The Personal Finance Emergency Room

© saintlukeskc.org

The state of healthcare, or lack thereof, in the United States is exemplary the overall pattern of capitalist predation and oppression that causes undue financial and emotional stress. A recent experience with an emergency room visit prompts me to probe the connections once again.

While visiting family out of state for the holidays in December, my partner experienced prolonged numbness in her hand. This was not an “I slept wrong” issue that resolves itself within an hour or so of waking up. Given Heidi’s history of a mild stroke, we take symptoms like this seriously.

My sister-in-law’s family lives in a rural town, so we drove an hour to one of the few open urgent care clinics. Upon describing the issue and her medical history, the intake person declared that urgent care is not equipped to evaluate such situations, and referred us to the nearby hospital.

I will be generous and say that our time with a physician lasted fifteen minutes. The doctor asked questions, even got out of their chair to do a brief, standard protocol to rule out another stroke. They ventured that it was not a stroke, but without imaging, could not rule it out entirely. We declined additional procedures. The next half hour was devoted to the paperwork exit interview.

Fast forward to this week. The bill is over $2,400. We have health insurance. Despite this, we are left with a payment exceeding half of that amount. Yes, there is the “deductible,” and we are fortunate in being able to absorb that shock to our finances. Most people cannot, but even for those that share our circumstance, the ripple effect is profound.

Misery is simply another commodity, publicly traded under other identities.

When faced with a large, unexpected, unavoidable expenditure, be it for a medical bill, vehicle repair, needed plumbing upgrades, or some other catastrophe (all of the scenarios I listed are ones we have experienced in the last few months), my mind goes to what we must now sacrifice. There goes that vacation. Charitable donations? Off the table now. Membership in that organization? Nope. Meals out are less frequent.

It is no wonder that the average American’s bank account is always in the emergency room. It may not be a government conspiracy responsible for that condition, but certain business models literally profit from it. You did not get yourself into this mess.

We need an ‘unsubscribe’ button, and do not have to name an alternative to reject the current system.

The American oligarchy existed long before any of us were born, but its influence has intensified, and become vastly more complicated in its ways of appeasing the masses without truly solving any of the problems that exist because of….oligarchy. Government is complicit, at least at the level rendered by the ability of the oligarchy to appease politicians it helps get elected. Even supposedly well-meaning crusades like the “war on drugs” are waged not because of sympathy for addicts, but because cartels are making money that the oligarchy covets.

In the world of capitalism, everything must be privatized, and for profit. Only the consumer has value. Labor is an overhead cost, to be outsourced, or automated, at every opportunity. How to foster consumerism, then? Credit, and other forms of lending, which the oligarchy profits from by charging interest. Debt is not figured in the calculation of poverty levels, so the illusion of a middle class persists.

Our economic system has even turned our collective stress and anxiety into for-profit enterprise, from pharmaceuticals to sports betting. Misery is simply another commodity, publicly traded under other identities. We are in an abusive relationship with corporate-level business, on both the production side and the consumer end. We need an “unsubscribe” button, and do not have to name an alternative to reject the current system.

Instead of capitulating to the script that says Blacks and other minorities are threats to our safety and security, that immigrants are taking our jobs, and welfare is being exploited by the poor, we can seek ways of disconnecting our lives from global capitalism. We can expose the culture wars for what they are: distractions from the oligarchy that is taking power and control away from us.

We do not have to quit capitalism cold turkey. Do it incrementally. Engage in positive distractions, like arts and crafts. Go out into nature, like I do, and observe other organisms as examples of a basic, but vivid and satisfying existence. Participate in community commerce. Make friends with local farmers, and school teachers. Help them prosper. You will feel better daily.

The Pursuit of Power

”Power” may be the most aggressive and dangerous concept in world history. Certainly, the pursuit of power has led us to countless devastating events, including the one we are witnessing today in Ukraine. Is such behavior, if only carried to the extreme periodically, inevitable? Is peace the exception?

The biological sciences can shed much light on human behavior. It is necessary to understand that Homo sapiens is an animal species, subject to the genetic code that has “advanced” us to the pinnacle of social organization, and supremacy over other species. What began as mating success through physical superiority to other males evolved to success through demonstration of better skills at provisioning food and other resources. Today, we no longer compete merely in a tribe or village, but on a global stage. Accumulation of excessive material wealth is now one standard. Use of military force is another means of demonstrating an "alpha" persona.

