Mon AM

Bounding down the stairs, somewhat agitated, came Bopper.  He doesn't like being late to school.  In fact, he begins to simmer if he's not there 15 or more minutes before he needs to be.  I quickly defused his agitation, "No school today, Bopp.  Snow day!"  His demeanor quickly reversed itself with a fist-pumping, "Yes!"  Ah, is there any thing more joyful to a kid than the words, "Snow Day?"  Of course, K and C were also pumped up for it, calling for the "Snow Day Dance" yesterday.  I won't go into the details, but it would be something I'd like to see, if only to watch neighbors' reactions.  But, whatever it is, it worked.  No word yet on the college closing.  My guess is I still have class tonight, which is fine.  I'd rather not miss.

And, thanks to this weekend, I finally think I know who's in this year's Super Bowl.  I know two brothers, the Harbaughs, are coaching against each other.  49ers v Ravens.  How odd it still seems to me to say anything other than "Baltimore Colts."  When did that change happen??????  To be honest, I have no interest at all in the game, none.  K and I are headed to a Super Bowl Party and that's my only interest.  But, as someone noted over the weekend, why isn't the game played on Sat instead of Sun?  Viewers would like it more.  Business/Restaurants/Bars likely would, too.  (More folks, I'd guess, would go out to see the game on Sat than on Sun, with work on Mon.)  Regardless, with all the very serious stuff going on right now, I wonder about a people who can spend so much energy and time on a football game.  (Perhaps it's a needed diversion; I don't know, but I don't think so.)  I guess that's going to take me a step closer to being tossed out of the "Man Club."  (Besides the NFL, I don't care for cars, fast boats, NCAA basketball or football--I received some strange looks this weekend when I noted I didn't watch the NCAA football championship game, which K confirmed--golf, or power tools.)

Do I ask too many questions?  I know I don't have a lot of answers, but I do have a lot of questions.  I think that harkens back to Socrates (or was it Plato or Plato citing Socrates?), "The unexamined life is not worth living."  I do believe that is true, at least for me.

I am worked up about the governor's call for new taxes on the roads.  Like anyone with a set of eyes, I realize that our roads are in terrible condition--always in terrible condition.  But, more taxes to repair them?  I don't think so, at least not yet.  The governor (who I think is a wolf in sheep's clothing) needs to convince me of several things before I change my mind.  First, my first pay check (for two weeks) of this year was $90 light (and I don't make a lot of money!).  Of course, it wasn't all state taxes, but still it was $90 short of what I brought home in Dec's check.  And, I haven't filed my 2012 state (or federal) income taxes yet.  By most media accounts, those will be higher, too, with increase taxes and fewer deductions/credits.  So, then, what is the government doing with my extra money, money they've stolen, er, taken from me?  I'd also like to know if businesses are also going to be nailed.  Perhaps they will, at the gas pump and with registration.  I don't know yet.  Will they be exempted?  Beats me.  But it seems that businesses use the roads a lot more than I do and, an important "and," they also tear up the roads a lot more than I do.  I believe Michigan has the highest weight limit for trucks in the entire US.  That needs to be addressed before I think that higher taxes are necessary.  And, where are the constuction guarantees?  Will the road repairers (is that a word?) guarantee that their work will last?  This can't be a perpetual cycle. 

I think I saw an article this weekend, buried back in the middle pages of the newspaper, that the state unemployment rate has gone up.  Hmmmmm......  And, I'd guess, there are lots of folks who aren't looking for jobs anymore, frustration taking root.  So, is the rate even higher than that reported?  I thought the business tax cut pushed through by the governor was going to fix all that.  Of course, the tax cut came without any conditions.  Pay fewer taxes, but you don't have to hire more people or even lower prices. 

I'm not sure the governor can do anything these last couple of years to persuade me to vote for him.  And, I don't think I can vote for a Democrat.  I guess it's write-in or third party--again.

I've asked here and in public, with all the crap being done to teachers (and remember, I think many of them deserve it), why would anyone of any competence ever want to be a teacher in this climate?  So, these ding-a-lings who think they know how to make schools better (After all, they went to school, so....  It's sort of like, "I played little league baseball so I can manage in the big leagues."  Their main efforts at reform are more testing, more testing, more testing....) are going to do so by attracting less competent people?  I wonder why their business models don't apply here; to attract the best managers, requisite high pay is required.  How interesting that they are selective in what business "best practices" (isn't that a grating, grating term?) to employ?  Anyway, one guy this weekend asked, of public sector employees in general, but teachers specifically, why those outside of those jobs are so adamant in asking the teachers to work for 1990s pay.  And, that's true.  K now, even exclusive of cost of living increases, has the disposable income of about 12 or 15 years ago.  I realize some folks have had it tough, some have lost jobs, taken lesser-paying jobs, have had hours cut, etc.  But....