Imagine being able to vote for reducing, and perhaps eliminating, human pain and suffering. Now, imagine voting against that.
This is what's happening in the Iowa legislature right now -- and I'm not even talking about medical marijuana! I'm talking about a proposed Death With Dignity Act, which is more widely (and crudely) known as physician-assisted suicide.
This may seem like a radical idea in Iowa, but it isn't elsewhere. Oregon currently has a similar Death With Dignity Act, and other states are considering it.
Under the Iowa version of this Act, "An adult patient who is competent, is a resident of this state, has been determined by the patient’s attending physician and consulting physician to be suffering from a terminal disease, and has voluntarily expressed a wish to die, may make a written request for medication that the patient may self-administer to end the patient’s life…”
In short, this would allow some terminally-ill, suffering Iowans the option of a more peaceful, non-painful death. It would reduce human pain and suffering. So naturally, social conservatives (mostly Republicans) and our governor-for-life Terry Branstad, oppose it.
Taking one's life is obviously not something to be taken lightly. And this Act doesn't do that. It simply allows a competent person the freedom to make a choice to forego their pain, a choice that harms no one else.
It's different, yet in some ways the same as the medical marijuana debate. The old, white, conservative males who dominate the legislative and executive branch are either unable or unwilling to understand that science, and attitudes, change over time. They think they know better -- don't confuse them with evidence to the contrary.
The other day, a friend of mine put it about as eloquently as you can: Some people just don't believe in evolution, past or present.
Friday, March 18, 2016
Monday, March 7, 2016
Ruining A Great Invention
The internet, as we know it, has been around since roughly 1990. It was only for sending and receiving text at first, but by the mid-to-late 1990s, the World Wide Web became available. This allowed us to electronically visit places (web sites) with pictures and later videos, which we would ultimately be able to pass along to others.
With that brief history of the internet in mind, I would compare it to any of mankind’s greatest inventions. It may not be quite up there with the alphabet or the automobile, but it’s at least in the conversation with the printing press.
Unfortunately, that conversation would have to include whether the internet is now used as much for evil as it is for good, thanks in part to the proliferation of Facebook / Twitter / social media. I don’t just mean terrorist type evil, either. I mean the little bits of evil, things like trolling and bullying, and lies that get passed along as fact and influence behavior in a negative way.
I’m not the most internet-connected person, yet not a day goes by that I don’t see a false or questionable internet-sourced item that’s presented as fact. (This is particularly true in national political election years like this one.) It happened to me today, it happened to me yesterday, it will surely happen to me tomorrow.
I’m usually skeptical enough to figure it out on my own (sometimes with the help of snopes.com) but let’s face it, most people swallow whatever they’re sent as the truth. That wouldn’t be so bad, but in our instant gratification world, those fake-truth-swallowers not only agree with what they see, they also have to affirm it, often by sending it along to other fake-truth-swallowers.
Using the internet in this way this isn’t good for civilization, but short of another evil called censorship, there are no rules of engagement to keep it from happening. That’s a shame, really, for one of the greatest inventions of all-time.
With that brief history of the internet in mind, I would compare it to any of mankind’s greatest inventions. It may not be quite up there with the alphabet or the automobile, but it’s at least in the conversation with the printing press.
Unfortunately, that conversation would have to include whether the internet is now used as much for evil as it is for good, thanks in part to the proliferation of Facebook / Twitter / social media. I don’t just mean terrorist type evil, either. I mean the little bits of evil, things like trolling and bullying, and lies that get passed along as fact and influence behavior in a negative way.
I’m not the most internet-connected person, yet not a day goes by that I don’t see a false or questionable internet-sourced item that’s presented as fact. (This is particularly true in national political election years like this one.) It happened to me today, it happened to me yesterday, it will surely happen to me tomorrow.
I’m usually skeptical enough to figure it out on my own (sometimes with the help of snopes.com) but let’s face it, most people swallow whatever they’re sent as the truth. That wouldn’t be so bad, but in our instant gratification world, those fake-truth-swallowers not only agree with what they see, they also have to affirm it, often by sending it along to other fake-truth-swallowers.
Using the internet in this way this isn’t good for civilization, but short of another evil called censorship, there are no rules of engagement to keep it from happening. That’s a shame, really, for one of the greatest inventions of all-time.
Friday, February 26, 2016
Fiduciary Rules!
Within the next few months, the U.S. Department of Labor is expected to release final rules that will impose a fiduciary standard of care on financial advisors (including insurance agents) working with qualified retirement employer-sponsored plans and individual retirement accounts. While I'm generally against more regulations, this happens to be of the best and most overdue pieces of federal rule-making ever.