Our cultural revolutions, from the Agricultural Revolution to the Industrial and Digital, are mere extensions of our biological evolution. They have all been driven by personal aspiration to power in the sense of reflecting our biological imperative to advance our personal genetic code through future generations. The collective success of our species is probably largely a by-product of personal pursuits, choices, and invention.

We have always coveted resources held by other humans, and viewed “others” as competition, or impediments to our selfish pursuit of a monopoly on genetic advancement, though we would never come right out and say this. We have become so conditioned to ignore the role of our biological instincts that we create all manner of arguments to distract us from it. We are loathe to accept ourselves as biological beings subject to the “laws” of nature, yet it is at the heart of everything we do.

The most terrible situation of all is when an individual succeeds in convincing others it is in their best interest to advance his personal agenda, when it does not benefit those who endorse it. Tragically, we see this scenario time and again, so we are apparently not learning anything from it. In fact, when the scam is revealed, it often serves to solidify allegiance to the scammer. We abhor being duped more than we are committed to truth, justice, and equity. People who are easily fooled do not perpetuate their genes as successfully.

Time out. None of us want to admit we are that basic, that everything is driven purely by biology. Fine, but that is the foundation of our success to this point, and there is no shame in that. What is shameful is how we have chosen to evolve socially. Social evolution is largely a feedback loop that begins again with genetic code that is then modified through experience and experimentation. Social evolution is nature and nurture, the latter being more than maternal, paternal and familial, but including the global village. What works is perpetuated, what fails is not. Well, ideally, anyway.

The fact that we see rampant opposition to warfare, colonization, poverty, racism, and other manifestations of oppression and exclusion, speaks to at more than marginal success in advancing a genetic and social code based on peace, justice, and inclusion. This is highly encouraging.

Here in the U.S., efforts to gerrymander congressional districts and restrict voting rights are actually signs of success. The more desperate the measures to protect concentrated power, the more we should accelerate the opposite agenda, because we are at the brink of breaking the power cycle forever.

That is the ultimate characteristic of individual power: it is fleeting, impermanent. Even relatively benign examples like the British monarchy, are likely to expire in my lifetime, or at least be rendered irrelevant. Powerful individuals and families tend to stop evolving once they have achieved their personal version of success, while the rest of society continues to evolve, eventually overwhelming them, replacing them with more effective institutions.

We are living an accelerated social evolution right now, where, at its best, social media is creating widespread empathy for those not in positions of power, empowering those who previously believed themselves to be powerless, and organizing movements at lightning speeds. Despite a global pandemic we are refusing to allow ourselves to be isolated. We still take to the streets locally (hopefully vaccinated and still masked to protect the immunocompromised), and broadcast globally. There are fewer and fewer strangers every day.

We are getting there. Refuse to acknowledge anyone who tells you otherwise. We will prevail in normalizing the pursuit of equal power for all, and aspiring not to material wealth but to generosity and critical thinking.

The Coronavirus Reveals That Our "Normal" is Itself a Disaster

© Mayoclinic.org

Since I am not even remotely literate in epidemiology, it would be irresponsible to comment on the medical aspects of covid-19. However, the fallout from it in terms of social, economic, and cultural reactions is fair game. What, if anything, will we learn from this collective experience? What will change permanently? Is resumption of “normal” an appropriate outcome? Serious questions abound if we want a better future.

Mandates and directives are changing daily, if not hourly, as governments at every level make new policy decisions based on the latest information available from the scientific community. We hope that is the process, anyway, but consumer confidence is often conspicuously absent. Politically-motivated courses of action are also at play, and it is left to media pundits and the citizenry to conclude which are in the best interest of the public versus being to the benefit of corporations and the (considerably) more wealthy.

This episode is a bizarre hybrid of a natural disaster and a manmade, or at least human-induced, catastrophe. Our behavior reflects it. While we are at our best, as Americans, anyway, in the face of hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, and floods, we are at our apprehensively worst when confronting a Y2K situation, or, obviously, a potentially cataclysmic disease pandemic. Consequently, the coronavirus has left us torn between a hoarding, every-man-for-himself mentality and a longing for closeness that violates the imperative of social distancing. Mentally and physically we are stressed to the max, and that only makes our immune systems more vulnerable to the pathogen we are trying desperately to avoid contracting.

