Alright, so I said I was going to resurrect the blog and then never did. Turns out having two small children and working full time lends itself to very little writing time! I'm really going to try to write more.
Sunday April 15, 2012 marked the 100th anniversary of the Titanic sinking. It has been 100 years since 1,500 people died on a ship that was claimed to be unsinkable. I consider myself a bit of a Titanic enthusiast. Even before the movie premiered in 1998, I was always fascinated by this event in history - how could this have possibly happened? This was the Gilded Age, a time of immense wealth, prosperity, and innovation. Why, then, was a massive ship that was built to be virtually unsinkable, so easily taken down on her maiden voyage? The irony is unbelieveable.
Between 1912 and 1985, the only information historians had to go on was eyewitness testimony. Seven hundred people survived the disaster, and many of them were grilled about their experiences by congressional hearings in both the US and Britian. Everyone wanted answers, and no one could give good ones. The blame ultimately landed on Captain E.J. Smith (for speeding through an ice field even though there were warnings), dreamer and financier J. Bruce Ismay (for not having enough lifeboats on board and for saving his own life), and Thomas Andrews (the architect of the ship, for not building it strong enough to survive the blow). Captain Smith and Thomas Andrews went down with the ship, but J. Bruce Ismay dealt with the scrutiny and the blow to his impeccable reputation for the rest of his life. I'm sure there were times he wished he died along side Smith and Andrews.
There was also blame laid on others - the White Star Line, Harlan and Wolfe, the lookouts, Murdoch for trying to steer around the iceberg when a head on collision probably would've kept her afloat, and the ship's staff for not filling the lifeboats to capacity. Then there is blame to be laid on the wireless operator, who was so busy keeping up with passenger messages to the mainlands (passengers were charged for this service) that the ice warnings got buried. He also seriously irked the wireless operator on the Californian, who after hearing a trite message from the Titanic operator turned off his headphones and went to bed. The Captain of the Californian can also be to blame - The Californian was only 10 miles away or so, well within distance to see the flares, thought something might be amiss, and yet did not respond.
It truly was a perfect storm of events which led to the deaths of 1,500 people.
The wreck was discovered by Bob Ballard in 1985. Until then, the official accounts concluded that Titanic sank in tact (even though many eye witness said it broke). When she was discovered in two very large pieces almost a mile apart on the ocean floor, it became obvious that she split in two at or close to the surface. This was a huge revelation because it alluded to the fact that perhaps Titanic wasn't as strong as originally thought. Maybe there was something wrong with her design that caused all 45,000 tons of her to sink in under 3 hours.
In the almost 30 years since the discovery of Titanic there have been about 20 expeditions by various researchers and groups. I think I have seen video footage from every one of them. Most noteably, Bob Ballard went back a short time later (funded by the US Navy) to learn more. Then James Cameron (privately funded) shot footage for his movie in 1998 and went back to learn more in 2001. Wreck divers John Chatteron and Richie Kohler made an expedition in 2005, finding previously undiscovered pieces of Titanic's double bottom. Then last night I watched a documentary on the most recent expedition to the site, with several experts in various fields. They used special underwater sonar imagery to capture the first ever full map of the entire 15 miles of wreck site. It is pretty awesome stuff because for the first time they are able to lay out where pieces of Titanic fell and THEN could go back and get detailed images to determine which parts of the ship they were from. They were essentially able to recreate 90% of Titanic's structure from the wreckage pieces on the ocean floor, 2.5 miles below the surface.
There has been so much speculation in the last 100 years about what caused the sinking of Titanic. First, before the wreck discovery, there was negligence - on the part of the Captain, on the part of the builders, on the part of the White Star Line, on the part of the crew.
Then once the ship was discovered, it was due to design flaws. Weak rivets, cheap steel, the wrong type of expansion joint. The ship should not have broken - almost all ships stay in tact even when they sink.
They have discovered that the sinking did not go down as originally planned. The stern certainly did not get to a 90 degree angle before splitting, like James Cameron would've liked us all to believe. It was likely much less dramatic than that, maybe only 19 degress or so - to the point where passengers might not even have known until close to the end that the ship was doomed.
