Enjoy Washington's Birthday

We all get to be a stick in the mud some of the time, a curmudgeon for the right season.  For a lot of us complaining about niche civic issues comes with a strange pride all its own. So try not roll your eyes as I present mine. President’s Day is un-American. It dilutes a full strength celebration of greatness by adding a pitcher of water in the form of mediocre leaders. 

 Some places still celebrate Washington’s birthday but most (like Oklahoma) call it President’s Day. Others (like Illinois) still celebrate Lincoln’s birthday as well as Washington but Abe doesn’t get a federal holiday.

It’s become the ‘trophy holiday’ for US presidents, everyone gets one. They don’t get their own of course, they have to share. Imagine doing this with the Oscars. Can you see Gary Oldman or Margot Robbie offering to share a best actor award with the field? Not all heads of state are created equal and a holiday that lumps them in together (wheat and chaff) is a disservice to a truly great man, George Washington.

Most states (before 1971) celebrated our first president’s birthday and if it happened to fall on a weekend, too bad, see you at work on Monday. The desire to have long weekends led lawmakers to shift it to a Monday and start calling it President’s Day. This happened a little over time. Shifting dates, blending leaders. So it’s now a mish mash of people and meanings all amounting to a free day from school and not much else.

Importance gets swept aside when we shoehorn critical holidays into convenient shopping and travel days. We have the Monday Holiday Law of 1968 to blame. I’d prefer celebrating Martin Luther King Jr. on his birthday and not the 3^rd Monday in January, but at least he isn’t sharing it with anyone yet. Neither sharing a day with anyone is Casimir Polaski, whom Illinois honors on the 3^rd Monday of March (again with the Mondays!). To be fair I had to look him up every year, I still don’t know. I’m sure whatever he did it was great though! That's kind of the point. He's another Monday guy.

“Off school this week?”

“Yeah it’s a holiday on Monday so you can sleep in”

“Perfect. Which holiday anyway?”

“Oh I can’t remember, some leader I guess”

"Some leader that did some thing years ago, old guy, probably dead by now"

I guess it’s my soapbox thing, we all need one. Clearly the issue is further down on just about everyone’s list of ‘stuff to change in 2019’.  I think a lot of people are genuinely confused that this is bugaboo for anyone, ever.

“Really? This is your big crusade? Against having Monday holidays?”

Well no, not for all of them. Labor Day makes perfect sense to hold on a Monday; it’s a day to celebrate workers by uh…well, not working I guess. It doesn’t matter though because it doesn’t represent some accomplishment or big idea that transformed life. It used to be big in the Soviet Union with…let’s call them ‘class struggle’ types. Thankfully that one lost some of its meaning.

Why stop at presidents of the United States? Why not include presidents of any civic organization or club, you know for inclusiveness. But then again, why draw the lines around American only groups? How many presidents (or whatever the country leader is called) exist around the world? They should count as well. How about the ones that didn’t get elected but tried really hard? Doesn’t seem to fair to leave them out. Has anyone ever wanted to be a president? We are celebrating you too.

Partly why I’m for tradition in holidays is that they were created for a specific meaning to honor a specific person, or idea. Any change in structure weakens the foundation that holds up the important day. Holidays are exclusionary. If they weren’t what would be the point? The ones who matter get the respect.

So George this free day is for you. You aren’t sharing it with Tyler, or Pierce, Arthur or Van Buren.  

State of Union '19

The State of the Union (SOTU) was Tuesday. 

Trump is great in these big moment settings and even manages to be charming and statesman like. I’m not sure if it’s the preparation or the event but he nearly always gets high marks from viewers. Most of the viewers are probably supporters, which skews the data, but not all. Conservative pundits hate the SOTU because they think it looks a lot like a king addressing his subjects. Their thinking goes something like this “We aren’t ruled by a king or monarchy and having a president give pronouncements from on high smacks of rulers and the ruled. Another complaint says the speech is basically useless as policy, no one remembers it weeks later and Congress gets back to telling the president to go pound sand. He tweets something nasty about “Pocahontas” and it’s back to normal.

Both criticisms are true but the first one is such an old fashioned one it hardly applies. Complaining about the monarchical vibe of the SOTU is like worrying about piracy in the Caribbean. It was a much scarier reality 200 years ago. If the office of president is more powerful today than it’s the fault of Congress for acquiescing law making abilities to the executive branch. Congress has the authority to declare war but we treat ‘going to war’ as a presidential decision.