First, let’s clarify the two different rules under which financial advisors currently operate.
Suitability Standard of Care
Most financial advisors, including financial company representatives and insurance salespersons, operate under the suitability standard of care. Generally speaking, the suitability standard simply requires the advisor to 1) know the client and their financial situation, and 2) recommend products that are suitable for their situation.
Fiduciary Standard of Care
Some financial advisors, including Certified Financial Planner® professionals, must operate under the fiduciary standard of care. Under this standard, advisors must 1) put the client's best interest first; 2) act with prudence, meaning with the skill, diligence and good judgment of a professional; 3) provide full and fair disclosure of all important facts; 4) avoid conflicts of interest; and 5) fully disclose and fairly manage, in the client's favor, unavoidable conflicts.
While the general public often assumes financial advisors are working in the client’s best interests, in fact, most are not bound to do so. The new Labor Department rules would change that, making the fiduciary standard the actual standard in financial advising. It boils down to every advisor following the highest standard of care regarding investment advice and retirement planning.
Seems like a slam-dunk, right? In truth, large financial institutions (particularly insurers) are spending millions in a lobbying effort to stop the rules from being codified. There is only one viable reason for this: Greed.
Big financial institutions use the fecklessness of the suitability rule to sell lots of useless financial products to trusting people who don't need them, thereby capturing huge commissions and other fees. This is great for the company, while simultaneously terrible for everyone else. In short, those companies value profits over people.
Let's just hope this fiduciary rule regulation is made final, and comes with the enforcement it deserves.
First, let’s clarify the two different rules under which financial advisors currently operate.
Suitability Standard of Care
Most financial advisors, including financial company representatives and insurance salespersons, operate under the suitability standard of care. Generally speaking, the suitability standard simply requires the advisor to 1) know the client and their financial situation, and 2) recommend products that are suitable for their situation.
Fiduciary Standard of Care
Some financial advisors, including Certified Financial Planner® professionals, must operate under the fiduciary standard of care. Under this standard, advisors must 1) put the client's best interest first; 2) act with prudence, meaning with the skill, diligence and good judgment of a professional; 3) provide full and fair disclosure of all important facts; 4) avoid conflicts of interest; and 5) fully disclose and fairly manage, in the client's favor, unavoidable conflicts.
While the general public often assumes financial advisors are working in the client’s best interests, in fact, most are not bound to do so. The new Labor Department rules would change that, making the fiduciary standard the actual standard in financial advising. It boils down to every advisor following the highest standard of care regarding investment advice and retirement planning.
Seems like a slam-dunk, right? In truth, large financial institutions (particularly insurers) are spending millions in a lobbying effort to stop the rules from being codified. There is only one viable reason for this: Greed.
Big financial institutions use the fecklessness of the suitability rule to sell lots of useless financial products to trusting people who don't need them, thereby capturing huge commissions and other fees. This is great for the company, while simultaneously terrible for everyone else. In short, those companies value profits over people.
Let's just hope this fiduciary rule regulation is made final, and comes with the enforcement it deserves.
Thursday, February 11, 2016
RIP Glenn Frey
Already this year, two rock music icons have passed away, David Bowie and Glenn Frey. I was a little too young to appreciate them in their prime years, basically the 1970s. They both continued to put out new, popular music well into the 1980s, but their best recorded stuff was basically over once we hit the 1990s.
I was never a Bowie fan, he always seemed to me like some strange dude from England, although I will admit that the song Modern Love does take me back to my college days. Glenn Frey, however – that’s a different story.
I finally got to see an Eagles concert in person a couple of years ago, on one of their reunion tours. Frey couldn’t quite make it to the highest notes, but otherwise I thought he (along with Don Henley, Joe Walsh, and Timothy B. Schmit) sounded a lot like their recordings from decades ago.
Frey’s solo career wasn’t as good as Henley’s, but it was decent, with saxophone-heavy tracks like The One You Love, The Heat Is On, and You Belong to the City. Regardless, he’s going to be remembered for all of the classic Eagles stuff, some of which I’m just starting to really appreciate for the first time.