My social media feed is full of humor, thank goodness, but also angst and uncertainty. There is little comfort to be had, and if there is anything we in the U.S. are addicted to, it is comfort….and convenience….and dependable sources of entertainment, food, and beverage….and ideally all at the same place and time. Right now, if the internet goes down, we are collectively screwed. Food delivery goes away? We are doomed.

Those in cities and suburbs, at least, are feeling helpless. Rural populations are likely laughing at us. They put a premium on self-reliance, and whatever we are in for as a result of our dependence on others in the big city, well, we deserve it. All our learnin’ and liberalism ain’t gonna get us nowhere. Forgive that last remark, or better yet take it to heart because there is some truth in it. Farmers, ranchers, and others who labor in small, far-flung communities deserve respect. Their skill sets are broader out of necessity. We could learn a good deal from them in how to prepare for emergencies.

As our lives boil down to basics, as our economic systems are forced to reevaluate their most basic tenets, and as we gain a new appreciation of what really matters, will we remember it all when life returns to our expectations? Should that be what we aim for? This pandemic is both a crisis and a valuable opportunity for make fundamental changes in our global culture, as well as addressing shortcomings here in the U.S.

Personally, maybe we make different choices in the marketplace, supporting local businesses over chain retail and dining. We’ve learned we can live without unhealthy foods we’d come to crave. We continue positive habits we evolved to cope with the stress of self-quarantine and social distancing.

Collectively, ideally, we embrace science again, start advocating for better pay and benefits for teachers, and press even harder for healthcare reform and a living wage so we can better weather future emergencies. We recall which of our civic leaders were on the side of working people, the elderly, and our youth, and who was trying to maximize their own gains or minimize their own losses at the expense of the rest of us. We remember that in the next election cycle, and push initiatives that would affect the removal of corrupt officials from office faster than recall elections.

Let us also recognize the need to repair the barriers between humanity and the wilderness that are necessary for the protection of our global population from novel pathogens. Not every organism is an appropriate resource. Probably not a resource in any way, shape or form, actually. Periodically we are reminded that our existence is tenuous, dependent on an infinite number of factors beyond our personal control. This is one of those times. Let us heed the warning, and work unselfishly toward sustainability.

Chasing Money

At this particular moment in time, I am secure enough in the fiscal sense that I do not need to chase projects for the money. That has not always been the case, and it will surely be a fleeting sense of relief. The welcome respite gives me pause in another way, more restless and disturbing than gratifying. It calls into question the idea that money should be a motivator, that everything be framed in the sense of income and expenditures.

© BayAreaDigitalSolutions.com

The constant implication in our lives is that we have a responsibility to earn an income, a responsibility to spend it and invest it to keep the economy going, and that taxation is the villain that keeps us from fully realizing our financial potential. Those directives come from those already wealthy, who attained their power by hoarding money. We think that money is the matrix that holds our lives together, and we need to free our minds of that foolish belief.

We think that money is the matrix that holds our lives together, and we need to free our minds of that foolish belief.

The only currency of any relevance and importance is energy. Some may equate energy with love, or some other emotion or notion, but what I am talking about is metabolic energy. That is the currency of living ecosystems, and it flows freely among all organisms. There is minimal banking of metabolic energy. Plant tubers might be one example. Bears putting on fat for the winter is another. These situations are the minority, though. Energy usually passes quickly through the food web.

Economies can be viewed as redundant and inefficient ecosystems in which every niche is filled by only one species: Homo sapiens. Energy flow is disrupted as some individuals hoard money instead of releasing it to continue flowing to other niches. Nature is strict in its demand that energy flow.

Perhaps the worst aspect of money is that it has allowed us to assign arbitrary value to everything. "Precious" metals and stones are precious only because we say they are. There is a fine line between priceless and worthless. Arguably, they are two sides of the same coin. The lives of other species are priceless until we decide that the monetary value of the land they occupy can be increased by developing a shopping center....and we arbitrarily decided what the land was worth to begin with.

Money limits our creativity because we think only in terms of how we will benefit financially. We dismiss important endeavors before they get off the ground because [whining] "that's too costly," or "we can't make any money doing that." A cost-benefit analysis too often destroys potentially great achievements.

Money also actively encourages the invention of unnecessary products and services. The marketplace is full of disposable goods, mass-produced decorative objects, and all manner of substances passing themselves off as food and drink that are destructive to our individual and collective health. We are all children in the face of advertising, so easily convinced that we cannot live without a given item. Money fuels the conflict that filmmaker Ken Burns describes as the "I want versus we need."