 I’ll buy the second criticism though. The speech is generally forgotten by both parties within a week’s time. I like it as a historical record though. SOTU speeches go all the way back to Washington and it’s a good way to understand issues facing the country at the time.

I do get annoyed by the slow speech patterns, standing and sitting for every ‘home run’ idea or bravo moment. It forces the writers of the speech to aim for big claps. It’s a show. I understand why that’s irritating but much of politics is theater and this is just the biggest stage.

Here is what I liked. Trump reinforced his position on the wall and drove home the emphasis on security at the border. Will it get him the wall he needs? I doubt it. The votes aren’t there. It would have been better to get the funding last year and put the pressure on his own party to support it. They had a majority after all. I can’t see what changes in the minds of democrat lawmakers. It feels like positions have hardened on this whole business. He could always call for an emergency at the border and use allowable funds to construct the wall, fence. I don’t think he really wants to fight that court battle that would follow.

I like how he talks about abortion. He doesn’t use milquetoast language like “culture of life” when signaling support to pro-lifers. He says things like they “rip the baby out of the womb” which is admittedly hard to hear. But then, some things should be hard to hear. His proposal for a ban on late term abortion comes just after the horrific bill in New York passed which eliminates restrictions on the procedure. His tone of disgust was perfect.

I don’t like Trump’s embrace of North Korea or their nutty leader. Not only because he is a dictator who has starved his people and murdered his own family members, but because this is far from a win. It may turn out that the North dismantles its nuclear facilities over time but I doubt it. President Bush tried this and got burned. They have a tendency to promise or hint at what the US asks for and sign treaties, or agreement, or frameworks. But they always back out. Usually it’s a tactic so the US releases their seized bank accounts and frees up their ability to get money. Once awash in cash, they do what dictatorships do. Kick out inspectors and fire up the rockets for testing. Maybe this time will be different but I don’t think so.  

A couple things set off my spidey senses about the direction of the speech. I’m not picking on Trump because both Bush and Obama did it on similar things. Proposals suggesting the federal government ‘fix’ things never before within their purview. The family paid leave stuff is not an American idea, sorry. It’s unclear at this point who gets the bill for mom and dad’s absence from work. Will the government require insurance plans to cover it or does Uncle Sam fork it over at tax time? I’d like to know who came up with this idea? I imagine wonks dreaming up ways to spend funds they don’t have, “Hey I know, how about another welfare program? Yeah, we’ll say it’s for the kids. That always works.”

Taxpayers aren’t responsible for your time off, whatever the reason. Either use your vacation time or take the hit. Or, save some money and quit expecting us to work harder while you sit around in your sweatpants. Having kids is a responsibility. Having a job is a responsibility. Both are duties the individual need care for. The real problem isn’t the transfer of money, from productive to unproductive segments; it’s the addition of yet another entitlement. Entitlements become ‘rights’ shortly after being implemented. And good luck taking it away once it’s implemented. Sorry, this one strikes a nerve. 

 Does every social problem in the country need to be addressed by Washington? Are we really so helpless and incompetent to need a federal solution to everything that ails us? Some private employers have started providing family leave as a benefit. We have wonderful charities and churches that assist people in financial straits. If paid time off is going to happen it should happen in the private sector.  

In short, the SOTU was far cheerier than I expected. There was some forgettable parts about the nation’s infrastructure bill (state’s don’t fix their own roads?) and drug prescription prices (I guess that’s a thing). In reality presidents have to be laser focused on one maybe two issues. For now it’s immigration.    

The Value of Card Collecting

Value means different things to different people. Some never realized the value in collecting baseball or football cards because the market fell apart. Cards were meant to package and sell to kids so they could search for their favorite players. So even though the value of most cards is basically worthless, for kids who bought and traded the memories and the search are what matters.  

This would have been about 1988 or 1989, just as I was getting into middle school. I’m not sure if it was my age or the popularity of card collecting but it seemed most of my friends bought and traded. Upper Deck was the best card. Expensive and glossy, you paid at least twice as much as Tops, the cheapest. I had some other brands as well like Donruss and Fleer; Upper deck had the best look though. Their cards had a consistently high trade value. Like most kids I checked the price guides as much as possible. I never quite understood the magic of card pricing. Who exactly determined what a card was worth? Did a player’s performance drive the value or was it the scarcity of the thing?

