Home Again

Back from the achingly beautiful desert . . . enjoying the riotous delight of a place so wet the trees grow like weeds.  Excellent trip.  During which I, unusually for me when I visit the place, got almost no news and no internet time.  And was really quite happy that way.

Attempted to goof off one day and ended up doing my planning for the coming homeschool year.  Determined that there really just isn’t that much free time running around my life.   So I’m guessing the summer vocation will tranform into a full-time gig.

Encyclical remains just partly read.  The part I read was, as expected, entirely fabulous.

Speaking of reading and weighty topics, focus for this school year is going to be on Just War, legitimate self-defence & waging peace.  Maybe a little will trickle out onto the blog.  Probably very little will trickle out — I’m scrambling to get the house ready for the school year, and hope to hit the ground running August 17th (our legal school year opens the 15th, a Saturday) so we don’t run into the gotta-work-through-the-end-of-June thing that hit us this past year.

All that to say, do recommend your favorite titles on Just War and related topics.  And if you know of any such titles aimed specically at school-age *boys*, please oh please oh please speak up.

Have a good August,

Jen.

A new encyclical!

Woohoo!  Wildly excited to see that news, as I tried desperately to catch up on my goofing-off today.   [Dear Lord Jesus, thank you for giving us a Pope who writes things I am just barely smart enough to read.] Printed it out, will drag to Las Vegas next week with the rest of my overdue reading pile, and maybe write about it one day.   Meanwhile, the summer vocation goes very well in massively busy kind of way.  Hope you are having a good summer yourself.

Excuse of the month, I suppose

Crazy busyness ’round here.  Mostly the good kind, but it sucks up writing time.  You know I want to talk more about health care, and about 6,000 other timely economic and political topics.  Just not happening right now.   Goofing off is in short supply, and goofing off with brain engaged even more so.  One of these centuries I’ll get back into the swing of things.  Meanwhile I’ll note that the Darwins are doing plenty o’ posting these days, and I’m sure you can find others.

May the Best Budgeter Win

A few months ago (yeah, I know), I picked up a copy of The Medieval Military Revolution (Barnes & Noble 1998 – originally written in 1995 — Edited by Andrew Ayton & J.L. Price).  Been sitting on my shelf, inherited from TR, yet unread.  I was looking for something I didn’t find there, but I came across this thought in the editor’s introduction:

Those that live by the sword shall die by the sword, and this can be applied in a sense to governments and even states as well.  States went bankrupt, at least technically, through the cost of war, and the fiscal strain of long-term involvement in warfare was perhaps the single most important threat to political stability even in this most turbulent of periods.

In this case, the editor is writing about the mid-16th to mid-17th century.  But every century has its nations, and the realities of economics and defense don’t disappear over time.

When I was in high school economics, I can remember people trying to argue that somehow the US’s national debt just didn’t matter.  We were too big to fail, or by some bit of magic we could borrow as much as we wanted and nothing would really happen . . . it was bizarre. Didn’t make sense then, and still doesn’t.  I suppose we could always stiff our creditors in the end, but even that has its consequences.

The US is a mighty wealthy nation.  Wealthy people can waste a lot of resources and not feel the consequences the way poorer neighbors would.  But there are limits to our wealth.  We can’t just magically spend on anything we decide we want — even we must pick and choose.

***

And anytime we borrow? We have to pay it back out of future wealth.  The only time borrowing fuels growth is when the money borrowed is invested in something that makes us more productive. The hallmark of a chronic debtor, of course, is the conviction that every debt really was necessary, really did make the debtor ‘better off’.

But reality isn’t so.

In the current economic quagmire, households, businesses, and governments that had previously acted prudently and with fiscal restraint are managing fairly well.  A neighbor was laid off, but fortunately he had savings, was living beneath his means — he has a little cushion to get by while he looks for a new job.  The greatest crises today are coming among those who were massively in debt a year ago or more, and don’t know how to get by without yet more debt.  (Or, of course, stiffing their creditors.)

–>  Not talking here about those families and businesses that did everything ‘right’ during the flush times (which were not, for them, all that flush), but still struggle today.  Not talking about those whose reverses have been far greater than anyone could plan against.  Prudence today won’t withstand every possible storm tomorrow. But it sure improves your odds.

***

So I’m a bit alarmed by the current rush to spend, spend, spend.  Oh and it isn’t a democrat’s problem — I had a pit in my stomach prior to the presidential election, knowing that I could count on either party to be just as irresponsible.  I’m alarmed by things like trying to create new government-sponsored insurance programs *for people who already have health insurance*, when we haven’t sucessfully put together a program for those who don’t.

–> Frankly I’m really dissappointed in the democrats, because they aren’t actually coming through on helping people who actually need help.  Tons and tons of spending on vague programs to ‘stimulate’.  Er, how about we just get everyone who needs food fed?  Houses for *actual homeless people*?