One example of an Eagles tune that I never liked that much until the past few years, one in which Frey sings the lead-vocal, is Lyin’ Eyes. It was far from their most popular song, but the way the lyrics are laid out to tell the story is as good as it gets:
City girls just seem to find out early
How to open doors with just a smile
A rich old man
And she won't have to worry
She'll dress up all in lace and go in style
Late at night a big old house gets lonely
I guess every form of refuge has its price
And it breaks her heart to think her love is only
Given to a man with hands as cold as ice
So she tells him she must go out for the evening
To comfort an old friend who's feelin' down
But he knows where she's goin' as she's leavin'
She is headed for the cheatin' side of town
[Chorus]
You can't hide your lyin' eyes
And your smile is a thin disguise
I thought by now you'd realize
There ain't no way to hide your lyin eyes
On the other side of town a boy is waiting
With fiery eyes and dreams no one could steal
She drives on through the night anticipating
'Cause he makes her feel the way she used to feel
She rushes to his arms; they fall together
She whispers that it's only for awhile
She swears that soon she'll be comin' back forever
She pulls away and leaves him with a smile
[Chorus]
She gets up and pours herself a strong one,
And stares out at the stars up in the sky.
Another night, it's gonna be a long one.
She draws the shade and hangs her head to cry.
She wonders how it ever got this crazy.
She thinks about a boy she knew in school.
Did she get tired or did she just get lazy?
She's so far gone she feels just like a fool.
My oh my, you sure know how to arrange things.
You set it up so well, so carefully.
Ain't it funny how your new life didn't change things?
You're still the same old girl you used to be.
[Chorus]
I was never a Bowie fan, he always seemed to me like some strange dude from England, although I will admit that the song Modern Love does take me back to my college days. Glenn Frey, however – that’s a different story.
I finally got to see an Eagles concert in person a couple of years ago, on one of their reunion tours. Frey couldn’t quite make it to the highest notes, but otherwise I thought he (along with Don Henley, Joe Walsh, and Timothy B. Schmit) sounded a lot like their recordings from decades ago.
Frey’s solo career wasn’t as good as Henley’s, but it was decent, with saxophone-heavy tracks like The One You Love, The Heat Is On, and You Belong to the City. Regardless, he’s going to be remembered for all of the classic Eagles stuff, some of which I’m just starting to really appreciate for the first time.
One example of an Eagles tune that I never liked that much until the past few years, one in which Frey sings the lead-vocal, is Lyin’ Eyes. It was far from their most popular song, but the way the lyrics are laid out to tell the story is as good as it gets:
City girls just seem to find out early
How to open doors with just a smile
A rich old man
And she won't have to worry
She'll dress up all in lace and go in style
Late at night a big old house gets lonely
I guess every form of refuge has its price
And it breaks her heart to think her love is only
Given to a man with hands as cold as ice
So she tells him she must go out for the evening
To comfort an old friend who's feelin' down
But he knows where she's goin' as she's leavin'
She is headed for the cheatin' side of town
[Chorus]
You can't hide your lyin' eyes
And your smile is a thin disguise
I thought by now you'd realize
There ain't no way to hide your lyin eyes
On the other side of town a boy is waiting
With fiery eyes and dreams no one could steal
She drives on through the night anticipating
'Cause he makes her feel the way she used to feel
She rushes to his arms; they fall together
She whispers that it's only for awhile
She swears that soon she'll be comin' back forever
She pulls away and leaves him with a smile
[Chorus]
She gets up and pours herself a strong one,
And stares out at the stars up in the sky.
Another night, it's gonna be a long one.
She draws the shade and hangs her head to cry.
She wonders how it ever got this crazy.
She thinks about a boy she knew in school.
Did she get tired or did she just get lazy?
She's so far gone she feels just like a fool.
My oh my, you sure know how to arrange things.
You set it up so well, so carefully.
Ain't it funny how your new life didn't change things?
You're still the same old girl you used to be.
[Chorus]
Friday, January 29, 2016
A Candidate Guide, Circa 2016
With the first-in-the-nation caucuses only days away, Iowa is once again in the national political spotlight. It’s time for my quadrennial assessment of the remaining candidates (here's the 2012 version), in alphabetical order by party:
DEMOCRATS
Hillary Clinton
The good: She’s easily the most credentialed to be president. The bad: There’s something unlikable about her quest for political power, even after reinventing herself as a senator and cabinet member.
Martin O’Malley
The former governor of Maryland seems smart and likable enough, but he definitely picked the wrong cycle to run for president.
Bernie Sanders
Every four years, it seems there’s a grandfatherly-looking candidate with an unusual message who sparks an interest with younger voters. The last time, it was Republican-Libertarian Ron Paul. This time, it’s Democratic-Socialist Bernie Sanders.
REPUBLICANS
Jeb Bush
All that PAC money, all that name legacy, and he’s seems to be getting no traction. Maybe we have had enough of the Bush family in the White House. He just doesn’t stand out in this field.
