Grad School is Weird - March Edition

I got my first B at midterm in graduate school so far. It was disappointing and was even more so due to the fact that this class is a complete mess. A mess in the sense that I can’t determine whether I deserve a B, or an A, or an F. And a mess in the sense that this is supposed to be a serious class on a serious subject necessary for any graduate of this program. I was looking forward to the course because I was interested in the subject and thought it would be an asset to my career ambitions. So far the professor has done nothing but read directly from the text in each class. There has only been one assignment this semester, one that was not graded and, from my February dispatch, required several emails and phone calls to the professor in order to get incredibly late feedback on before presenting to the class. This week I was unable to attend class and I sent an email to inform the professor the day before. I received no reply and later learned that they blew the class off, forgetting to bring in the book to read out of that day. Which just means that next week’s class will be extra long.

Obamacare Rant - 3/31

In closing arguments this week in the Supreme Court on Obamacare, one of the justices spoke favorably on severability, the ability for them to strike down certain aspects of the act as unconstitutional. The positive aspect of this concept in this case is that the current argument in front of the court is in regard to one aspect, the individual mandate. This is because the mandate forces anyone born in this country not exempted by the government to purchase health insurance by threat of fine and imprisonment if that fine is not paid. The justice speaking was speaking in favor of removing the individual mandate, citing this tact as a conservative approach. Certainly this justice, who was once employed as general counsel for the ACLU, did not mean conservative in the political sense. This argument has gained in popularity on the coat tails of two popular clauses in the law, allowing children to remain on their parent’s policies to the age of 26 and disallowing the preclusion of prior conditions to new enrollees. While it sounds reasonable, to get rid of the bad while preserving the politically popular, simply severing the individual mandate is not a workable solution. First, it is not the duty of the court to determine what the law should look like. That’s the job of the legislative branch and the law is what it is, warts and all. Second, congress did not include a severability clause so that certain aspects could be removed if they were later found to be unconstitutional. Second, the current case questions the individual mandate, but does not yet take to account other possibly questionable aspects. Based on this one decision, should the court consider all 2,700 pages of the law in order to determine what should and should not be included? Which brings us back to the first point, making or editing laws is simply not the duty of the Supreme Court. Last, the individual mandate is the core of the entire act’s Rube Goldberg pyramid scheme structure, remove it and the whole thing becomes even worse financially.

Obamacare Rant - 3/30

The waiting is the worst part. No one knows what the US Supreme Court will decide in their deliberations of Obamacare. This week, following a rare multi-day nearly six hour hearing on the law (typically cases get about half an hour), many have weighed in with their assessments of the case, probable decisions and the blame for whomever screwed up. It’s interesting to assess such unknown unknowns and curious with regard to the way that Justice Kennedy is insulted or sucked up to because of his reputation as the so-called crucial swing vote. One writer insists on referring to him as America’s monarch, and like everyone else, wants him to rule one way or another. Before leaving the court, O’Connor was the justice known as the swing vote and Kennedy was a hard core conservative. Or so was his reputation. I’d bet he doesn’t think he’s changed. In ending arguments on Obamacare, Justice Kagan, former solicitor general for this administration spoke what seemed to be on behalf of it bringing up virtue to help those less fortunate. The one thing I don’t understand, because it disappears in these conversations, but is brought up all the time to espouse the virtues of government programs, Medicaid. You know, the means tested program for the less fortunate? Why do we need more when it exists already? Is it because it’s a bloated ineffective government mess? If it isn’t why doesn’t it work? And why should anyone believe that the solution is an even bigger government program?

Obamacare Rant - 3/28

It's striking how far this is going to the detriment of the real issue. That many seem unwilling to accept responsibility for their debts, healthcare or otherwise. It's head shaking to keep seeing this "we" nonsense. Why is it so horrible to consider that people should be responsible for covering their debts? If it leads to bankruptcy, so be it. Clean slate, lesson learned, insurance for next time. And why is it so great to force insurance regulations for mandatory coverage? It's fantastic for those who utilize such things, forcing others to subsidize the popular and cheap. But what about those with no such needs and high deductibles resulting from those regulations faced with something not explicitly covered? Why even have insurance if they consume less than their deductible? Every person is different and the problem is over-regulation and compulsion forcing everyone to accept the same and pay for free-loaders. There are already programs to cover those who honestly can't do for themselves. What is this debate about without considering the obvious failure of these programs? So maddening. The quest for control over everyone else from these people.