A more personal example: I’ve a friend who has an undiagnosed breathing problem. She *stops breathing*.  She can’t afford a doctor’s visit to diagnose the problem.  Mmn . . . how ’bout we stimulate the economy by making it possible to get in for a doctor’s appointment if you’re a person who can’t work because you can’t, uh, breathe reliably??  That cash would trickle into the pockets of a receptionist, a maintenance guy, a lab worker, an MD — *and* we’d have a person who might be able to breathe all the time? And thus be able to go get a job? Hmmn?

***

End of the rant.  Have a good week.  Soon as I find my lost book, I’ll have a review up on the other blog.  Meanwhile am trying, as always, to clean the house, educate the children, exercise the ol’ mind, body & spirit, and all that other vocation-y stuff.  Hope y’all are doing well.  Oh, and hey, to keep you busy during my slackerlyness, here’s another cornucopia of social-issues rants: http://www.frontporchrepublic.com/ . Thanks to Bethune Catholic for the link.

Still Alive and All That

Didn’t realize it had been so long since my last post. Have written for you many times in my head, but apparently the whole ‘typing’ thing never materialized.  The free time has pretty much dried up lately, not really sure where it’s gone, though there are rumors it is in my garden.   Will get back here with some health care topics and other exciting stuff just as soon as I can.  Meanwhile, it’s spring!  Back away from the computer . . . Go play outside.

When Even the Buildings Are In Denial

For a cornucopia of social-issues posts, check out the Blogging Against Disablism Day blogfest.   I’m running behind on my own contributions, but I wanted to talk for a minute here about dumb architecture.  Not merely bad in the sense of ‘ugly’, for I must grudgingly admit that ugliness is in the eye of the beholder.  But dumb as in ‘doesn’t work’.  Buildings that don’t meet the needs of the people who use them.  Or would use them, if only they were useful.

What stuns me is not that there was a time when buildings were not made to be wheelchair-accessible.  There was, after all, a time when wheelchairs, like indoor plumbing, just weren’t a significant part of most people’s lives.  Would have been nice to have such conveniences, but you didn’t.  Too bad.  The architecture of those eras reflect that, and retro-fits to modernize can be a bit clumsy.  (But worth it!  In both cases!)

But I am continually amazed that we don’t, as a society, seem to have caught on to the bit about how people — all people — ought to be able to get in and out of a building, and even move around in it.  I’m reminded of when I lived in a little ground-floor room in Paris and that had a window that let out onto a courtyard.  I hosted a party at the end of the school year, and fully expected that my guests, if they wanted to relax on the grass outside, would simply climb through the window.  I was stunned to discover that not everyone includes climbing through windows as part of their traveling repertoire.

But I was young then.  I was not an architect, not even a builder.  My assumption that anyone (among my guests, who were all walking-around kinds of people) could and would climb through windows was naive and a bit self-centered.  I assumed that if I could do something, everyone else could, too.   Somehow you would think that building professionals would have grown passed that point.

I am fortunate to live in a home that was designed to be moderately wheelchair accessible.  Not perfectly so, but better than average.  One of the previous owners did a few renovations to make it even better.  And the sordid truth?  It isn’t that big of a deal.  Any grown-up who has, say, studied architecture, ought to be able to whip out fairly accessible homes without too much difficulty.  There’s nothing really magical about it.

[Tuning a building to the precise needs of a particular individual or family?  Yes.  That takes some doing.  But being able to get far enough into the ballpark that the residents can easily take it the rest of the way?  Not nearly so hard. ]

And curiously, I think that defaulting to accessible architecture would bring down construction costs.  Here’s why: in order to make a home wheelchair-friendly, you can’t crowd it up with a bunch of built-ins.   And built-ins — cabinets, counters, shelves, drawers, even closets and extraneous doors — these are things that drive up cost.

So why aren’t modern American homes built to a default level of accessibility?  It isn’t a lack of space — our homes are larger now, on average, than they were fifty years ago, and have fewer residents.  It isn’t that everything goes to two stories, and it’s just so hard to make a two-story home accessible.  If that were the case, a) single-story homes *would* default to accessible design, and b) two-story homes would still have an accessible first floor.  (After all, even if I don’t have a ground-floor bedroom for my wheelchair-using visitor, it sure is nice for that person to at least be able to *get in front the door*.)

So I’ve got to assume a sort of perpetual adolescence on the part of our building industry.  Not surprising in a culture that worships youth and beauty and vigor — I’ve known people with gray hair and grandchildren to openly deny they were ‘old’.   So I suppose if you are going to great lengths to fight any appearance of mortality or even maturity, intentionally purchasing a wheelchair-accessible home isn’t going to help you keep up the facade.  And for a builder, suggesting someone might actually want such a building some day is going to about as popular as my letting slip to my gray-haired companion that no, she was not actually all that young anymore.