100 years later it seems that we finally have some answers. The latest round of expeditions, which gave us so much more information than we ever had previously, showed exactly the opposite of what was previously thought:
Negligence: What Captain Smith did was not unusual. It was customary at the time to be at cruising speed until ice was actually spotted. They had not spotted any, and so remained at cruising speed. Ismay can't be held accountable for the lifeboats because Titanic actually had 2 more lifeboats than was required by maritime law at the time. The generally held thought was that lifeboats would only be used to transport passengers from a potentially sinking Titanic to another ship that pulled up along side. She simply sunk too fast. There is no evidence that he pushed Smith to go faster, as the theatrical movie claims.
Design: It actually has been found that Titanic was exceptionally strong. They have done tests on the rivets using 100 year old steel and the design specs from the original blue prints. Titanic sustained a blow with an amount of pressure that no structure could withstand. What has been found suggests that with the amount of damage she sustained it is amazing that she stayed afloat for as long as she did. And one MAJOR thing - she stayed upright! In almost every shipwreck, including the latest disaster with the Italian cruise ship Costa Concordia (January 2012), the ship capsizes, rendering half of the lifeboats unuseable. All of Titanic's lifeboats were used, they were just not filled to capacity and there were not enough of them.
I believe in my heart that fate was against Titanic on her maiden voyage. There was either nothing anyone could do, or a little something that everyone could've done to prevent the deaths of 1,500 people. I have come to realize that no one is to blame, no matter how much the media would've like to vilify someone. Titanic was a very strong, amazing ship. She didn't leave 1,500 people to die in the icy waters of the Atlantic, she saved 700 people from the exact same fate in an impossible situation.
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
Resurrection
Happy 2012! Thinking about resurrecting the blog :) It is a new year, so much has happened in the last year. We have had ups and downs, and while 2011 was an okay year, I'm glad it is behind us. We had to say goodbye to our Goldendoodle, Henry, and that has been really hard on all of us. Henry was often my ray of sunshine on a cloudy day. Even when Brian, Nathan, Jango, and myself were in crabby moods, Henry would make it better. He was never in a bad mood! Even towards the end, when he was suffering from seizures, and definitely in pain, he was happy. I still miss him everyday!
Enough with the heavy. We also welcomed our baby girl, Cora on 12/31/11. She was due on Christmas Day but decided to hold out almost a whole week longer. She squeaked in right before the new year, and shares her birthday with her Auntie Dana. We have only had her in our lives for a short 6 weeks, but she is amazing, and a perfect addition to our family! (Consequently, she is also a GREAT sleeper, which really helps my mood!)
Anyways, I decided to resurrect the blog because I've had a lot on my mind lately. I have an opinion about everything, and I have a lot to say about every topic. There is at least once per day where I think to myself - I should write that down - and I never do. So here's my attempt at doing that. I've also noticed that there are virtually no blogs specifically by working moms, that I can find (if you know of one - please let me know!). I'm assuming it is because working moms are so crazy busy that they can't fit in the time to blog! I have a lot to say about being a working mom - the good, the bad, and the ugly. This will be my outlet for that, I hope! Additionally, the elections are right around the corner (yay!) and everyone knows I have a hard time keeping my political mouth shut!
I have 6 more weeks of my maternity leave and then back to the daily grind!
Enough with the heavy. We also welcomed our baby girl, Cora on 12/31/11. She was due on Christmas Day but decided to hold out almost a whole week longer. She squeaked in right before the new year, and shares her birthday with her Auntie Dana. We have only had her in our lives for a short 6 weeks, but she is amazing, and a perfect addition to our family! (Consequently, she is also a GREAT sleeper, which really helps my mood!)