Money allows us to judge one another not by the content of our character, but by the sum of our bank accounts, to paraphrase Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Wealthism should be as repulsive as racism, but instead we collectively aspire to be financially excessive. More importantly, we want to exclude others from our sense of entitlement and privilege. We want a very tangible expression of our success, but ironically define success by tangible expression. We never arrive in this scenario. It is the treadmill of status, nothing more. It is a process that erodes society instead of elevating it.

We can no longer afford (and I use that word deliberately) to allow ourselves to be conditioned to believe that money is a limiting or freeing element of our society. What is priceless? Empathy. Respect. Honesty. Patience. Persistence. Volunteerism. Be examples of those things. Add to that list, because it will get you thinking about what is truly value-able. Meanwhile, I challenge you to imagine a world without money. What would it look like? Could we operate more justly and more efficiently without it?

Observing World Population Day

Today is World Population Day. What does that mean to you? What is the intention of this observance; and is it possible to reflect dispassionately but critically on what it means to have so many human beings on planet Earth?

© AskIdeas.com

It turns out that the United Nations established World Population Day in 1989, two years after the estimated landmark human population of seven billion was reached. I dare say it has remained well under the radar of the average U.S. citizen, in part because so much polarization surrounds anything to do with issues affecting population. Were it not for CBS Sunday Morning last Sunday, I would not have known this day existed, let alone that it was occurring this week.

The current UN Secretary General summarizes this year's key points in this statement: "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is the world’s blueprint for a better future for all on a healthy planet. On World Population Day, we recognize that this mission is closely interrelated with demographic trends including population growth, ageing, migration and urbanization." Ok, first I have heard about the 2030 Agenda, too.

When many Americans hear the term "population," they internally add the word "control." Visions of a dystopian society in which the government dictates who can and cannot have children immediately clouds our vision. We even have previous historical examples, the latest being China's experiment with human reproductive....directives, shall we say. Perhaps no freedom is as valued in the U.S. as the freedom to have a family. We have fertility clinics for those facing physical impediments to reproduction. Our entire capitalist economy is based on the assumption that you will bear children that will consume goods and services throughout their lives. Certain religions place procreation at the center of their belief systems, too often with various warped results ensuing. Infringing on reproductive freedoms, or even suggesting that continued population growth is not necessarily a good thing, is met with instant and severe hostility.

Young American women face extreme social pressure to have children, this onslaught coming mostly from other women. It is a very real phenomenon that, like population, is seldom discussed. Meanwhile, economists, business leaders, and politicians whine about a labor shortage should birthrates continue to fall in the Western World. These same men fail to acknowledge that they readily outsource labor as it is, automate jobs where they can, and often refuse to grant paid maternity leave, pay a living wage, or offer health insurance.

We may struggle with these social issues, but other nations suffer poverty, in part because their populations may exceed the carrying capacity of their geographic boundaries, but also due to civil war, diseases afflicting their citizens, and myriad other factors. As much as the "developed world" lives in denial of its overly-consumptive per-capita lifestyle, it runs away at warp speed from suggesting that population is some other country's problem. Consequently, nobody talks about it, let alone takes action.

It is high time we make human population a regular topic of conversation, debate, whatever you want to call the dialogue. We must begin by having mutual respect for each other's personal decisions as far as child-bearing is concerned. Then we can go on to find agreeable standards for collective conduct and personal responsibility. It goes back to trust, that most fragile of human attributes, so endangered in our fearful society today. We have to trust the judgment of others as to what courses of action are appropriate for them given circumstances of physical and mental health, finances, spiritual subscriptions, and other factors which may be peculiar to that individual alone.

The old saying that it "takes a village to raise a child" has truth behind it, despite the cliché we consider that statement to be. The village is a global one, now. The world is watching. The universe is asking you to be kind, loving, and gentle to your fellow man. We are capable of making this work, but it takes work.

Anger and Apathy

© Pinterest

A few days ago I posted this statement to my Facebook page: "I am angry because I fear the only other option is apathy." I was curious as to the responses, and I was not disappointed. The comments reflect a wide spectrum of viewpoints and coping strategies in our troubling times.

