Came home from a grueling day at work: six and half hours spent prowling the web for articles, weblogs, nused cars, cheap airline tickets etc., one hour spent working (i.e. opening and closing files on my desktop), half an hour spent wandering around the building chatting to other employees trying to sniff out new gossip about recent layoffs and resignations.
Ate a nutritious dinner of three spoonfuls of homemade chocolate frosting, chased down with a handful of saltine crackers. I figure I always have tomorrow to eat the fruits and vegetables.
Started reading the book Saving Capitalism from the Capitalists which promises to be interesting, promptly fell asleep after the first two pages with the windows open to the lulling sounds of rush hour traffic outside our living room window.
Awoke for a moment positive someone was breaking into the apartment, but soon realized it was just the wind knocking over some papers. Changed napping scene to the relative quiet of the bedroom and napped for two hours.
Woke up as the sun was saying its final goodby at eight o' clock. My mouth had the feel and taste of a prepubescent boy's BO. Yes, that bad. Must be the combination of sugar and salt transmogrifies into alarming fuzzy mouth BO.
Husband came home from a hard night of surfing, fixed us a smooth cocktail of pineapple juice and berry flavored Sky vodka. Ah....this is living.
Good Night.
Thursday, August 28, 2003
Wednesday, August 27, 2003
Insecticide
I was in the bathroom doing my business and staring at the floor when I noticed a dead cricket on the linoleum. Nothing noteworthy there, but.... This cricket was upside down and dead. I nudged him to make sure, and yep, definitely dead not simply in a stupor. No one stepped on him smooshing him into oblivion. He wasn't munched on by another insect eater. So, how did this little fellow die? The body was completely intact simply upside down and dead in a human's bathroom. Was he leaping for joy when a stroke struck and knocked him flat on his back? Did he crawl up the toilet, sip the bowl water and then keel over from the cleaner, doing a backflip off the rim? I have questions but no answers.
Thursday, August 07, 2003
Parisian Whimsy
I finally got around to reading the Saturday edition of the Los Angeles Times. The front page story in the Calendar section was dominated by a photo in which the inhabitants of Paris were sunning themselves on a makeshift beach along the Seine. Apparently, Paris Mayor Bertrand Delanoe, a socialist, wanted to help the underserved who had either no time or no money to vacation at a real beach. Therefore, he recreated a beach on the banks of the Seine by closing off streets, trucking in 3000 tons of sand and palm trees and setting up volleyball courts and water venues for cooling off. What craziness! What whimsy! Kudos to Delanoe for his creativity.
Then I read the money quote.
The project was described as "a free populist event that cost the city 1.5 million euros". I may not be too bright, but I do know that something which costs the city millions of euros isn't exactly free. Afterall, where does a city usually get its money to spend on a "populist" event? Did I mention that the mayor is a socialist? That's right, he probably taxed the living snot out of the local citizens so he could then pronounce his little handout as free. If Delanoe was worried about poor people not being able to pay for a real vacation, why not decrease their taxes so they could keep more of their money and perhaps, spend it on a holiday to a real beach with a real ocean to get away from the all too real city?
Why do I have such a hostile reaction to the mayor's shindig? I don't mind when cities put on free events such as movies in the park, dancing at dusk, music at noon, what have you. Sometimes these events are paid for by the public through their taxes, and sometimes organizations or businesses fund the offerings. So why do I mind the beach bit? My hackels were raised by the Mayor's presumption that he was helping the underserved when the reality may be that he (and all his predecessors) has helped cause the condition by over taxation. My irritation is that the mayor isn't honest about who is really funding the "populist" event. If the populace was given the opportunity to choose which they would rather finance with their own funds, a getaway to a real beach or a lie down on a sandy Seine bank, where would all the people be?
I would appreciate the mayor's efforts more if the beach proposal was voted on by the people who were going to pay for it, or if it was touted as a publicity stunt to lure people into the city during the deadest part of summer, thus allowing the local businesses to increase their profits during a normally unproductive month. Instead, the joke is on the poor people who actually paid for the event and still believe they're getting something for nothing.
Then I read the money quote.
The project was described as "a free populist event that cost the city 1.5 million euros". I may not be too bright, but I do know that something which costs the city millions of euros isn't exactly free. Afterall, where does a city usually get its money to spend on a "populist" event? Did I mention that the mayor is a socialist? That's right, he probably taxed the living snot out of the local citizens so he could then pronounce his little handout as free. If Delanoe was worried about poor people not being able to pay for a real vacation, why not decrease their taxes so they could keep more of their money and perhaps, spend it on a holiday to a real beach with a real ocean to get away from the all too real city?
Why do I have such a hostile reaction to the mayor's shindig? I don't mind when cities put on free events such as movies in the park, dancing at dusk, music at noon, what have you. Sometimes these events are paid for by the public through their taxes, and sometimes organizations or businesses fund the offerings. So why do I mind the beach bit? My hackels were raised by the Mayor's presumption that he was helping the underserved when the reality may be that he (and all his predecessors) has helped cause the condition by over taxation. My irritation is that the mayor isn't honest about who is really funding the "populist" event. If the populace was given the opportunity to choose which they would rather finance with their own funds, a getaway to a real beach or a lie down on a sandy Seine bank, where would all the people be?
I would appreciate the mayor's efforts more if the beach proposal was voted on by the people who were going to pay for it, or if it was touted as a publicity stunt to lure people into the city during the deadest part of summer, thus allowing the local businesses to increase their profits during a normally unproductive month. Instead, the joke is on the poor people who actually paid for the event and still believe they're getting something for nothing.