Anyways, I decided to resurrect the blog because I've had a lot on my mind lately. I have an opinion about everything, and I have a lot to say about every topic. There is at least once per day where I think to myself - I should write that down - and I never do. So here's my attempt at doing that. I've also noticed that there are virtually no blogs specifically by working moms, that I can find (if you know of one - please let me know!). I'm assuming it is because working moms are so crazy busy that they can't fit in the time to blog! I have a lot to say about being a working mom - the good, the bad, and the ugly. This will be my outlet for that, I hope! Additionally, the elections are right around the corner (yay!) and everyone knows I have a hard time keeping my political mouth shut!
I have 6 more weeks of my maternity leave and then back to the daily grind!
Monday, January 3, 2011
Ringing in the new year
I'm very glad it is 2011. I didn't really have a problem with 2010. In fact, I've been quite happy with life these past few years. There are definitely things that I reflect upon that I wish I had done differently, but then there are outcomes that have come from my decisions that I can't possibly regret.
One of those decisions was leaving IDG. Mentally, it was not easy to leave IDG. I did it for the money...we just needed more at the time. I ended 2010 on job #4 for the year. First IDG, then Bose, then Forrester, and now GMI. I think I'm at the best one yet so far. I like it here a lot. I like the work, I like the people, I like the environment. I think it will be a good place to set down roots for a while...can I retire the resume for a while, PLEASE?!
Every year I think it is a good idea to make resolutions. Not necessarily because I have to follow them, but just to reflect on the things I could be doing better to make myself a better person. Here are this year's:
-Exercise more (or at all)
-Read more, watch less TV
-Make a budget and STICK TO IT
-Reach goal weight by June (about 5 lbs/month).
-Make time to blog
-Keep house cleaner
I think all of these are resolutions that I can achieve, although some are more tricky than others!
And then I have a few resolutions that I plan to keep to myself :)
I hope everyone so far has been able to stick to your resolutions! I forgot my lunch today, so I've already kinda busted the tool necessary to "reach goal weight!". Hopefully I can make it happen tomorrow and forward!
One of those decisions was leaving IDG. Mentally, it was not easy to leave IDG. I did it for the money...we just needed more at the time. I ended 2010 on job #4 for the year. First IDG, then Bose, then Forrester, and now GMI. I think I'm at the best one yet so far. I like it here a lot. I like the work, I like the people, I like the environment. I think it will be a good place to set down roots for a while...can I retire the resume for a while, PLEASE?!
Every year I think it is a good idea to make resolutions. Not necessarily because I have to follow them, but just to reflect on the things I could be doing better to make myself a better person. Here are this year's:
-Exercise more (or at all)
-Read more, watch less TV
-Make a budget and STICK TO IT
-Reach goal weight by June (about 5 lbs/month).
-Make time to blog
-Keep house cleaner
I think all of these are resolutions that I can achieve, although some are more tricky than others!
And then I have a few resolutions that I plan to keep to myself :)
I hope everyone so far has been able to stick to your resolutions! I forgot my lunch today, so I've already kinda busted the tool necessary to "reach goal weight!". Hopefully I can make it happen tomorrow and forward!
Monday, December 13, 2010
Oh the joys of home ownership...
Last night I walked into Nathan's room in the dark to get something. All of a sudden a big sloppy wet drip landed on my head. Light on, water dripping through the middle of his ceiling!
It was raining ridiculously hard last night. Like so hard that Henry didn't even want to go out, and held it in until this morning. So hard that Jango was literally on the porch for 3 seconds but when he came in he ran around like a mad man which he does right after he has a bath.
So Brian went up into the eaves. Yup, officially a leaky roof. We were told by the inspector that we would need a new roof sooner rather than later, but it doesn't make it any less annoying to deal with now :) The cost to fix a roof is pretty darn outrageous, and something we can't afford right now. Also, do roofers work in December?
Seems like you never realize the problems with home ownership until you are in them. Everyone always talks about the "American Dream" of owning their own home. But to be honest, we've been in our house for almost 3 years and it has been one big ball of anxiety from the beginning. Don't get me wrong, I like my house, I like it a lot. But it is far too expensive for far too little space. We've had to make a number of fairly pricey updates, including a whole new heating system, windows, and insulation. On top of that, the value has dropped about $40k since we bought, so we have no equity for selling or for home equity loans for repairs. If I had the option, I would DEFINITELY go back to renting right now. Then the roof is the landlord's problem.
