At a time when everybody seems to be scraping to save money, and nobody walks past a quarter lying on the ground, we bring you a (sort of) related story from the animal kingdom (thank you, Bobby).
A family in Naperville, Ill., is preparing to spend $25,000 to treat its sick golden retriever. It's a very sad story and anyone who has ever had a beloved pet can relate. This dog isn't just sick, though - it has stage four lymphoma (cancer), a diagnosis that would stun into submission any human who received it. Maybe being a dog has its advantages.
The treatment involves stem cells, a flash point for some treatments bestowed upon people. But don't worry - there's no aborted dogs or other creatures involved. Put down the picket signs. The process involves taking healthy cells from the animal and returning them to its body after radiation treatment.
But the tab - possibly $25,000? Wow. Given the present economic climate, it's almost hard to believe anyone has that kind of money lying around, not to mention ready to spend on veterinary care (sorry if I sound like someone who's watched too many dire economic reports on MSNBC).
Ironically enough, one bit of fallout from the recession has been more and more people giving up their pets at shelters because they couldn't afford them anymore. And these are the lucky animals - at least they might be adopted by someone else. What about the ones whose owners just drop them off in the middle of nowhere and drive away? Irresponsibility and selfishness know no bounds.
Back to the Naperville dog. I completely understand how the pet's owners feel. Pets are wonderful because they give love unconditionally and without fail. It doesn't matter if you have a goiter the size of a watermelon - a pet will still think you're the most beautiful being in the world.
I can relate (a bit) to the Naperville family. My former cat, Sinbad, developed health problems late in life and I spent a LOT of money on him. But he was my best friend, and I loved him dearly, so it was worth it. I knew he wouldn't be around forever. When the time came I made the decision, and on that final day Nancy and I stroked him, wished him goodbye, told him we loved him and nodded to the vet to do what had to be done.
Obviously the Naperville family isn't ready for that. If they can afford the treatment, all the more power to them. If you consider it in a cold accountant-type fashion, the cost-benefit analysis surely doesn't work - the dog is 7 years old, and golden retrievers rarely live past 12. But this is a decision based purely on emotion, not logic.
Perhaps some observers would bemoan the family's decision, saying they should donate the money instead to a charity that provides medical care for people. I don't agree. It's their money, they earned it, they can spend it as they like. If it's on veterinary care, that's their decision.
One closing thought supersedes all: That's one darned lucky dog.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Eight is more than enough
The topic of the "Octomom" in California is just too juicy to pass up. It's almost as if this whole situation arose just to provide fodder for online commentators. It's the proverbial slow pitch right over the middle of the plate, just ready to be hit out of the park.
For anyone who might have been living in a cave the past month, the "Octomom" is a 30-something-year-old woman who recently bore eight children. The children were conceived in vitro. The woman has six other children, all under the age of 7. She is divorced and unemployed.
Let the insanity begin!
The only question is, where to start?
A Feb. 17 news report cited a $1.5 million cost so far - paid by California taxpayers - to care for the eight children, all still in the hospital. Given that children of such huge multiple births often have lifelong health issues, we can presume that the public tab will keep growing.
The mother already receives disability and public assistance payments from the state for at least two of her other children. Cha-ching! The public subsidy for her family grows further.
There is no father in the picture. This factor goes well beyond the mere need for many sets of hands (and hearts) to care for 14 children, eight of them infants. The bigger point is, in one fell swoop we have 14 children growing up without a male role model in their lives.
Children deserve to have a father. A male parent brings a whole different set of perceptions, interests and life activities to the table. A father teaches his kids how men conduct themselves in our society and interact with women.
This is not to say that all fathers are sterling examples of malehood. And, it's possible that the Octomom will get remarried down the road. However, speaking as a male, I'll attest that a woman with 14 children doesn't have a lot of appeal in the romance marketplace.