I can understand how the condition of the card worked, nearly new looking surface with sharp corners were considered mint. The opposite was true for cards thrown into a shoe box and shuffled around like playing cards in a casino. Mostly that’s what mine were, crumpled and torn. I remember being in a card store and checking out the cards behind the glass case. I saw a familiar rookie card for Rams Quarterback Jim Everett. The guy was selling it for 12 bucks and I was pretty sure I had it. I rushed home and threw open the closet. I frantically dug through my bunches of mixed baseball and football cards until I found it. Boom! I knew it. There it was, the pricey card with the Los Angeles QB in his helmet. Problem was it looked like one of those Post It notes with a phone number you crinkled up and threw out, deep grooves crisscrossing the surface. The worst card in the box, it wasn’t even close. I could hardly read the print, looked like it got wet at some point. The only surprise was why I managed to keep it at all. Shortly after that I started using plastic sheets and binders.

Card price was something to check on and possibly brag about. It was never a way to make money or have a showy collection. It existed as a hobby until it didn’t. I always had the idea that by saving the cards I’d sell them someday for a good price. The dream of possessing some rare collection faded like the color on my Everett card. Basically everything from that era is worthless now. The market became flooded by card companies overprinting popular sets. We understand how supply and demand works so what happened to make everyone forget the rule? Too much of a thing forces its price down. Maybe the idea that cards could ever be “worth” something is silly on its face. Aside from a few pre-war tobacco cards (Honus Wagner) or a Mickey Mantel rookie, most have personal appeal. 

Any company that has the ability to create more of a thing due to popularity is going to do it. If you ever watch Antique Road Show or follow any of these ‘pickers’ type serials, rarity is usually the key ingredient in value. Either something is made by hand, or manufactured using a process we don’t use anymore. Certain items get created in small batches and keep their value, while old typewriters or vintage lamps haven’t been made for years. Card companies just kept printing to the point where no one could hope to make any money. But card collecting for those who just wanted cards of their favorite players was an adventure.

 I always looked for Nolan Ryan cards. I especially tried to find sets of cards within a series. Upper deck did a series of Nolan Ryan cards called “Baseball Heroes”. I think they did a few players the same way, with a full set of collectibles. They weren’t rare but looking for them became a mini event. I eventually got the whole series by trading or buying them from shops. I just googled them to see how much they’re worth, most go for $2 per card, sad really. But the same way a photograph evokes a memory, a 1991 Nolan Ryan card is surprisingly loaded with memories. In fact just flipping through the plastic sheets and carefully laying them one on top of the other brings specific events to mind.

The value for me is in the finding. Maybe that's a bit like saying, "it's the journey, not the destination". Collecting is a fun way to make weekend trips and vacations more enjoyable.  The card pricing racket was more mystery than formulaic standard. Once you get past rarity and condition, the only thing to do is find the best players, or the one’s you like. That’s basically what I did. Besides, what if you have a card worth $20? Who is going to pay you for it?

Better to hold on to it and remember what you gave up to get it. That's the real value anyways; who said baseball cards are worthless?

When Video Lies

The late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia never wanted cameras in his courtroom during oral arguments. His view, “what most of the American people would see would be 30 second, 15 second take outs from our arguments. I thought about these Covington kids and the clipped video with the Indian man. Scalia’s fear was that incomplete information and a rush to judgement would create an incomplete picture. More than that though, I think he assumed lawyers and judges would both play up to cameras for public spectacle. When the public is fed video segments in drips and drabs, it’s easy to tweak the messaging. He knew the media and how they operated. 

I’m sure everyone saw the video of the supposedly aggrieved Indian pounding a drum while a smiling kid with a MAGA hat stares him down. His friends can be seen in the background chanting something. The most I’d seen of the video is the clips from Fox and CNN while running at the gym. I didn’t have any context for the older Indian or the young kid (at first) but it did seem like the kid was taunting. Turns out No, not at all. The complete opposite of that. I don’t know why I’m surprised. These rush to judgement clips circulate so quickly and devastate everything in their path like a brush fire in a dry forest. The full video shows a black group (Black Hebrew Israelites) taunting the kids with epithets like “faggot!” and “cracker!”.

The Indian man who claims to be a Vietnam Veteran (Lie) goes on CNN and says the kids surrounded him (Lie). I guess these scary kids frightened him and he couldn’t find his way out (Lie). That people like this activist fake veteran exist is one thing. That supposedly respectable networks take his side of the story with no back story checking is dangerous. It’s journalistic malpractice! Lives are now destroyed because of a liar who was stamped ‘legitimate’ by CNN. It seems to me that he is taunting, trying to make this kid angry. Even if the story is the kids surrounding this man and mocking him, I don’t see it as a news item.