Guess I know what my tax return is going to this year, if we get one...
It was raining ridiculously hard last night. Like so hard that Henry didn't even want to go out, and held it in until this morning. So hard that Jango was literally on the porch for 3 seconds but when he came in he ran around like a mad man which he does right after he has a bath.
So Brian went up into the eaves. Yup, officially a leaky roof. We were told by the inspector that we would need a new roof sooner rather than later, but it doesn't make it any less annoying to deal with now :) The cost to fix a roof is pretty darn outrageous, and something we can't afford right now. Also, do roofers work in December?
Seems like you never realize the problems with home ownership until you are in them. Everyone always talks about the "American Dream" of owning their own home. But to be honest, we've been in our house for almost 3 years and it has been one big ball of anxiety from the beginning. Don't get me wrong, I like my house, I like it a lot. But it is far too expensive for far too little space. We've had to make a number of fairly pricey updates, including a whole new heating system, windows, and insulation. On top of that, the value has dropped about $40k since we bought, so we have no equity for selling or for home equity loans for repairs. If I had the option, I would DEFINITELY go back to renting right now. Then the roof is the landlord's problem.
Guess I know what my tax return is going to this year, if we get one...
Friday, December 10, 2010
Fat Santa
We know that obesity, particularly childhood obesity, is a dangerous epidemic sweeping our nation. There have been many initiatives started to combat obesity, but perhaps not enough.
Today I heard on the radio that we should stop projecting Santa as a fat jolly old soul who likes to eat milk and cookies. Why? Because that makes him a bad role model for kids. Kids will try to emulate Santa and act like him and think that milk and cookies should be a staple to their everyday diet.
I have 2 problems with this:
a) don't ALL kids think that milk and cookies should be a staple of their everyday diet, regardless if they are Santa believers or not?
b) Should Santa really be seen as a "role model"? I mean, do kids really strive to be LIKE Santa? Or do they just want to get a visit from him on Christmas Eve?
I agree that obesity is a problem and healthy living guidelines should be part of the education system. But things like making Santa buff and thin, or making the cookie monster not ONLY eat cookies anymore (I hear he has a much more diverse diet now), does that really do anything to combat the problem?
Today I heard on the radio that we should stop projecting Santa as a fat jolly old soul who likes to eat milk and cookies. Why? Because that makes him a bad role model for kids. Kids will try to emulate Santa and act like him and think that milk and cookies should be a staple to their everyday diet.
I have 2 problems with this:
a) don't ALL kids think that milk and cookies should be a staple of their everyday diet, regardless if they are Santa believers or not?
b) Should Santa really be seen as a "role model"? I mean, do kids really strive to be LIKE Santa? Or do they just want to get a visit from him on Christmas Eve?
I agree that obesity is a problem and healthy living guidelines should be part of the education system. But things like making Santa buff and thin, or making the cookie monster not ONLY eat cookies anymore (I hear he has a much more diverse diet now), does that really do anything to combat the problem?
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Charles Dickens and Christmas
I was talking with Brian the other day about the over secularization of Christmas. Where did all of our material desires come from? Why has it come away from being a generally Christian holiday celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ, to a custom in which Atheists and Agnostics and non-practicing Christians alike participate?
He told me it was due to Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol. So I decided to look it up.
Prior to the release of A Christmas Carol in 1843, the spirit of Christmas had been dwindling. In the U.S. Christmas lost popularity in the post -Revolutionary War era because it was thought to be a British custom, and we were all things non-British at that point.
Charles Dickens was a literary stud in his day. You could say he was one of the first celebrity authors. He popularized the "book tour" and many things which are commonplace now in our society. I think pretty much anyone with a high school education could quote you one Dickens line, even if it is only "Bah! Humbug!" The purpose was to revive the Christian spirit in the secular way.