Let's be realistic - is it even remotely possible that a single mother can provide anywhere near the needed attention for each of these 14 kids? Children need a lot of individualized love and caring from a parent. This woman is going to be so overwhelmed that, while the kids might not suffer from what would be termed "neglect," they are likely to grow up remembering that Mom was always too busy to do anything one on one with them.
There's a million other points to be made. What in the world was in the mind of the doctor who implanted eight embryos in this woman? Why did this woman need more children when she already had six? What happens when her parents - who are apparently integral to the child rearing - pass on?
The public cost cannot be underestimated here. The woman insists that she will get a job using her degree in social work - uh, has she checked the pay scale for these type of positions? It's barely enough to support a small family, much less one bigger than the average dog litter. It's only a matter of time before we hear that this family is being fed on food stamps and donations. Oh, and did I mention the rapidly mounting public cost for the kids' health care?
In an interview on NBC, the mother claimed that she and her family will be OK because she will love all the kids so much. Well, in their song "I Got You Babe", Sonny and Cher lyricized "They say our love won't pay the rent, we won't know 'til our money's all been spent." That bit of advice was offered 40 years ago, and it still doesn't work.
Maybe you can't put a price tag on stupidity, but it appears that the Octomom is going to try. Too bad you, me and every other hard-working American will be literally paying for it.
For anyone who might have been living in a cave the past month, the "Octomom" is a 30-something-year-old woman who recently bore eight children. The children were conceived in vitro. The woman has six other children, all under the age of 7. She is divorced and unemployed.
Let the insanity begin!
The only question is, where to start?
A Feb. 17 news report cited a $1.5 million cost so far - paid by California taxpayers - to care for the eight children, all still in the hospital. Given that children of such huge multiple births often have lifelong health issues, we can presume that the public tab will keep growing.
The mother already receives disability and public assistance payments from the state for at least two of her other children. Cha-ching! The public subsidy for her family grows further.
There is no father in the picture. This factor goes well beyond the mere need for many sets of hands (and hearts) to care for 14 children, eight of them infants. The bigger point is, in one fell swoop we have 14 children growing up without a male role model in their lives.
Children deserve to have a father. A male parent brings a whole different set of perceptions, interests and life activities to the table. A father teaches his kids how men conduct themselves in our society and interact with women.
This is not to say that all fathers are sterling examples of malehood. And, it's possible that the Octomom will get remarried down the road. However, speaking as a male, I'll attest that a woman with 14 children doesn't have a lot of appeal in the romance marketplace.
Let's be realistic - is it even remotely possible that a single mother can provide anywhere near the needed attention for each of these 14 kids? Children need a lot of individualized love and caring from a parent. This woman is going to be so overwhelmed that, while the kids might not suffer from what would be termed "neglect," they are likely to grow up remembering that Mom was always too busy to do anything one on one with them.
There's a million other points to be made. What in the world was in the mind of the doctor who implanted eight embryos in this woman? Why did this woman need more children when she already had six? What happens when her parents - who are apparently integral to the child rearing - pass on?
The public cost cannot be underestimated here. The woman insists that she will get a job using her degree in social work - uh, has she checked the pay scale for these type of positions? It's barely enough to support a small family, much less one bigger than the average dog litter. It's only a matter of time before we hear that this family is being fed on food stamps and donations. Oh, and did I mention the rapidly mounting public cost for the kids' health care?
In an interview on NBC, the mother claimed that she and her family will be OK because she will love all the kids so much. Well, in their song "I Got You Babe", Sonny and Cher lyricized "They say our love won't pay the rent, we won't know 'til our money's all been spent." That bit of advice was offered 40 years ago, and it still doesn't work.
Maybe you can't put a price tag on stupidity, but it appears that the Octomom is going to try. Too bad you, me and every other hard-working American will be literally paying for it.
Monday, February 16, 2009
There's no illegitimate kids, just illegitimate parents
A news story out of Milwaukee a week or so ago told a distressingly familiar tale: A 21-year-old woman was accused of letting her 1-month-old son starve to death. Yes, in this wondrously bountiful country, where we have far more food than virtually any other nation, the most helpless among us still die for lack of nourishment.