I find that my mind often perceives things as black or white, as limited to only a couple of points on the spectrum. I have been known to become impatient with people who do not express outrage at what I see as an injustice or other wrongdoing, usually inflicted by a government agency or policy, or a private corporation or religious institution. A lack of response in the face of egregious acts I see as either agreement with the action, or apathy.

Why don't you care?! How can you not be as angry as I am? Do not get me started with "life isn't fair." Our only responsibility while we are on this planet is to do our best to make life more equitable. We have instead allowed ourselves to be channeled into a way of thinking that elevates the attainment of vast personal material wealth as the highest degree of success....but I digress.

The responses to my statement were more concerned with personal psyche than with whatever triggers anger. "Anger is only good if you use it for organization towards a goal," wrote the person who replied first. "I go with rage, because horrific sadness sucks," said another. "True...stay with anger," wrote another in agreement.

The next response was perhaps the most revealing, and puzzled me: "Have you tried empathy? I helps me when i get where you are at." That somehow made me even more frustrated, and I answered "My empathy often incites my anger. I have an intense sense of justice and fairness, and of course the world is anything but." Farther down in the comments was a similar answer: "I know how you feel, Eric. And my only statement is this: Empathy expands you while anger only shrinks you. Small words, I know."

No, those are profound words which got me thinking, after I wrote " But I AM empathetic! That is where a lot of my anger comes from: injustices to people I empathize with." What next entered my mind, but which I did not communicate outright, was something to the effect of "do you expect me to have empathy for irresponsibly affluent people, for racists, for bigots, for those who put profits above environmental health? Am I to empathize with people who deny others the right to affordable housing, healthcare, food, and opportunity?" I cannot imagine that is what you mean, but if so then I need to reconsider some of my social media friends.

I am not sure why more people do not see the link between empathy and outrage. You cannot witness injustice after injustice and not be driven to madness....unless you benefit from the status quo. "I too am angry," wrote another friend. They continued "It doesn't help. Neither does the immense sadness I feel. Between the two I am stuck. We have politicians who deny climate change, and politicians who acknowledge it, but refuse to do anything on their watch. I am 74, and will live to see the devastation and great extinctions. They are already happening. I think I am doing what I can. It is not enough." I would argue that sometimes it is enough to simply express solidarity with other empathetic people.

Another sentiment: "Rage, grief, when it's too much, sometimes a numbing sets in. When it hurts too much to care... Everyone has their own way of dealing. Some become apathetic and some don't recognize how much they've changed until an event occurs in their life to wake them up again. Some never wake up. Some never feel alive again. Some fight all of it within and some are lucky enough to have a life that sustains their spirit. Many are not so lucky." Well said, friend.

"I believe ACTION is a third option," mentioned another person, and my response was that I am very much an "idea man." I am horrible at taking action on those ideas. I often don't know where to start. That is why I write. Another person chimed in "Writing is action. And, if compelling, it propels other people to take action. We cannot sit by paralyzed by depression, disappointment, inertia, whatever! The stakes are much, much, much too high...."

I was reminded by another that it might help channel my anger if I read more: "It occurs to me that I ought to read Viktor Frankl’s Man’s Search for Meaning. We’re all talking in affirmative messages that are pertinent for 'normal' times, and they’re still true but don’t feel proportionate to the current set of catastrophes. I want to see how a man got himself through a time when the world was completely falling apart.

What do you do in the face of injustice and misguided priorities by those in power and those who do not know better because of ignorance? Are you shopping differently in the marketplace? Writing and calling your public representatives? Practicing civil disobedience? Please share your ways of coping, and changing the world. Thank you.

Americans Must Define 'Great' and Who it Applies to

Has the President of the United States lived up to his campaign promise to "make America great again?" The answer may depend upon whom you are asking. Looking at the advertisements for the midterm primary elections, it is glaringly obvious that the divisions we see in the electorate are largely manufactured by our two major parties, designed to pit us against one another such that the status quo of prosperity for the few is maintained. Citizens need to ignore political rhetoric and keep chugging along, as we have always done.

Let us start with immigration since that is the hot-button issue of the day in the wake of images of children sleeping under sheets of silver mylar inside fenced areas resembling cages. Children. Forget everything else. They are vulnerable human beings first, and every other label second, if applied at all. Speaking for myself, one of the facets of this nation that I believe makes it great is its desire to comfort the afflicted, as so perfectly worded on the plaque beneath the Statue of Liberty.