Chris Christie
Not the best bedside manner, but that’s a net good, it makes him look less Washington-insider. He won’t do well in Iowa, but he could do well elsewhere. Also: Must lose more weight, America doesn't elect unhealthy-looking presidents.
Ted Cruz
Take a ring-wing whack-job who’s disliked by his own party, and add support from Iowa’s own resident whack-job congressman, Steve King. This is how you identify the Republicans’ potential Iowa caucus winner. (Has it really been 2+ years since I wrote this?)
John Kasich
Probably the Republican candidate most appealing to independents, someone who seems to understand that governing is a compromise. Unfortunately, that means it will be tough for him to win.
Rand Paul
Younger folks like him, but his mostly libertarian message isn't getting the traction it did when his father, Ron, ran in 2012. Interestingly, he can partly thank Bernie Sanders for that.
Marco Rubio
Youth, intelligence, ethnicity, and likability are in his favor. He could win the nomination, but if he goes too far to the right to do it (a la Mitt Romney), he’ll have a hard time being elected president.
Donald Trump
He’s the Frankenstein’s monster created by the Tea-Party Republicans, and now they can’t control him. I still predict he’ll eventually ruin his reputation(?) along with the Republicans’ chances of winning.
Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Jim Gilmore, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum
Thanks for visiting Iowa! Now go home, and stop trying to make a career out of running for president.
DEMOCRATS
Hillary Clinton
The good: She’s easily the most credentialed to be president. The bad: There’s something unlikable about her quest for political power, even after reinventing herself as a senator and cabinet member.
Martin O’Malley
The former governor of Maryland seems smart and likable enough, but he definitely picked the wrong cycle to run for president.
Bernie Sanders
Every four years, it seems there’s a grandfatherly-looking candidate with an unusual message who sparks an interest with younger voters. The last time, it was Republican-Libertarian Ron Paul. This time, it’s Democratic-Socialist Bernie Sanders.
REPUBLICANS
Jeb Bush
All that PAC money, all that name legacy, and he’s seems to be getting no traction. Maybe we have had enough of the Bush family in the White House. He just doesn’t stand out in this field.
Chris Christie
Not the best bedside manner, but that’s a net good, it makes him look less Washington-insider. He won’t do well in Iowa, but he could do well elsewhere. Also: Must lose more weight, America doesn't elect unhealthy-looking presidents.
Ted Cruz
Take a ring-wing whack-job who’s disliked by his own party, and add support from Iowa’s own resident whack-job congressman, Steve King. This is how you identify the Republicans’ potential Iowa caucus winner. (Has it really been 2+ years since I wrote this?)
John Kasich
Probably the Republican candidate most appealing to independents, someone who seems to understand that governing is a compromise. Unfortunately, that means it will be tough for him to win.
Rand Paul
Younger folks like him, but his mostly libertarian message isn't getting the traction it did when his father, Ron, ran in 2012. Interestingly, he can partly thank Bernie Sanders for that.
Marco Rubio
Youth, intelligence, ethnicity, and likability are in his favor. He could win the nomination, but if he goes too far to the right to do it (a la Mitt Romney), he’ll have a hard time being elected president.
Donald Trump
He’s the Frankenstein’s monster created by the Tea-Party Republicans, and now they can’t control him. I still predict he’ll eventually ruin his reputation(?) along with the Republicans’ chances of winning.
Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Jim Gilmore, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum
Thanks for visiting Iowa! Now go home, and stop trying to make a career out of running for president.
Wednesday, January 20, 2016
Everything's Coming Up Roses
I traveled to Los Angeles over the New Year's holiday weekend, for a bucket list trip to attend the Rose Bowl and Tournament of Roses Parade in Pasadena. With the Iowa Hawkeyes playing (Standford) in the bowl game, I figured I wouldn't have a better chance to go, along with 30,000 or so other Iowans (some of whom I knew and bumped into there).
My observations, in chronological order:
* The Santa Monica Pier, and surrounding city and beach, was a great place for us Midwestern tourists to gather. Seeing the sunset over a beach on New Year's Eve isn't normal, but I could get used to it.
* Pasadena is a tree-filled, skyscraper-less suburb that could pass for a thousand other college towns anywhere in the America. (Cal-Tech is at its center.)
* The parade exceeded my expectations. The route is 5.5 miles long, so it isn't that hard to find a spot to watch as long as you aren't near the start. Standing among the locals around the parade mid-point was perfect. The colors, the music, the floats, the celebrities -- it was all very cool, and the two hours went by very fast.