This story is tragic beyond words. Yet the circumstances might just sound like a situation or six that you've heard about before, and that often end up with children dead, abused or neglected.
The dead boy was at least the mother's third child. Now, can anyone tell me why an unmarried 21-year-old woman has three children? It's obvious that she is unable, unwilling or maybe just incompetent to care for three kids on her own - one of them is dead! Need we any more proof?
Oh, the details get better (or I should say they get worse). The woman was earlier accused of using a car to try to run down the father of her two older children! Where was the father when this happened? At his girlfriend's place - and this wasn't the woman with whom he had the two children! Who knows if (or how many) children he might have with this other woman!
What's even sadder about this episode is what supposedly happened to upset the mother so badly. She had taken her two children to stay with their father. After she brought the children inside the other woman's residence (this is the father's girlfriend - admittedly it's hard to keep the people in this ugly soap opera straight), the father took them outside and put them back in the car. He didn't want to deal with them.
How do you think this made those two small children feel? Unloved, to say the least? Unwanted? Sad? Confused? Probably all of these. The list could go on and on.
So the mother allegedly got so angry that she tried to hit the father with a car. Well, at least this could be interpreted as standing up for her kids. It's obvious that the father is an irresponsible loser sperm donor who probably has no qualms about spreading his seed all over town and not giving a damn about the consequences. There's far too many of his type around, and they're leaving behind an ever-growing trail of dysfunctional families and angry children.
Let's face it, the mother isn't much better. You'd think that, once she had a child out of wedlock, she'd take precautions to ensure it didn't happen again. No, that involves common sense and probably some guidance from a responsible older person, who might not have been in the picture. In any case, the woman managed to get pregnant at least twice more. Judging by the story, it's apparent that these children didn't have a stable home or probably much love, at least from their father. And one of them didn't live long enough to endure it.
There's a whole lot of irresponsibility and moronic behavior in this situation. This is what happens when people who shouldn't have children bear them anyway. It's exceedingly ironic how you have to take a test to get a driver's license, but anyone can have a child.
It's not the kids' fault. There are no illegitimate kids, only illegitimate parents. Our social fabric - the basis of which is stable nuclear families - is being slowly shredded by irresponsible people who act impulsively with no thought to the consequences. The number of single-parent homes with no active fathers is so huge that our society doesn't even notice anymore.
The difference between humans and animals is that people can control their impulses. But this takes self control, and that's too much to ask for a part of the population that knows only instant gratification. Whatever form it takes, gratification usually involves some form of happiness - and we know that's an emotion that the dead 1-month-old boy certainly never got to experience.
This story is tragic beyond words. Yet the circumstances might just sound like a situation or six that you've heard about before, and that often end up with children dead, abused or neglected.
The dead boy was at least the mother's third child. Now, can anyone tell me why an unmarried 21-year-old woman has three children? It's obvious that she is unable, unwilling or maybe just incompetent to care for three kids on her own - one of them is dead! Need we any more proof?
Oh, the details get better (or I should say they get worse). The woman was earlier accused of using a car to try to run down the father of her two older children! Where was the father when this happened? At his girlfriend's place - and this wasn't the woman with whom he had the two children! Who knows if (or how many) children he might have with this other woman!
What's even sadder about this episode is what supposedly happened to upset the mother so badly. She had taken her two children to stay with their father. After she brought the children inside the other woman's residence (this is the father's girlfriend - admittedly it's hard to keep the people in this ugly soap opera straight), the father took them outside and put them back in the car. He didn't want to deal with them.
How do you think this made those two small children feel? Unloved, to say the least? Unwanted? Sad? Confused? Probably all of these. The list could go on and on.
So the mother allegedly got so angry that she tried to hit the father with a car. Well, at least this could be interpreted as standing up for her kids. It's obvious that the father is an irresponsible loser sperm donor who probably has no qualms about spreading his seed all over town and not giving a damn about the consequences. There's far too many of his type around, and they're leaving behind an ever-growing trail of dysfunctional families and angry children.