I did not know that our sentiments had an expiration date. When you are fleeing for your life and seeking safety, you do what you have to do, "legal" or not, to get yourself and your loved ones out of harm's way. This is not criminal behavior, it is a heroic example of one's obligation to oneself and their family. The United States can compound the problem, or it can do what it does best and create new and unique solutions that do not further traumatize people who are already victims.

One must also recognize that the U.S. does not exist in a vacuum, "America first!" chants to the contrary. Immigration is a global crisis. Withdrawing from United Nations Human Rights Council, UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), the Paris Agreement (on climate change mitigation), and other international bodies and treaties only exacerbates issues with immigration and other forces that impact U.S. citizens. One of the great historical aspects of the U.S. has been its willingness to cooperate in global peace endeavors. We are now abandoning our obligations and abdicating our world responsibilities.

Some will argue that previous presidential administrations have abandoned obligations to our domestic citizenry, especially in rural areas where fewer voters are dispersed over vast expanses of agricultural landscapes. The current Commander-in-Chief has managed to convince those folks that he can make them great again, when in reality it is business as usual, with more mom-and-pop farms, ranches, and businesses going belly-up or being gobbled up by multinational corporations. There may be an immediate infusion of cash into rural economies when a company purchases land, a business, or equipment, but it is a quick fix that will leave that community begging again in another few years, though hopefully not before the next election cycle.

Economic prosperity, this writer would argue, is not what makes America great. It should be a byproduct of greatness, if anything, something that comes as a tangible reward for selflessness, not greed. Aspiring to material excess is what empires do, and we know from history that such greedy pursuits end badly.

What is truly making America great right now is the stubborn determination of Americans to succeed in spite of government, regardless of what political party is in power. We come home after a long workday and rail at the television newscasters bringing us stories of want, war, and woe; but we go to bed, get up, and go to work again.

That work may be volunteering at the food pantry, for Planned Parenthood, the local chapter of the Audubon Society, or any number of other organizations doing what we believe the government ought to be doing. Bless each and every one of you. Whether your neighbor agrees with your "agenda" or not, you are making society great, and that transcends borders, politics, religion, race, economic status, and all the other things that supposedly divide us. It is that daily commitment to participating in things greater than yourself that makes you great, and by extension makes America great. Not "again," but still.

The New Volunteerism

© Slideshare.net

A recent post on a colleague's blog got me thinking again about what it means to be a volunteer these days; and how we define the word "community," too. The world is changing, and we are perhaps failing to recognize the profound impact we have on our neighborhood, town, city, country, or even the globe from our desktop PC, laptop, tablet, or phone. Must we show up in person, or donate money, to be considered valued contributors to various causes? I believe the answer is no.

Consider in-person activities. You get the exhilaration of achieving, or at least working toward, a common goal when you volunteer with others at an event or location. Not everyone enjoys such gatherings, though, and in fact many people sympathetic to a cause may be far too shy or anxious to expose themselves to the excitement and pressure inherent in fund-raising and other events. Further, they may feel inept. You may not be playing to the personality strengths of many of the most fervent people involved in a cause. Lastly, interaction with others at group events tends to be very brief, and shallow.

The internet, and social media even more so, allows even greater participation in communities, however you define them, because even those who do not venture out into crowds can still be volunteers, and may be even better at recruiting others to a given cause or charitable organization. They might be better at researching an issue, and providing links to articles and experts that solidify arguments for an issue. These unseen, nearly anonymous volunteers may also be gifted, like my friend's late friend, at pairing certain talented individuals with organizations desperate for the skills those people offer.

Here is another point. Often the best kind of volunteering has nothing to do with a non-profit, political, or social organization at all. I, myself, volunteer at AllExperts.com as an authority in the entomology category. I address questions from the public without representing a company, industry, university, or any entity besides myself. This gives me freedom that would be impossible if I were bound by the rules and expectations of an organization. I am free to speak against the use of insecticides to treat pests. I am even free to espouse my own philosophy that there is no such thing as a "pest." I was successful enough to be honored as one of the top fifty (50) experts in all categories for the year 2009.

There may be no substitute for a one-on-one exchange between a volunteer and a recipient of services, and the relative anonymity of the online world helps immensely in allowing for those relationships. Sure, it is not without its pitfalls, but one quickly learns who they can trust, who they enjoy dealing with the most, and conversely who is unreliable or has poor "netiquette."