 High school kids (boys especially) can be particularly mean spirited and unaware of their surroundings. So even taking the original shots at face value, this is a big nothing. 

This whole thing comes down to soft targets. The kids were young and not likely to fight back so were fair game for cowards. It’s like those nature shows where the family of Lions hides behind some brush in wait for a pack of zebras to gallop by. They give chase. The young and weak ones that can’t run fast get eaten. Unlike predators though, groups that use class resentment and bullying tactics are villainous little turds full of malice.

 I’m pleased with the restraint and judgement of those boys to hold their ground. Their biggest crime is wearing the MAGA hat. Feminists wear pink pussy hats when they march, pro-choice women wear the white bonnet and red cloak from a ‘Handmaid’s Tale’, no one harasses them. Catholic school boys with red Trump hats, suddenly it’s a new age of oppression. It tells me if you’re put off by high schoolers with red hats, you have issues beyond their ‘offensive’ clothing. Showing red hats to SJWs is like waving a red cape in front of a bull. It’s pretty ridiculous.

The ugliest part of the story is the piling on from Twitter mobs. Some stories said the kids’ and their families were targeted by anonymous people on the internet. The school is closed because of the enormous numbers of threats. The entire town that houses the school is crawling with cops, and I assume feds, following up on terror threats. The media is complicit in this entire disgusting episode reminding us of how dangerous this social media age is. How many celebrities jumped on Twitter to encourage harassment of these kids? Kathy Griffin said she wanted names. You remember her right? She was “Actually” shamed for her magazine cover holding the severed Trump head. Why such aggressive posturing? She should know better.  

Video is immediate and tells the story the filmers want to share. Often it’s wrong, willfully and with malice. Scalia understood how video can skew, “I am sure it will mis-educate the American people.” It’s important for us, the consumer, to take a breath and wait. The traditional media is sadly beyond hope. They’ve traded journalism for activism while ordinary people get swept up and destroyed. A few bright spots persist where ethics and responsibility guide coverage but the profession needs a remake.   

The Look of Cities

What are some reasons cities and neighborhoods change over time?

 I was talking to an acquaintance about the current state of our city, Tulsa. We both own homes and have for close to 10 years. We’ve both seen our respective neighborhoods improve, rates have gone up, crime is down, new stores are going up. Much of the ‘sense’ one gets about a neighborhood’s improvement is subjective though. We know when one is declining. Rent signs litter the streets, boards replace windows in tattered houses and overgrown lawns threaten to swallow cars. Sketchy drifters wander through neighborhoods.

 If you’ve lived in a place long enough the decline is felt more than being obvious.

My friend complained that Tulsa was trying too hard to attract new money and push new homes into expanding areas. “Endless suburbia” he called it, clearly he didn’t want the city he calls home to change too much. I agree on some level. It’s a common concern that an infusion of a big company will create such a hike in prices that no one will be able to afford to live in the city. Seattle and San Francisco are examples where big companies moved in (or began) and displaced large chunks of the residents. The high salaries lead to high priced homes and apartments. Only the wealthiest residents can afford to live in the city and building new homes is nearly impossible with the strict codes. Tulsa is a long way from that but an increase in cost of living is likely with even modest growth.

 Downtown Tulsa expanded quite a lot since the BOK Center opened for business (2008) and started hosting large events. It’s been the peg for a sweeping increase in building. The drillers completed a new baseball stadium, high end apartments shot up across the street, countless restaurants, bars, retailers and boutique sellers popped up like spring dandelions. I used to take classes at the college downtown; there were a few restaurants but not much entertainment. In just a few years that entire strip of empty buildings and vacant lots boomed. The transformation is great for everyone; it brings in new money and puts life into a neglected spot.

A lot of the shops can’t keep up with the rent and close up in less than a year. Building booms don’t always create economic growth. Sometimes planners underestimate the real value or available money in an area. “If you build it they will come” only applies if you have at least one product everyone wants. The BOK Center seems to be what the city needed based on how much growth that’s happened since 2008, the year it opened.

So what is the optimal level of growth that keeps high paying jobs around while keeping housing affordable? Every city presents a different challenge but the ones with high cost of living also have the strictest zoning requirements for new housing. Mostly because people who already live there want to keep their property high and their neighborhoods relatively unchanged. It’s called NIMBY ism (Not In My Back Yard) and I’m sure you’ve experienced it at some point. Whenever a new apartment building is slated to go up around the corner from your part of the city, residents vote it down.