Let's face it, the mother isn't much better. You'd think that, once she had a child out of wedlock, she'd take precautions to ensure it didn't happen again. No, that involves common sense and probably some guidance from a responsible older person, who might not have been in the picture. In any case, the woman managed to get pregnant at least twice more. Judging by the story, it's apparent that these children didn't have a stable home or probably much love, at least from their father. And one of them didn't live long enough to endure it.
There's a whole lot of irresponsibility and moronic behavior in this situation. This is what happens when people who shouldn't have children bear them anyway. It's exceedingly ironic how you have to take a test to get a driver's license, but anyone can have a child.
It's not the kids' fault. There are no illegitimate kids, only illegitimate parents. Our social fabric - the basis of which is stable nuclear families - is being slowly shredded by irresponsible people who act impulsively with no thought to the consequences. The number of single-parent homes with no active fathers is so huge that our society doesn't even notice anymore.
The difference between humans and animals is that people can control their impulses. But this takes self control, and that's too much to ask for a part of the population that knows only instant gratification. Whatever form it takes, gratification usually involves some form of happiness - and we know that's an emotion that the dead 1-month-old boy certainly never got to experience.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Don't let the door hit you, Brett
So Brett Favre is (allegedly) retiring again. For good this time, or at least until he changes his mind. No drawn-out "will he or won't he?" soap opera to plague the fans and management of the New York Jets. If only he'd been so considerate in his final seasons with the Green Bay Packers.
While on the cruise ("No! No! No more cruise stories!"), a fellow passenger asked me about Favre. I replied that I had very mixed feelings. Yes, he was possibly the greatest player in Packers history and gave the fans something to look forward to each week. And, after building an incredible reservoir of trust, affection and good will with Packers Nation, he proceeded to squander a good portion of it with his prima donna "unretirement" performance.
The interview with Greta Van Susteren pretty much did it for me. After he had announced his retirement in a teary news conference, Favre started waffling months later. The Packers, of course, had put in motion long-set plans to move ahead with Aaron Rodgers at quarterback. The team had taken Favre at his word. Training camp was very near. And when Van Susteren asked Favre whether he would be willing to compete for the quarterback position with Rodgers, his reply said it all: "Why?" Right then it became crystal clear: He felt entitled to the role regardless of what he had previously told the team about his plans.
Who did this guy think he was?
Over the years, Favre had carefully built an image of himself as a down-home, aw-shucks humble person. Now the truth had shone. He was no better than all the other high-profile athletes who put themselves above the organization. "Good old boy" Brett had morphed into "I'm most important" Brett. Which made one wonder: Was this the underlying person all along?
So enjoy your retirement, Brett, provided that you're serious this time. I really hope the Jets hold you to your deal and don't allow you to force a release so that you can play with the Vikings or Bears. You do that and I guarantee you'll be persona non grata in Green Bay.
Is there anything positive out of all this? Hmmm. Let's think long and hard. OK, I've got one. How about this?
At least he hasn't tested positive for steroids.
While on the cruise ("No! No! No more cruise stories!"), a fellow passenger asked me about Favre. I replied that I had very mixed feelings. Yes, he was possibly the greatest player in Packers history and gave the fans something to look forward to each week. And, after building an incredible reservoir of trust, affection and good will with Packers Nation, he proceeded to squander a good portion of it with his prima donna "unretirement" performance.
The interview with Greta Van Susteren pretty much did it for me. After he had announced his retirement in a teary news conference, Favre started waffling months later. The Packers, of course, had put in motion long-set plans to move ahead with Aaron Rodgers at quarterback. The team had taken Favre at his word. Training camp was very near. And when Van Susteren asked Favre whether he would be willing to compete for the quarterback position with Rodgers, his reply said it all: "Why?" Right then it became crystal clear: He felt entitled to the role regardless of what he had previously told the team about his plans.
Who did this guy think he was?
