Jokes

Volume IV - Golfing to Kid Jokes

Volume V - Lawyer to Medical Jokes

Volume VI - Military to Newlywed Jokes

Volume VII - Nurse to Redneck Jokes

Volume VIII - Religion to Senior Citizen Jokes

Volume IX - Sports to Train Jokes