 Understandably when apartments start to go up the surrounding houses lose value. People move to areas with good schools and low crime. Large apartment complexes change all that. It isn’t popular to explain (it seems snobby) but it’s true. So the strict zoning is understandable but not appreciated by those hoping to find a place to live. Renters want good schools too. Apartments aren’t the only development subject to NIMBYism. Prisons, industrial factories, and big retailers like Walmart all face resistance when they try to build in cities or towns. Change is expensive because most people resist it.

Cities change for better or worse every few decades without any nudging from cities or states though. Some lose a key employer depriving the city of jobs and money. Countless mill towns sit empty surrounded by dilapidated structures and scant economic activity. Most cities more than one form of raising money, Detroit being a noticeable exception. The population trend in America is toward larger cities and away from rural communities, despite the expense. Mostly it’s a reflection of changing economics and the efficiencies of modern cities. We crave convenience.

 People get nostalgic about the place they grew up to the point where all change seems bad. We forget that our town or city looked a lot different before we lived there too. It will look different in another 20 years.

How many ethnic neighborhoods have changed hands over the years? Emigration to the US during the industrial revolution (late 19^th century) came mostly from Western Europe, later Eastern Europe and Latin America. City boroughs reflected that diversity for a time but started to blend as groups moved away.  I don’t imagine there was a huge population of West Africans in the early 20^th century in any major U.S city. Today there is. Immigrants leave the city for the same reasons in every age, more land, safer neighborhoods, cheaper costs of living.

I’m encouraged about the prospect that Tulsa is set to grow. We probably won’t get an Amazon headquarters for 30,000 workers or an NFL team anytime soon, but we’ll change as much as the city can handle and still be affordable. Hopefully common sense planning prevails and efforts to turn the downtown into a destination continue.   

Barriers to Cooperation

The president gave an address to the nation Tuesday night that lasted less than 10 minutes.

 I tuned in just as Fox cut away from announcing the event. Afterwards the Democrats gave a 5 minute or so rebuttal. Since then I’ve heard the address (the President’s) described as ‘effective’ from supporters and ‘alarmist’ from detractors. Those are my summations and not actual quotes but the two sides are hardening on this. The shutdown is getting close a month old and the country is no longer closer to an agreement on funding.  

Let’s recap. Congress does the budget every year about this time. Or at least they fund some parts of it. Last year the president wanted a wall but avoided a veto because officially the military would lose out on funding. I always thought that sounded like cover from some crafty politicos to tell Trump’s base as to why he didn’t get the money. Paul Ryan was hard against it anyway. 

When the Democrats say Trump should have done this last year, they’re right. He had more votes in theory at least. In either case the border issues had to be settled. This is the year for the border security and a “big beautiful wall” is the centerpiece of his campaign. He couldn’t exactly walk away with some half measures like additional drones. Washington DC does not want this wall. The Republican led House couldn’t make it happen last year and Democrats are less likely to.

President and Congress might have backed themselves into a corner. But it always looks that way when a shutdown is underway, who is going to blink? I do think we need a wall but at this point it feels more like the president needs a ‘win’ more than he needs the wall. Trump isn’t asking for much, a portion of the wall and 5 billion to do it. This is chump change for a 3 trillion dollar budget. Trump has threatened to declare an emergency and make the Army build it. That’s a mistake, an overreach. It’s likely a tactic to make the Democrats back off. I think he can make a strong law and order case to the American people and get the funding.

When large numbers of poor people desperate for work, escaping dangerous conditions travel they make themselves targets for smugglers. Those long treks are difficult for children and often they die of starvation or lack of water. Women become targets of rape and abuse at high rates. The president pointed this out in his address. For some, the argument about dangerous conditions and treacherous crossing is proof of the type of environment they’re coming from. "Who would undertake such a journey?" I’m sympathetic to that but countries do have a right to protect their borders. Should we stop bothering with a customs and enforcement department at all? A country without borders isn’t a country.

The biggest reason for the wall is the sheer amount of people coming in illegally. That increases the stress on social safety like welfare, law enforcement. Trump called the problem at the border a ‘crisis’. I don’t know what determines if it’s a crisis but not knowing who is in the country, to the tune of 12 million people is a problem. A wall is one part of a broad strategy to regulate traffic at the southern border. The border patrol, immigration’s courts for asylum and détente with Mexico are some of the other things. On the last point, Mexico offered a quick asylum process and jobs to members of the caravan in December. Most turned down the offer but at least it was on the table. 