Over the years, Favre had carefully built an image of himself as a down-home, aw-shucks humble person. Now the truth had shone. He was no better than all the other high-profile athletes who put themselves above the organization. "Good old boy" Brett had morphed into "I'm most important" Brett. Which made one wonder: Was this the underlying person all along?
So enjoy your retirement, Brett, provided that you're serious this time. I really hope the Jets hold you to your deal and don't allow you to force a release so that you can play with the Vikings or Bears. You do that and I guarantee you'll be persona non grata in Green Bay.
Is there anything positive out of all this? Hmmm. Let's think long and hard. OK, I've got one. How about this?
At least he hasn't tested positive for steroids.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Parents, where art thou?
Just one more anecdote from the cruise, but I promise it will lead into a bigger point.
If you've ever been on a cruise, you know that most have big-stage nightly entertainment - real Broadway style productions with singing, dancing and some impressive talent. Other nights the entertainment might be a comedian, magician or musical act.
One night on our cruise, Nancy and I went to the 9:30 p.m. performance of a comedian. Mind you, that's the LATE show. "Night life" is a relative term depending on your locale.
Anyhow, looking down into the lower echelon of seats, we spotted something very disturbing - a stroller parked along the wall. Here's why this gave us pause: It meant that somewhere in the crowd a small child was being kept up by its parents, with a distinct possibility for loud crying or fussing as time ticked further and further past the kid's bedtime. In other words, anyone sitting in the theater could have their enjoyment of the show disrupted, thanks to a parent(s) who just HAD to be at that show.
Thankfully this particular child was never heard from, having apparently fallen asleep. Or maybe he/she was just so smart for their age that they enjoyed the show along with the rest of us and kept quiet.
Here's the bigger point: What were these parents thinking?
In recent years I've noticed a growing trend of people taking small children to late-night events. The kids are either completely zonked out or so overtired that their screaming makes life miserable for everyone around. Uh, shouldn't these kids be home in bed getting the rest that is so important at that age?
A few years ago I witnessed a small parade of people pushing strollers as they left Summerfest - after midnight! It was astounding!
Parenting is about sacrifice. An adult can't do everything they did in their pre-parenting life. It's as simple as that. The kid(s) comes first, and that means giving up some activities that don't mesh with a child's schedule. It's called responsibility.
Responsibility is a heavy concept for some people, I acknowledge. So is courtesy. When neither clicks in a person's mind, that's when we find them dragging their child around at 10:30 p.m. in a public place. The kid's not happy, nor are the rest of us who have to endure the loud outbursts that quite naturally come from a kid who just wants to be home in bed.
Next time, parents, think carefully about everyone who bears the brunt of your decisionmaking - not just your child, but every other person within earshot.
If you've ever been on a cruise, you know that most have big-stage nightly entertainment - real Broadway style productions with singing, dancing and some impressive talent. Other nights the entertainment might be a comedian, magician or musical act.
One night on our cruise, Nancy and I went to the 9:30 p.m. performance of a comedian. Mind you, that's the LATE show. "Night life" is a relative term depending on your locale.
Anyhow, looking down into the lower echelon of seats, we spotted something very disturbing - a stroller parked along the wall. Here's why this gave us pause: It meant that somewhere in the crowd a small child was being kept up by its parents, with a distinct possibility for loud crying or fussing as time ticked further and further past the kid's bedtime. In other words, anyone sitting in the theater could have their enjoyment of the show disrupted, thanks to a parent(s) who just HAD to be at that show.
Thankfully this particular child was never heard from, having apparently fallen asleep. Or maybe he/she was just so smart for their age that they enjoyed the show along with the rest of us and kept quiet.
Here's the bigger point: What were these parents thinking?
In recent years I've noticed a growing trend of people taking small children to late-night events. The kids are either completely zonked out or so overtired that their screaming makes life miserable for everyone around. Uh, shouldn't these kids be home in bed getting the rest that is so important at that age?
A few years ago I witnessed a small parade of people pushing strollers as they left Summerfest - after midnight! It was astounding!