A Taco Bell Tale

So apparently that story about that dude in the Taco Bell commercial driving his friends 965 miles for a Doritos shelled taco is real. I thought it was fictional. I’ve heard rumblings demeaning the trip, I wonder why anyone cares. It seems to me that a group of friends wanted to go on a road trip somewhere and the idea of a special, hard to find taco was just the means to an end, a way to determine where to go. After all, if a road trip wasn’t in the plans, why not just buy some Doritos and then spread the innards of a locally purchased Taco Bell taco onto it, creating a yuppie approved Doritos bowl?

Anyway, I wonder why Taco Bell isn’t manned by robots and available in vending machine form yet. I want one of those Doritos Locos tacos but don’t want the hassle of going to a Taco Bell to get one. I went to the Bell Sunday night to get one and it ended up being a disaster. We went through the drive thru and when we got home the order was incorrect. The receipt was only 60% right and the contents of the bag didn’t even match the receipt. Worse, of the correct contents in the bag there was no Doritos Locos taco.

This particular location has screwed up previous orders and out of frustration I didn’t want the order remade, I wanted a refund. Calling ahead to the restaurant I was informed by the on-duty manager that he couldn’t grant a refund and after he called another manager was told that I could get a refund the next day. On Monday I called to talk to this manager a couple hours into what I was informed was the beginning of his shift and told that he had not yet arrived. Before leaving work in the afternoon, six hours into this manager’s supposed shift, I called again and he had not yet arrived. I was informed that this person alone could grant the refund and assured that he would be there when I arrived. I had refrigerated the food and brought it along and was able to get a refund, a day later. Every communication I had with the restaurant was strained and it was difficult to be understood. When I went to the restaurant to get my refund and return the food it was a mess and uncomfortable and the manager was unkempt and lacking in hygiene. It was a nightmare and I won’t make the mistake of visiting that location ever again, and very likely won’t visit any Taco Bell without being incredibly hungry and absent of other options. Basically if I’m driving through Grants, it might happen.

Which gets me to the main point, why can’t a Taco Bell exist as a vending machine? Seriously. Taco Bell’s menu consists of a limited number of set ingredients arranged in various ways. I could imagine a vending machine consisting of pre-measured ingredients separated and managed through various sensors being mixed as ordered through a controlled process. A touch screen that resembles one of those automatic supermarket checkouts would be the interface to the customer. It could also take orders online thorough a website or tablet app and the receipt would work as a key through a locker system to deliver orders. It is a dream of mine to never have to order food in person.

And the Lobos Come Home

The Sweet Sixteen has become the University of New Mexico Lobos men’s basketball team’s Everest. It just is. I don’t know what it is and no one else does either but it just seems insurmountable. Over the last ten years the Lobos have been to the tournament three times. Over the life of the program, many more times than that and have had as high as a number 3 seed in the 16 seed tournament. This year, the Lobos won the Mountain West Conference regular season and tournament and had a 5 seed. Not too far into the second half of this past Saturday night’s second round game against Louisville, the Lobos were down by as much as fifteen points. The lead seemed insurmountable and then the Lobos clawed their way back providing hope for their fans. In the end, they lost by three and don’t get a third game. The Lobos had a great season and every year under current coach Steve Alford has ended in a post-season bid. The thirst of Lobo fans for that third NCAA tournament game will only get larger, hopefully it finally happens. They are a great team and deserve credit from a successful season. Maybe next year.

Broncos to Sign Manning

According to reports, Peyton Manning will soon be a member of the Denver Broncos. It is a good day for the franchise and there is a lot of hope for success in the upcoming season. Many of the reports today mention that the team will be looking to trade incumbent starting quarterback Tim Tebow, who was impressive last year. While Manning was making his decision and the Broncos emerged as a suitor, there was an opinion piece purporting to deconstruct the mental status of Tebow, basically stating that he would be somehow emotionally scarred by the Broncos pursuit of Manning and as a result would be a less effective quarterback if Denver did not secure Manning’s services. I always have a problem with this kind of opinion because there is no way to truly understand someone’s thinking, you can only go by the very real actions and statements by the person being analyzed. Based on what is known, Tebow has never been anything but a consummate professional. He very may well end up emotionally tried by this episode but there is no way to know how it will manifest at this point. Tebow may remain in Denver, backing up Manning or he may be traded or cut and then sign with another team. No one knows at this point and he deserves the benefit of the doubt and provided the opportunity to do what he does best, win football games, as a backup in Denver or as a starter somewhere else. On Manning, the signing is a risk because of his recent injury history but again, no one really knows. He has been examined by multiple doctors and cleared for playing. There’s nothing more that can be said that isn’t conjecture and we will know soon, once Manning steps onto the field, whether or not he can return to his hall of fame career. The possibilities are very positive and Broncos fans have something to cheer for. Welcome to the team, Peyton Manning. And, thank you Tim Tebow for what you did for the Broncos.