 Mexico could stop most of the crossings by choking off the flow at their southern border. I’m not sure how they regulate their borders but clearly they aren’t doing enough. Their new president (Obrador) is at least making noise about keeping migrants in Mexico to apply for asylum in the US. This is the way it’s supposed to work. Anyone escaping a country for any reason has to apply for asylum in the first country they visit. The cases are backlogged in the US and most won’t get approved, but it constitutes an orderly affair.

For all Trump’s angry tirades and criticism of Mexico, Congress, MS-13 and crime in general, he has one solid point. This illegal immigration issue should have been settled years ago. American citizens can be forgiven for not trusting their government to strictly enforce border control. The big immigration bill from 1986 (Simpson-Mazzoli) failed to prevent future crossings. Illegals were given temporary status which, following employment rules could be upgraded to citizenship. The bill was supposed to punish businesses that hired illegals but never did. So it basically just amounted to amnesty and not much else. 

When George W Bush tried the same thing in 2007 the attempt fell flat. Enough Americans didn’t want the amnesty portion to go through while the border enforcement stuff got purposely left out. Bush’s plan awarded the trophy before the race; it never stood a chance.

 There are too many unguarded spots and vast stretches of land where a wall, or barrier, or fence can work. Border patrol agents largely support building more fencing because it makes their job easier. We should trust their judgement on this.

   

Let’s talk about worker programs and visas after the border is secure, not before then.

Changing Colors

I finally finished with the painting project I meant to do this past summer. Actually “finished” isn’t quite right. I still need to hang the pictures and art. I’ll need some new ones as well since the blue doesn’t match some of the reds and browns I had up before. What is it about doing one big project that makes everything else seem incomplete? Suddenly the kitchen needs a new floor, cabinets and light fixtures. Don’t forget the laundry room and that ridiculous looking threshold leading out onto the deck. Painting at least is relatively cheap. A lot of home projects, even for DIY superstars, get expensive quick. Usually something needs to give, either that summer vacation to Yellowstone the new F150. The paint, brushes, tarps and tape set me back a little, but I’m not giving up much. 

 I decided a few days ago that I really need to do the ceiling. Only after looking at the newly colored walls does the top look unacceptable. It’s sparse with bits of white paint spread thinly, like an Oreo cookie with the inside eaten out. The texture isn’t exactly smooth or regular and I have no idea what the finish was supposed to be. I guess it’s somewhere between an eggshell and a satin but it’s too shiny to be a flat white. I decided I like the flat white on the trim. Especially with a shiny satin finish on the walls, the contrast from dull to bright is noticeable. Honestly, listen to me. I’m going on like a Home Depot paint pro, wearing an apron, gesturing toward the brushes and blathering about contrasting color. I repaint walls in just under a decade and I’m qualified to opine about pigments and shades. It took 6 months to find the right blues. It might look too much like the bedroom of an 8 year old boy but at least it’s done.

Over the last few nights I’ve come home from work and put in a few hours clearing furniture and taping off windows and door frames. Here’s what’s strange, I imagined I’d be exhausted after the extra work but I enjoyed it. Anytime I can work and listen to a podcast or put on a football game, it’s a successful day. It must be the way I’m wired. I like to check things off lists, not just physical lists (but yeah those too) the mental ones that keep tapping me on the shoulder and asking when I planned to get to it. The only tough thing with painting is the mess and the cleanup. No one likes it but unlike say, framing a shed, it doesn’t come with the hassle of measuring and cutting. Not to mention poor measuring, bad cutting and throwing tools at the unfinished shed. So yes, I see more painting and list checking in the future, less framing.

I see similarities between writing and home projects. Both are outside of my regular paid job but necessary for long term value. Writing is educational, it forces me to think critically and organize ideas under philosophical principles even if I don’t always understand them. I write some copy for money but mostly it’s for me. Having home projects is practically rewarding because I’m adding value to the house, in very real terms. Both teach skills that translate to money with enough effort.

I’ve written in different ways about making the most of my time, partly because I tend to waste it. I’m far too likely to blow off a few hours watching TV or reading. Nothing against resting, we all need it. That nagging voice to stop wasting time gets louder every year though. Sometimes just changing habits is enough to shake off the laziness, the boredom, the sluggishness. Rearrange the way in which daily routines play out.

 I realize I’m writing this just a few days after the New Year. It’s a coincidence really, then again maybe not. Like most Americans I’m conditioned to start thinking about ‘newness’ at this time of year. What goes, what improves, what begins, what ends?

For me it’s about purpose. Be purposeful in every task, every essay, every project. So I started with paint colors and finished with New Year’s resolutions. Happy New Year.