Parenting is about sacrifice. An adult can't do everything they did in their pre-parenting life. It's as simple as that. The kid(s) comes first, and that means giving up some activities that don't mesh with a child's schedule. It's called responsibility.
Responsibility is a heavy concept for some people, I acknowledge. So is courtesy. When neither clicks in a person's mind, that's when we find them dragging their child around at 10:30 p.m. in a public place. The kid's not happy, nor are the rest of us who have to endure the loud outbursts that quite naturally come from a kid who just wants to be home in bed.
Next time, parents, think carefully about everyone who bears the brunt of your decisionmaking - not just your child, but every other person within earshot.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Working hard at sea
OK, back to the cruise - maybe for the last time, but no guarantees.
One thing you notice immediately on a cruise like the one we took (eastern Caribbean) is that virtually the entire crew is comprised of foreign workers. It is truly a melting pot of nationals. You know this because their nametags list their country of origin. They came from southeast Asia (especially the Philippines), eastern and western Europe, South America and Central America. The ship commodore was from Italy.
By and large they were very friendly and worked very hard. These are not glamorous jobs - waiting tables, tending bar, preparing food, working the front desk or cleaning rooms. The workers were interesting to speak with and seemed to enjoy talking about their homeland. One had to wonder what they thought of the huge amounts of food on the ship, given that many come from countries where food is a daily concern for millions.
One thing you didn't see were any workers from the U.S. I saw exactly one person, and she was an assistant cruise director - a supervisory administrative role.
So the question easily came to mind: Why does Princess Cruise Lines, a U.S.-based operation, have to recruit workers from all ends of the earth? Isn't the U.S. sliding into a deep recession and unemployment heading skyward? Shouldn't there be U.S. workers lining up to apply for these jobs? What gives?
Maybe the answer is simpler than we thought: Yes, there are jobs out there - but not jobs that Americans want to work.
One thing you notice immediately on a cruise like the one we took (eastern Caribbean) is that virtually the entire crew is comprised of foreign workers. It is truly a melting pot of nationals. You know this because their nametags list their country of origin. They came from southeast Asia (especially the Philippines), eastern and western Europe, South America and Central America. The ship commodore was from Italy.
By and large they were very friendly and worked very hard. These are not glamorous jobs - waiting tables, tending bar, preparing food, working the front desk or cleaning rooms. The workers were interesting to speak with and seemed to enjoy talking about their homeland. One had to wonder what they thought of the huge amounts of food on the ship, given that many come from countries where food is a daily concern for millions.
One thing you didn't see were any workers from the U.S. I saw exactly one person, and she was an assistant cruise director - a supervisory administrative role.
So the question easily came to mind: Why does Princess Cruise Lines, a U.S.-based operation, have to recruit workers from all ends of the earth? Isn't the U.S. sliding into a deep recession and unemployment heading skyward? Shouldn't there be U.S. workers lining up to apply for these jobs? What gives?
Maybe the answer is simpler than we thought: Yes, there are jobs out there - but not jobs that Americans want to work.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Paradise amid the poverty
In the interest of full disclosure, let me start by stating that my wife, Nancy, and I returned home last week from a 10-day Caribbean cruise. It was a little bit of heaven, as anyone who has ever escaped from a Wisconsin winter will attest.
Having grown up in southeastern Wisconsin, I never really understood how interminable our winters really are. It all came clear to me about 10 years ago. A good friend from church, a Kentucky native who was living here while studying at the Medical College of Wisconsin, made it oh-so-abundantly clear. I'll never forget Dr. Bob (his nickname) saying in his inimitable southern drawl, "I don't mind a couple months of winter, but it's just that you all have it for so long here." And suddenly it hit me - not everyone suffers through five months of snow, cold, slush and general messiness each year. There are places that have cold weather, but it only lasts a month or two and frozen precipitation is almost an afterthought. How about that?
But that's a topic for another time. Back to the cruise.