Absurd Random Phoniness - 3/15

If this year’s election is decided based on a bogus argument based on the supposed lack of access to contraceptives it might be time to move. The way that the story, that once seemingly dominated headlines, has faded to the background while honest disagreement with the mandate is promising but there are still many whom allow themselves to confuse access to such things with the desire that someone else pay for them. And that’s what the point is, after all. Because contraceptives are in wide use, it is a subject that would seem uncontroversial to most people. But the mandate has nothing to do with contraceptives. Health and Human Services deemed that a tangentially health-care related product be provided free of charge through health care plans. That a person can go to a no or low-cost clinic to obtain a contraceptive prescription and then have it filled by Wal-Mart for less than $10 a month doesn’t seem to matter to the takers in our society.

I wonder what would have been the reaction to recent comments by Rush Limbaugh comparing the testimony given by the Georgetown law student (average starting salary upon graduation: $160,000) and self-described reproductive-rights activist to some less than kind words would have been if phrased differently. Something like, I wonder the reason why this person believes that it’s so necessary for contraceptives be provided at no cost as part of health care coverage, could it be because of promiscuity? And it seems as though this person is desirous of being compensated, in a roundabout way, for their coitus related activities. Many wouldn’t have even noticed. However, the resulting feigned indignation wouldn’t have changed one bit because those faking outrage didn’t care so much about what was said but who said it. Rush has been around for a long time. No matter the desires of those who disagree with him and his popularity, he will be around for a lot longer.

It’s cliché to say ‘keep your laws off my body’. In response, no one cares what you do with your body so long as you keep it out of my wallet.

School Photos are a Sham

No doubt, out of self-interest, there are many photographers working the school photo racket, and in any other kind of photography, that would disagree with my opinion. I’ve even argued with a professional photographer about whether or not the client should own the rights to the work that they paid them to do. It was a dead-end conversation and simply resulted in the hiring of a different wedding photographer who did not insist that they owned the photographs that I paid them to take. But I digress.

The other day I went to pick up my son at his pre-school and they had a setup for school photos. My son, being precocious, did his part and was even presentable in what was taken. Then, I saw the prices. One hundred and forty dollars for eight pieces of paper with my hijo’s likeness on them, along with negatives! I certainly understand that the labor involved in taking the pictures, editing and producing the things and then dragging them back to school incurs a cost. I do wonder though, exactly what the mark-up on those pieces of paper exactly are. I also learned that I had only that afternoon to decide whether or not I desired to purchase the already printed images. That’s right, not only do they overcharge, but they also presume that you’re going to purchase. The representative of the photographer was rude and pushy. Fantastic salesmanship for an overpriced presumptively produced product.

Can the industry be saved, or at least become more honest? Of course it can. In today’s digital photography world, there is no reason to ever produce completed pictures before the customer even sees them. Why not set up a website with the images previewed for customers with the option to purchase all the high resolution results on a disk for $45 or digital download at $40? Savvy customers can then order prints from their preferred provider. Additionally, the photographer could partner with a picture printer, to offer prints and many other photo-related products, shipped directly to the customer’s home at a 100% mark-up. Partnering with Walgreens the photographer could charge 40 cents for 4 X 6, $3.20 for 5 X 7 and $6 for 8 X 10 photos. And what if the customer cannot or does not want to go online? Then send a representative for an afternoon with a couple laptops with the website as a standalone program available for customers to review and make purchases. Done, and done. No more ticked-off customers, wasted prints and because costs are lowered, demand will go up enough to make up for the previous price structure. It could even increase photographer revenue. Would it work? I think so. I could be wrong but so long as they continue as they have they will not get one cent from me.