If you notice when reading A Christmas Carol, there is little to no focus on religion. Dickens wanted to highlight the other important parts of Christmas...a general season of good cheer and spirit, excellent food and drink, family gatherings, and goodwill. He was the first, essentially, to take the "Christ" out of modern Christmas, and "made" Christmas a secular tradition for many Atheists, Agnostics, and non-practicing Christians it is today!
At the time Dickens wrote A Christmas Carol, Britain was kinda-sorta still celebrating the 12 Days of Christmas (from December 25th - January 5th, the time thought to be when the Magi brought gifts to the new baby Jesus). Dickens revised that in his novel to be just one day of family and friends and good tidings, much like we have today.
Dickens was very progressive for his time, and this actually helped his "reinvention" of Christmas.
I have nothing against Dickens. In fact, A Tale of Two Cities was quite possibly one of my favorite books read in high school. A Christmas Carol is one of my all time favorite stories (particularly the Muppet adaptation!) :) I think what Charles Dickens did for Christmas is pretty darn amazing, actually. Had he not written A Christmas Carol, Christmas would probably be just another day of the year today. But he revived the festive spirit and the holiday goodwill which was beginning to dwindle. And perhaps due to the revival of these things also came a revival in the Christian celebration of Christmas, although that seems to have dwindled a bit in the past few decades.
However, as I've mentioned I frequent the debate boards, and have found among the countless Christmas threads that Atheists and Agnostics often spite Christians for pretty much consuming December. Christmas is everywhere you look, everywhere you go. It is essentially impossible to escape, and Christians are often the scapegoat for the long shopping lines and mall craziness, the overspending, the tacky decorations, and annoying Christmas music. But what they are seeing in plain sight is 99% of the time not related to the Christian celebration, but the Dickens type celebration of Christmas. And I don't think his idea of using the Christmas holiday to spread holiday cheer, festive spirit, gather with family, and share goodwill is anything to be spiteful of.
Likewise, Christians shouldn't take it so personally if an Atheist, Agnostic, or non-Practicing Christian wants to participate in Christmas traditions. Afterall, we may not even have those traditions if it weren't for Charles Dickens' agnosticism (at least in this case, because it is said he actually was a Christian*), we wouldn't have Christmas as we know it today!
*Note: "Agnostic" wasn't actually a term until 1869, long after the publication of A Christmas Carol.
He told me it was due to Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol. So I decided to look it up.
Prior to the release of A Christmas Carol in 1843, the spirit of Christmas had been dwindling. In the U.S. Christmas lost popularity in the post -Revolutionary War era because it was thought to be a British custom, and we were all things non-British at that point.
Charles Dickens was a literary stud in his day. You could say he was one of the first celebrity authors. He popularized the "book tour" and many things which are commonplace now in our society. I think pretty much anyone with a high school education could quote you one Dickens line, even if it is only "Bah! Humbug!" The purpose was to revive the Christian spirit in the secular way.
If you notice when reading A Christmas Carol, there is little to no focus on religion. Dickens wanted to highlight the other important parts of Christmas...a general season of good cheer and spirit, excellent food and drink, family gatherings, and goodwill. He was the first, essentially, to take the "Christ" out of modern Christmas, and "made" Christmas a secular tradition for many Atheists, Agnostics, and non-practicing Christians it is today!
At the time Dickens wrote A Christmas Carol, Britain was kinda-sorta still celebrating the 12 Days of Christmas (from December 25th - January 5th, the time thought to be when the Magi brought gifts to the new baby Jesus). Dickens revised that in his novel to be just one day of family and friends and good tidings, much like we have today.
Dickens was very progressive for his time, and this actually helped his "reinvention" of Christmas.
I have nothing against Dickens. In fact, A Tale of Two Cities was quite possibly one of my favorite books read in high school. A Christmas Carol is one of my all time favorite stories (particularly the Muppet adaptation!) :) I think what Charles Dickens did for Christmas is pretty darn amazing, actually. Had he not written A Christmas Carol, Christmas would probably be just another day of the year today. But he revived the festive spirit and the holiday goodwill which was beginning to dwindle. And perhaps due to the revival of these things also came a revival in the Christian celebration of Christmas, although that seems to have dwindled a bit in the past few decades.
