Mangela Lansbury

Oof. This is the same kind of "they don't need welfare because they have a car" type of arguments that are just infuriating. It does not behoove anyone to be judgmental and condescending to impoverished people. Society has already failed them once. There's no need to put our failures on their shoulders.

Increase the tax rate on long term capital gains made by those making more than $90,000k a year to be on parity with the income tax rate associated with their tax bracket; encourage corporate spending by incentivizing raising wages, hiring new workers, and bolstering capital/R&D investment via a tax on stagnant corporate holdings (maybe as determined by a ratio of their declared net annual profit to their total liquid holdings, or maybe by some other method, i don't know, i'm not an economist); eliminate the more short-sighted of trade agreements like NAFTA; cease the failed policy of quantitative easing... There are a lot of options beyond getting the government to decrease military spending, some more feasible than others.

So is it fair to say that you consider puns to be rather... toothless?

I need to fluff up my podcast library because my commute has gotten longer, so I tried the Slate Political Gabfest again. I was again disappointed by the level of discourse on there -- they talked about a lot of legal stuff, and just didn't make very many good points, and the good points they made were poorly argued. I'll try it out for another week or two, but I got frustrated by that before and probably will again. I added the Lawfare podcast to my list and it's been really good. It's a nice podcast for wonks. Jihadology is a good related podcast about terror-related subjects, as is Covert Contact by the guy who does Blogs of War. I think I'll try out the other two Lawfare podcasts -- Steptoe Cyberlaw and Rational Security -- just to go full Brookings on tech policy.

I've been listening to Donnie Trumpet and the Social Experiment on repeat lately.

Even in his explanation of the situation, James can't help making homophobic jokes ("This guy's an ass! (or maybe dick, not sure what he prefers)"), blaming women for what he views as his failure (It's Sheever's fault this panel from a few years ago was bad, not mine! The only reason it was passable was because of my efforts, and only my efforts!), and being generally misogynistic (Why include that weird anecdote about his brother facing rape charges? A woman who needs to collect her belongings can't have been raped??? What?????). He's always sounded like a bully with a massive ego to me, and his own explanation of why he was fired further cements that impression. The only reason I'm sad to see him go is because there have been some great games over the last few days, and that's overshadowed by all the drama around this ass.

For some people, the options are making a statement about illegal business practices and keeping the heat on during the winter. It's almost like predatory employment practices are targeted at those among us who have already been robbed of their voice and are unable to speak up. Hmmm.

Every city. No market provides unlimited opportunities for unskilled laborers. Even if there were unlimited unskilled jobs out there, that doesn't mean that everyone would have access to them. In a world where some people have to walk 21 miles to get to their low wage job, it is wrong to assume that people have easy access to unskilled work. Minimum wage for everyone is important, of course. It's just that people who work for tips are more vulnerable to abuse because of how they're paid.

I don't know anyone who's waited tables for a long time and not occasionally made under minimum wage. Also, I've seen enough local news stories about restaurants having to pay tons of money in back pay because they never appropriately compensated their employees when they made under minimum wage to know that it's common practice to stiff the employee. The most recent judgment against a local business was for a place called Sophia's House of Pancakes. Assuming that businesses obey the law is not a good place to start. It's standard practice to abuse the kinds of workers who live off of tips.

Independent contractors who are paid based on work done rather than by time worked are exempt from minimum wage laws. Labor laws are screwy.

I always check Lyft first, but I'm in a small enough market that I'm sometimes forced into using Uber because that's the only way I can get a driver. It's a bummer.

Scrambled eggs don't go well on a sandwich. Over medium is best for sandwich purposes.

Congratulations, SAM!

Pretty much. In that case, it's good to ask him to clearly define his expectations and work with him to develop a plan to ensure those expectations are met, assuming they're reasonable. If they're not reasonable expectations, that's a whole other beast.

You can't know. It's up to any person's discretion how long they're willing to put up with a pattern of behavior. Pressing a person on how to compensate for a behavior is always an option, and depending on how intolerable the behavior is, it may be worth having that difficult conversation.