Another aspect of the online community is that it is global. There are no geopolitical boundaries, and we have the freedom to exchange ideas across borders without a passport, or other official permission. We can engage in unfettered dialogue, or seek out moderated forums, whichever we feel most comfortable with. We teach and, more importantly, learn, daily. The odd flame war, as discussions that degenerate into angry name-calling are known, is a small price that we can usually tolerate in exchange for helpful conversations.

One way in which the internet lags behind traditional volunteerism is in the art of recognizing volunteers. You don't get a t-shirt, coffee mug, or any other tangible reward for your online service, no matter how many hours you put in, or how many people you serve. Surely we can overcome that challenge, though rarely have I seen any online volunteer's enthusiasm diminish in spite of being unrecognized. People who love what they do, and love the way they do what they do, are not easily derailed from continuing their quest to make the world a better place in one way or another.

The Olympics

© Olympic.org

After careful deliberation, I deem the Rio version of the thirty-first Olympiad worthy of a score of roughly 4.2. This is much less of a reflection on the host city and the competing athletes than it is on the presentation of the games by NBC, which was simply dreadful.

First, as with all networks these days, NBC assumed that every television spectator has a cable or satellite service and could therefore tailor their Olympics-watching to their own personal tastes. This left those of us without such providers to endure basically only "race" events and women's gymnastics, interspersed with diving and beach volleyball. Seriously, that was about the sum of network coverage on free, commercial television.

The network also missed many an opportunity to profile non-U.S. athletes, though there were some stories here and there. Showing how athletes from what we might consider Third World countries can succeed against athletes from nations where they train almost full-time, and have many of their expenses covered, would be a real source of inspiration and hope to a jaded American audience. As it is, I find myself rooting for the "underdog," especially in the Olympics, because we already have it so good here in the U.S.A.

At least one friend commented on Facebook that it was nice to be free of political advertising and, ostensibly, other matters of more lasting importance economically and socially, during the two week span of televised competition. Still, the irony of someone firing a gun that sends a group of (mostly) Black people running is not lost on me, but no one else will say that because it "isn't the right time," and all of that kind of rhetoric. How doubly ironic that a privileged Caucasian male was the one that committed a crime after his own athletic events had concluded. I am still willing to help pay to extradite his ass back to Brazil, by the way.

The opening and closing ceremonies were the real treat, of course. It never ceases to amaze that the host nation raises art and pageantry to a new level. We need this kind of celebration at more frequent intervals than every four years. Why wait for an excuse? Let's do a world art olympics every two. Also, the commentary on the ceremonies was limited, much like it is for parades, and that is how every event should have been handled.

Among the worst aspects of Olympic coverage were the commentators and analysts. Every event should have been handled with a lot less verbiage, let alone criticism. If ever there were athletic competitions that could do without voice overs entirely, it would be the Olympics. Why not simply explain each event beforehand, then sit back silently and watch the athletes execute? Instead, we get negative comments on all but the most perfect dives and gymnastics performances. I really don't care that you know it all because you are retired from the sport you are analyzing. Shut up and let the rest of us enjoy.

What made NBC think a late night party with Ryan Seacrest was a good idea? His "interview" skills are non-existent, and the rest of the broadcasts were so exploitative of the locals as to make me want to vomit. Even Bob Costas seemed off of his game, relegated to presenting the latest medal count and trying to play along with female gymnasts half his age or younger. You are not "hip" anymore, Bob, get over it.

All of this said, spectator athletics are exactly that: entertainment. Few athletes recognize that they are entertainers, but it is those who do that we adore the most, and who are usually the most successful. It also makes some of those athletes the most hated, misunderstood, and mistreated of all.

Muhammad Ali was perhaps the first athlete in the modern era to recognize his stature as an entertainer, and he played it to the hilt. He was so masterful, in fact, that many people mistook his on-stage (in the ring) persona for his actual character as a human being. Later, Earvin "Magic" Johnson, Jr. and Shaquille O'Neal took to the basketball court all smiles and we loved, as we do, watching someone who loves what they do for a living. Simone Biles actually smiled during her floor exercise routine. How can you not love that?

Well, another Olympiad is in the books, for better or worse. We can only hope that coverage for the next one in Tokyo is going out for bid. Maybe PBS will get it, though I wonder how many people would fall asleep during its broadcast. Personally, I am hoping that it goes to Comedy Central.