However, as I've mentioned I frequent the debate boards, and have found among the countless Christmas threads that Atheists and Agnostics often spite Christians for pretty much consuming December. Christmas is everywhere you look, everywhere you go. It is essentially impossible to escape, and Christians are often the scapegoat for the long shopping lines and mall craziness, the overspending, the tacky decorations, and annoying Christmas music. But what they are seeing in plain sight is 99% of the time not related to the Christian celebration, but the Dickens type celebration of Christmas. And I don't think his idea of using the Christmas holiday to spread holiday cheer, festive spirit, gather with family, and share goodwill is anything to be spiteful of.
Likewise, Christians shouldn't take it so personally if an Atheist, Agnostic, or non-Practicing Christian wants to participate in Christmas traditions. Afterall, we may not even have those traditions if it weren't for Charles Dickens' agnosticism (at least in this case, because it is said he actually was a Christian*), we wouldn't have Christmas as we know it today!
*Note: "Agnostic" wasn't actually a term until 1869, long after the publication of A Christmas Carol.
So, anyone got an extra $10k laying around?
As some of you may know, or may have read from previous blog posts, I'm a Titanic enthusiast. I have read 2 books lately about the disaster and have always found myself fascinated by it.
April 14-15, 2012 marks 100 years since the tragedy. Being a Titanic fan, I decided I would look to see if there would be any memorial events happening in April of 2012. I thought maybe it would be a nice excuse to take a trip to Belfast or Southampton, or in the poorest of circumstances, Halifax or New York.
Welp, I found one. The cream of the crop.
http://www.voyages-to-remember.com/reservations.html
What the above website details is a "Voyage" across the Atlantic. The ship leaves Boston (SOOOO close!) and heads to Halifax on April 9, 2012. After a day or two exploring Halifax, the ship heads off to the Titanic wreck site, about 300 miles south east of Newfoundland. There it stays, giving passengers real-time video of the wreckage until the end of April 15, 2012, when she heads back to Boston. Aboard the ship there will be experts and enthusiasts and Titanic historians giving presentations. There will be information for collectors and "Titaniacs" (which is just weird in my opinion). There will be family members of survivors (the last survivor died in May 2009 - she was 9 weeks old when Titanic sank) giving presentations.
In addition the accommodations are supposedly very luxurious and include high end food and beverage.
An interior stateroom (no windows) and all of the above can be yours for just...
$4,899 PER PERSON!!!
Talk about bursting my bubble. I was very excited about it. Knew it would be expensive...thought maybe we could save for it. But $10k is not happening.
I should add that the most expensive cabins on this ship are going for a cool $14,999 per person (Club World Owners Suite - only six left!)
Maybe I can go to the doc when the ship leaves and wave to those who, if this were 1912, could've afforded first class accommodations with private promenade decks. Definitely no steerage passengers on this voyage...
April 14-15, 2012 marks 100 years since the tragedy. Being a Titanic fan, I decided I would look to see if there would be any memorial events happening in April of 2012. I thought maybe it would be a nice excuse to take a trip to Belfast or Southampton, or in the poorest of circumstances, Halifax or New York.
Welp, I found one. The cream of the crop.
http://www.voyages-to-remember.com/reservations.html
What the above website details is a "Voyage" across the Atlantic. The ship leaves Boston (SOOOO close!) and heads to Halifax on April 9, 2012. After a day or two exploring Halifax, the ship heads off to the Titanic wreck site, about 300 miles south east of Newfoundland. There it stays, giving passengers real-time video of the wreckage until the end of April 15, 2012, when she heads back to Boston. Aboard the ship there will be experts and enthusiasts and Titanic historians giving presentations. There will be information for collectors and "Titaniacs" (which is just weird in my opinion). There will be family members of survivors (the last survivor died in May 2009 - she was 9 weeks old when Titanic sank) giving presentations.