There is a difference, and it's in that intention. The difference between an excuse and a reason is what comes after. If whatever action prompted the excuse/reason persists with the same or a related excuse/reason, it's an excuse. If the action stops or continues with some kind of compensatory response, it's a reason. For myself, I live with depression. It sometimes affects my ability to live my life in the way that I'd like to. I've used it as an excuse before when I've been in a really bad place -- continuous bad behaviors with no intention to change them, and I laid all that at the feet of my depression and expected total unwarranted forgiveness. That's a problem. I've also used it as a reason for things. I've done some bad thing, and when asked to explain myself, admitted that it was my depression overcoming my ability to live my life and put in place some kind of plan. If I can't muster up the will to keep these plans to go out to dinner next time, would you be okay with ordering takeout and just coming to my place? If I can't come into work because I'm paralyzed by the anxiety of all the meetings I have lined up for the day, is it okay if I cross-train my coworkers to cover for me?

I think I got an undeclared promotion? My boss's boss gave me a new project that's all kinds of secret (I'm assisting with the logistics of an institutional reorganization -- really minor role, but still privy to a lot of very private discussions) and told me that I am now reporting directly to her on all matters, and that I'm not to discuss any of my new responsibilities with my (former?) direct report.

I've been spending my mornings with my new life partner, Glutenfreeda. She is larger than life and I don't have it in me to tinker around and make her a more manageable size.

Metabolizing alcohol causes your body to produce a certain enzyme or protein structure that's in your blood for up to 3 days or something like that. There's also the hair test that I'll be subjected to prove to my insurance that I have a need for treatment, which is a good indicator of abuse patterns. It's just absurd to me that because I've managed for a few weeks (one of which was spent hospitalized), it's declared not medically necessary by my insurance. At least I can appeal, and my case manager is helping me with that process. The American healthcare system is so skewed against actually helping people. Argh. At least the company I work for will cover any and all treatment for substance abuse that I receive through them, but it's weird going to your own employer about something so stigmatized.

Apparently, because I haven't had a drink in 3 weeks I'm ineligible for substance abuse programs, despite being diagnosed with one and seeking help for it. What kind of bunk ass healthcare system do we even have in America

Ouroboros Press puts out some solid books on Western esotericism (or at least did when I went through that phase a few years ago).

https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/10/the-death-of-the-most-generous-nation-on-earth-sweden-syria-refugee-europe/?utm_content=buffera874b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer This is a very good article on the refugee crisis in Europe.

Naw, you didn't come across that way. I'm just acutely aware of how bad the problem of overprescription is and how that leads people into addiction because I see direct numbers for just the hospital I work with. They are shockingly high, month after month, and we're even aggressively trying to control the problem (along with "medication diversion," since a nurse died and a doctor almost died when they stole and took opiates at the hospital). Because I support a group that encourages people to question their doctor if they feel they're being overprescribed, and people are usually hesitant to question a doctor about something they assume they're being careful about, I felt compelled to put up a little disclaimer! Epidemic is misused a lot tho, so that's fair. Try not to let addicts near you. You might catch the crave. (Any drug dealers are welcome to use "catch the crave" as the slogan for their business, or during a first one's free promotional period.)

I know that's a joke, but man, that is a big deal at my work right now. If you're prescribed opiates, be very careful with how often you take them. If you think you're overprescribed opiates and your doctor is dismissive of your concerns, please tell someone who's in charge of them.

I'm only partway through this book, and my main criticism of it has nothing to do with the book itself. It has to do with the way it's written, which is making me think a lot about literary writing in general -- especially literary writing produced by people who have been through MFA programs. Specifically, it brings to the forefront of my mind the facts of the gentrification of creation. Sarah Schulman wrote about the gentrification of creation in her book Gentrification of the Mind, and I'll let her speak to this herself. On "[w]hat counterindicates professionalization programs from real art-making": As I read this book, I can't help but think I won't remember who wrote it in 2 years. I'll remember it was a woman who wrote it, but probably not which one. Was it Rebecca Schem or Elizabeth Strout? Maybe Patricia Hawkins or Lauren Groff? This isn't really a specific critique of the author, but rather of the system that she is a part of: the professionalized writing industry, which has gentrified cultural production. We only seem to hear from one type of person with one type of writing, and Groff writes in a very MFA voice. I can tell that she's read the Western canon, and that she's adopted the modern "literary" voice. She experiments some, but not in a way that's earnest -- it feels like she experiments in a way that would fit the genre of experimental literature. These aren't bad things in themselves but I've grown tired of them. I'm taking a break from this book, and hope that some distance will rejuvenate my interest in the second half of it. It's got a very strong core and the ideas it plays with are interesting, but its aesthetic is unappealing to me.