As anyone who has cruised the Caribbean knows, you stop at many islands along the way. Most people book an excursion that takes them to a beach, on a sightseeing bus trip, a boat ride or any number of other outings. You pretty much get off the ship, gather into groups, jump onto transportation of some sort and take off.
Here's where the contrast comes in, and if you don't notice it you're either blind, asleep or incredibly cold hearted.
Most of these islands are former European colonies that have been independent nations for maybe three, four or five decades. Their economies are often largely reliant on sugar cane, fishing or tourism. They are Third World countries.
You can't help but notice -as you zip by in your air-conditioned motorcoach - the often-prevalent shacks, huts and lean-tos that house so many of the island residents. "Ramshackle" is an apt description. This is the type of poverty unheard of in America, yet these islands exist just a few hundred miles south of the U.S. It's stunning to see if you aren't prepared. You feel an empathy for these people. You wonder what they do for a living, if they have enough to eat, and what hopes and dreams they hold. If it doesn't make you thankful for the bountiful blessings we have in America, nothing will.
At the end of the day, you reboard the cruise ship and sail off to another island. You hope that the money you spent will help the people living on the island you just left. And once again you give thanks for where you live and all that you have.
Having grown up in southeastern Wisconsin, I never really understood how interminable our winters really are. It all came clear to me about 10 years ago. A good friend from church, a Kentucky native who was living here while studying at the Medical College of Wisconsin, made it oh-so-abundantly clear. I'll never forget Dr. Bob (his nickname) saying in his inimitable southern drawl, "I don't mind a couple months of winter, but it's just that you all have it for so long here." And suddenly it hit me - not everyone suffers through five months of snow, cold, slush and general messiness each year. There are places that have cold weather, but it only lasts a month or two and frozen precipitation is almost an afterthought. How about that?
But that's a topic for another time. Back to the cruise.
As anyone who has cruised the Caribbean knows, you stop at many islands along the way. Most people book an excursion that takes them to a beach, on a sightseeing bus trip, a boat ride or any number of other outings. You pretty much get off the ship, gather into groups, jump onto transportation of some sort and take off.
Here's where the contrast comes in, and if you don't notice it you're either blind, asleep or incredibly cold hearted.
Most of these islands are former European colonies that have been independent nations for maybe three, four or five decades. Their economies are often largely reliant on sugar cane, fishing or tourism. They are Third World countries.
You can't help but notice -as you zip by in your air-conditioned motorcoach - the often-prevalent shacks, huts and lean-tos that house so many of the island residents. "Ramshackle" is an apt description. This is the type of poverty unheard of in America, yet these islands exist just a few hundred miles south of the U.S. It's stunning to see if you aren't prepared. You feel an empathy for these people. You wonder what they do for a living, if they have enough to eat, and what hopes and dreams they hold. If it doesn't make you thankful for the bountiful blessings we have in America, nothing will.
At the end of the day, you reboard the cruise ship and sail off to another island. You hope that the money you spent will help the people living on the island you just left. And once again you give thanks for where you live and all that you have.
Late to the party, or what?
What's that old saying about "late to the party?" Well, it's it's better to be late than not show up at all.
So here I find myself finally getting around to writing a blog or, to use the popular verb form, "blogging." Who in the world ever came up with this term? There's a bit of popular tech culture that would be interesting to know. It reminds me of "slog," which refers to walking through deep mud or some other navigational hindrance. Hopefully there's no correlation within the two in any way, physical or literary.
I have a list of topics for future postings. They cover a gamut of topics from timely news events to rather irrelevant observations. So, to quote a somewhat well-known 1980s song, "let's get this party started."
So here I find myself finally getting around to writing a blog or, to use the popular verb form, "blogging." Who in the world ever came up with this term? There's a bit of popular tech culture that would be interesting to know. It reminds me of "slog," which refers to walking through deep mud or some other navigational hindrance. Hopefully there's no correlation within the two in any way, physical or literary.
I have a list of topics for future postings. They cover a gamut of topics from timely news events to rather irrelevant observations. So, to quote a somewhat well-known 1980s song, "let's get this party started."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