In addition the accommodations are supposedly very luxurious and include high end food and beverage.
An interior stateroom (no windows) and all of the above can be yours for just...
$4,899 PER PERSON!!!
Talk about bursting my bubble. I was very excited about it. Knew it would be expensive...thought maybe we could save for it. But $10k is not happening.
I should add that the most expensive cabins on this ship are going for a cool $14,999 per person (Club World Owners Suite - only six left!)
Maybe I can go to the doc when the ship leaves and wave to those who, if this were 1912, could've afforded first class accommodations with private promenade decks. Definitely no steerage passengers on this voyage...
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
So Freakin' Cold
So it is really freakin' cold today. It was really cold yesterday and the day before too. The last 3 days we've been running below average temperatures and it doesn't look like we'll recover until the weekend.
I always say I'd rather be cold than hot. But that is only until it is really cold. The coldest I ever saw it get at UMass was -6, and that is just absolutely ridiculous. This morning when I left at 8am, the car said it was 22 degrees. Yick. Just the start of winter?
It was 37 degrees in Florida this morning.
What was that about global warming again? Oh right, that's why we changed the term to "climate change" :)
I always say I'd rather be cold than hot. But that is only until it is really cold. The coldest I ever saw it get at UMass was -6, and that is just absolutely ridiculous. This morning when I left at 8am, the car said it was 22 degrees. Yick. Just the start of winter?
It was 37 degrees in Florida this morning.
What was that about global warming again? Oh right, that's why we changed the term to "climate change" :)
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Tax Cut Extension
There has been a lot of talk recently about extending the tax cuts instated by Bush temporarily and set to expire at the end of December 2010. If congress did nothing, the tax cuts would expire and every tax-paying American would see an increase in their withholdings come January 1. Up until the past few days, there was very little knowledge about where taxes would stand on Jan 1, which in my opinion is completely unacceptable. Individuals and businesses deserve to know what they will be facing in terms of taxes long before they have to start paying them.
That being said, there are many different schools of thoughts on this. Conservatives want to keep the tax cuts for everyone. They think that raising taxes on anyone in the midst of a recession, or recovery from a recession, will stifle economic growth and inihibit a recovery in employment. There is valid concern there. The United States is a consumer-driven economy. We rely completely on purchases and investments for our economic health. If you take more money out of peoples' and businesses' pockets, the less they can spend/invest.
The other argument among conservatives is trickle down economics. They didn't want th expiration of the tax cuts on just the top tier of income earners because it is their belief that it is those making over $250k that provide the jobs to most Americans. Americans rely on small business a lot for employment, and many small businesses fall just over that $250k threshold. The theory is that those small businesses will be deincentivized to hire, and thus it will stifle job growth. This is known as the trickle down myth and I have yet to see really convincing evidence that it ever actually works.
Among the more liberal points of view is that the tax cuts should expire for those making over $250k, but should remain for those making under that mark. Their rationale is that the "rich" can afford it, and that NOT allowing these tax cuts to expire will only "cost" the country more and add to the deficeit. Also a valid concern, and I completely empathize with that point of view. They are also disbelievers in trickle down economics and (generally) believe that the top income earners are greedy SOBs who want to do nothing other than pocket their profits (vs. investing in human capital, etc).
Here is where I stand on this issue. I really have no inner turmoil about the tax cuts expiring for the top income earners. I do think they *can* afford it, and as I mentioned above, haven't seen any concrete evidence that trickle down economics helps during tough economic times. However, I am a true libertarian and believe the least amount of taxation as possible to get by is sufficient. I think that raising taxes on ANYONE in this economy cannot possibly be a good thing. I also believe that $250k is not anywhere close to "rich" and if they wanted to go that route they should raise that threshold to $750k or $1m. There'd still be plenty of people to tax.