It’s a sad kind of denial.  As I rode through the countryside yesterday on the way home from a family reunion, I was myself a little surprised at how many homes had a ramp tacked on to the front.   More informative than riding through the city, because in the country you aren’t likely to move when your house doesn’t fit your needs anymore, you just try to adjust your house as best you can.

Not the end of the world — a slapped-together plywood monstrosity of a ramp isn’t particularly attractive, but as I said, this post isn’t about beauty.   Look inside our family farmhouse, and the bathroom — converted from a bedroom, I think — betrays that same problem of The Home That Had To Be Brought Into the Present.

But there reaches a point when you’ve got to lose patience with builders and architects who are still building for Some Other Era.  Be a grown-up, builders. What you build, people *will* buy — most of us haven’t got a choice but to purchase what is on the market.  It falls to you to lead.  Recognize that humans are frail, mortal.  That not everyone can climb through the window.   And it just isn’t a good building if people can’t use it.

I was nominated for something !?!

Take a look: http://thecrescat.blogspot.com/2009/04/and-nominees-are.html

I’m there under  “Best Under Appreciated Catholic Blog”.

I think there must be voting soon (nominations end May 1).  You could vote for me.  Which would be a way of find out, not whether I was the *best* under appreciated catholic blog, but more likely, whether I am the least-appreciated under-appreciated blog.  I think I have a better chance of winning that distinction.

Meanwhile I will have to cancel all plans to clean house and educate my children, so that I can write lots of articles for voters to appreciate.  Or not.

(PS: I’m so excited.  If the person who nominated me would kindly speak up, I’ll thank you in person.   Gosh, I might have to create a whole new link category: People Who Nominate Me for Blog Awards.  That would be fun.  Mighty fun.  UPDATE: Thank you Julie D. This is twice now I owe you your own link category.  And I see that you have more blogs than I knew.  Wow.   Putting the thinking cap on to come up with a good category title . . .)

Indoor Plumbing

I am largely persuaded that indoor plumbing is Wonderful Thing.  However I noticed today one of the side-effects: the demise of outdoor plumbing.

I, being one of those old-fashioned mothers, send my children out to play.  As in “go outside and stay outside”.   I use often use this playtime to do activities better done without loud, slovenly, inquisitive bystanders.  (There’s me of course, loud, slovenly & inquisitive; but I haven’t figured out how to, say, pay the bills with *me playing outside* too.)

It is my understanding that mothers have operated this way for millenia.   And I do not envy my forbears in their rustic simplicity.  Just don’t.  But, I’ve noticed a modern bladder problem.  Children who can hold it for twelve hours straight suddenly need to visit the facilities every ten minutes if There Is A Parent Inside.

And then I realize:  Hmmn.  Outdoor plumbing.  It had it’s uses.

***

And next I think: What did people do before wasp spray?  If anyone knows, do tell.  I’m curious.  Because wasps seem like they would really love a good latrine.  And my rule is that any place I am exposing my flesh is not a place a wish to share my little wasp friends.  So I’m wondering how people used to address that inevitable clash with the stinging-set over who gets to use the facilities.

routine care and the uninsured

Anna in the combox on my last post points out that I glossed over the importance of routine care as a cost-savings measure.   She shares a specific example of a family member’s costly (and potentially deadly) health problem that could have been caught and treated earlier via routine care.   WSJ this morning has an article about the large number of clients health insurers are losing to layoffs.

–> Given the cost of privately-obtained insurance, and given that an unemployed person will naturally put off lower-priority expenses, the layoffs *will* mean people skip on routine care that could have saved much time and distress.

***

What’s the solution?  I don’t know.  It’s really tempting to, say, add some kind of health care aid as part of unemployment compensation. It seems pretty simple – in addition to that paltry sum of unemployment payments, you get a packet of health-care stamps or some such thing.

Objections?

Doing so creates an incentive to not return to employment unless it provides a better package than the unemployment package.  The way our unemployment system works now, we assume that you were pretty pulled together before you were laid off — you kept yourself healthy, you are up-to-date on your physical, you have some emergency savings, you weren’t living above your means.  Unemployment payments are, in my state anyway, a little something extra to tide you over while you scramble for a new job, any job.

Most Americans, it turns out, aren’t actually living this way.  Americans are, on average, in poor health, they haven’t got savings, they are in the habit of using credit all the time.   Not poor Americans, *all* Americans.   Conservatives have a well-trained stinginess-reflex that recoils at the thought of aiding and abetting these bad habits.   Liberals, on the other hand, might recognize the need for change, but observe that you won’t have much chance for self-improvement if you’ve just dropped dead.

My intuition is that the solution lies in the middle.  It is reasonable to set up some mechanism for providing routine preventative care and emergency health care to people whose situation falls outside the norm.  Whether due to temporary unemployment or some tragic longterm problem.  We should think about how to do so efficiently. (Health care stamps? Clinics? Private Charities? Insurance vouchers? School nurses? So many possibilities.)

And then, separately, we need to be working on addressing the myriad problems that are making our health care crisis so much more onerous than it ought to be.