* If you go to the parade, and then the game, there isn't a lot of transition time between the two. Driving or shuttling to the game was almost impossible with the traffic, so most parade attendees made the 2+ miles walk. Couple that with extremely tight security at the stadium gates, and it takes a while to get to your seat.
* The Rose Bowl Stadium experience was second-to-none. Not sure there is any other 100,000-seat stadium in the world in such a park-like setting. Factor in that I'd seen it on TV dozens of times on New Year's Day, but always in the cold and dark of an Iowa winter, when it looked like it was on another planet. The game outcome may have been awful for Iowa football fans, but at least the Stanford band was entertaining.
* So many freeways, so many cars in LA. And this was a holiday weekend. Let's just say that Google maps and traffic came in very handy.
My observations, in chronological order:
* The Santa Monica Pier, and surrounding city and beach, was a great place for us Midwestern tourists to gather. Seeing the sunset over a beach on New Year's Eve isn't normal, but I could get used to it.
* Pasadena is a tree-filled, skyscraper-less suburb that could pass for a thousand other college towns anywhere in the America. (Cal-Tech is at its center.)
* The parade exceeded my expectations. The route is 5.5 miles long, so it isn't that hard to find a spot to watch as long as you aren't near the start. Standing among the locals around the parade mid-point was perfect. The colors, the music, the floats, the celebrities -- it was all very cool, and the two hours went by very fast.
* If you go to the parade, and then the game, there isn't a lot of transition time between the two. Driving or shuttling to the game was almost impossible with the traffic, so most parade attendees made the 2+ miles walk. Couple that with extremely tight security at the stadium gates, and it takes a while to get to your seat.
* The Rose Bowl Stadium experience was second-to-none. Not sure there is any other 100,000-seat stadium in the world in such a park-like setting. Factor in that I'd seen it on TV dozens of times on New Year's Day, but always in the cold and dark of an Iowa winter, when it looked like it was on another planet. The game outcome may have been awful for Iowa football fans, but at least the Stanford band was entertaining.
* So many freeways, so many cars in LA. And this was a holiday weekend. Let's just say that Google maps and traffic came in very handy.
Tuesday, January 12, 2016
More Brutal Vikings (Not The Nordic Kind)
We interrupt our planned blog entry to bring you breaking news.....
As background, six years ago, I posted this account of what it's like to be a Minnesota Vikings football fan, and listed my Top 5 most brutal Vikings losses of all-time. I now can add a new one that I'll label as 'tied for fifth':
T-5. 2016 Wild-Card playoff game at home versus the Seattle Seahawks. In the third-coldest game at kickoff in NFL history, in a game the Vikings were not favored to win (mostly based on a big regular-season loss at home to the same team a month earlier), Minnesota trails 10-9 with under 30 seconds to go. However, they've made a last minute drive deep into Seattle territory, and line up for a likely game-winning field goal of just 27 yards. Their fine placekicker, Blair Walsh, had already kicked three other field goals in the difficult conditions, so as long as the snap and hold were good, this was going to be a big win.....and he shanked the kick way left.
There are those that would put this higher on my list (or theirs), but given the stakes of a Wild Card game versus a championship game, given they weren't favored to win anyway, and given that they'd still have to win two more playoff games (at least one and probably both on the road), I don't currently rate it higher. If this young Vikings team goes no farther in the next couple of years, I could see it rising in my rankings.
Either way, brutal.
As background, six years ago, I posted this account of what it's like to be a Minnesota Vikings football fan, and listed my Top 5 most brutal Vikings losses of all-time. I now can add a new one that I'll label as 'tied for fifth':
T-5. 2016 Wild-Card playoff game at home versus the Seattle Seahawks. In the third-coldest game at kickoff in NFL history, in a game the Vikings were not favored to win (mostly based on a big regular-season loss at home to the same team a month earlier), Minnesota trails 10-9 with under 30 seconds to go. However, they've made a last minute drive deep into Seattle territory, and line up for a likely game-winning field goal of just 27 yards. Their fine placekicker, Blair Walsh, had already kicked three other field goals in the difficult conditions, so as long as the snap and hold were good, this was going to be a big win.....and he shanked the kick way left.
There are those that would put this higher on my list (or theirs), but given the stakes of a Wild Card game versus a championship game, given they weren't favored to win anyway, and given that they'd still have to win two more playoff games (at least one and probably both on the road), I don't currently rate it higher. If this young Vikings team goes no farther in the next couple of years, I could see it rising in my rankings.
Either way, brutal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)