President Obama compromised on this yesterday. The proposal is for the tax cuts to be extended for everyone for another 2 years. In exchange the congressional Republicans would have to accept an extension of unemployment benefits for 1 year. The liberals I know are very unhappy with the compromise. I haven't yet heard much from the conservatives. In a way, I'm glad Obama compromised because it shows his ability for team work and not trying to steamroll people. But I wish he compromised in letting the tax cuts expire for anyone making over $1m instead. That way the U.S. would generate more tax revenue to put towards the deficeit and yet still protect the most vulnerable businsses among us.
There is still a lot of negotiating to do and Congress has until 12/31 to figure it out. I hope it is much sooner than that!
That being said, there are many different schools of thoughts on this. Conservatives want to keep the tax cuts for everyone. They think that raising taxes on anyone in the midst of a recession, or recovery from a recession, will stifle economic growth and inihibit a recovery in employment. There is valid concern there. The United States is a consumer-driven economy. We rely completely on purchases and investments for our economic health. If you take more money out of peoples' and businesses' pockets, the less they can spend/invest.
The other argument among conservatives is trickle down economics. They didn't want th expiration of the tax cuts on just the top tier of income earners because it is their belief that it is those making over $250k that provide the jobs to most Americans. Americans rely on small business a lot for employment, and many small businesses fall just over that $250k threshold. The theory is that those small businesses will be deincentivized to hire, and thus it will stifle job growth. This is known as the trickle down myth and I have yet to see really convincing evidence that it ever actually works.
Among the more liberal points of view is that the tax cuts should expire for those making over $250k, but should remain for those making under that mark. Their rationale is that the "rich" can afford it, and that NOT allowing these tax cuts to expire will only "cost" the country more and add to the deficeit. Also a valid concern, and I completely empathize with that point of view. They are also disbelievers in trickle down economics and (generally) believe that the top income earners are greedy SOBs who want to do nothing other than pocket their profits (vs. investing in human capital, etc).
Here is where I stand on this issue. I really have no inner turmoil about the tax cuts expiring for the top income earners. I do think they *can* afford it, and as I mentioned above, haven't seen any concrete evidence that trickle down economics helps during tough economic times. However, I am a true libertarian and believe the least amount of taxation as possible to get by is sufficient. I think that raising taxes on ANYONE in this economy cannot possibly be a good thing. I also believe that $250k is not anywhere close to "rich" and if they wanted to go that route they should raise that threshold to $750k or $1m. There'd still be plenty of people to tax.
President Obama compromised on this yesterday. The proposal is for the tax cuts to be extended for everyone for another 2 years. In exchange the congressional Republicans would have to accept an extension of unemployment benefits for 1 year. The liberals I know are very unhappy with the compromise. I haven't yet heard much from the conservatives. In a way, I'm glad Obama compromised because it shows his ability for team work and not trying to steamroll people. But I wish he compromised in letting the tax cuts expire for anyone making over $1m instead. That way the U.S. would generate more tax revenue to put towards the deficeit and yet still protect the most vulnerable businsses among us.
There is still a lot of negotiating to do and Congress has until 12/31 to figure it out. I hope it is much sooner than that!
First Day Headaches
Why is it absolutely inevitable that I get a headache on my "first day" of anything? Yesterday was my first day of work at a new job. Headache. I remember getting decently bad headaches on every first day of school. I realize it is inevitable, so I've come to expect them, but it is doesn't change how annoying they are!
Especially when they continue into the night (keeping me up), and repeat for the next day...today. It is difficult to concentrate on a load of new information when the lights in this office are piercing into my brain! I think I am starting to be a mini migraine sufferer. They are not debilitating, but annoying, frequent, and quite localized to my left temple just behind my eye.
Enough for now, I have a lot to say about the tax cut extensions...will write later this afternoon!
Especially when they continue into the night (keeping me up), and repeat for the next day...today. It is difficult to concentrate on a load of new information when the lights in this office are piercing into my brain! I think I am starting to be a mini migraine sufferer. They are not debilitating, but annoying, frequent, and quite localized to my left temple just behind my eye.
Enough for now, I have a lot to say about the tax cut extensions...will write later this afternoon!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)