You know, there IS a reason they have safety railings on boats like that
And people wonder why I get antsy when people stand up on long-tail boats...

The proof is in the passport.
I feel somewhat vindicated. I had several people ask me this year "Why do only 5% of Americans have passports?" and, while I didn't know where they got that percentage, at least I did have some reasonable arguments for why we'd have a low percentage. Main reasons being a) distance from nearest border, and b) don't need passport for closest borders (Mexico, Canada) or other nearby vacation spots (Caribbean). Well, I did recently hear that the policy is now changing, and US citizens will now need passports for those places, which kinda does make sense. But I also read in the May 1, '05 New York Times travel section that 60 million Americans have passports; that's more like 20% really, not 5%. And the State Department estimates that up to 12 million people will apply for passports in the next year. ...So I guess the question is: who's telling these Germans that only 5% of Americans have passports?

Er? (Or "blert?" as my cat would say)
So I obviously haven't been paying TOO much attention to politics etc. while away. And now I'm trying to catch up on this whole debate over Social Security. I don't know the whole story, but one thing is already confusing me. Bush keeps touting "personal accounts" as an important aspect of rehauling Social Security. Keeps saying people should have the same opportunities to invest their money for retirement as everyone else. Same opportunities apparently meaning "able to invest in stock market" or more specifically (call me cynical) in big businesses owned by his cronies. But, and forgive me if you disagree, isn't the stock market almost the same as gambling? Seems like the risks involved in stock market investment aren't the wisest thing for the average American to deal with. Has Bush, of all people, forgotten Enron, WorldCom, etc. so soon? Again, I'm no expert on the matter, but sounds fishy to me.

Agreement
I do, actually, agree with Bush on one thing he stated recently...that the way forward on energy issues is science. He feels we should spend more on researching nuclear power. I probably have different ideas on where the focus of that research should be (Sam: research on nuclear fusion; Bush: research on nuclear bombs to blow up our enemies and steal their oil), but at least he's stating that science is the way forward. Of course, I'd also like to comment that the way forward in medicine is also science, and yet he's still using his faith-based beliefs to block things like stem-cell research.
I just don't get how he can't see that a sound environmental policy, science-based medical and energy research policy, etc., would actually be GOOD for the economy and the country as a whole. Unless he truly doesn't care about the country as a whole...hmmm....
- posted by dearsirsam @ 11:46 AM