I've never advocated for the Alternative Minimum Tax because it never affected me. Without giving away too much on how I earn, it seems every time the waves of the AMT reach my financial front door, they seem to be swept away by another few bags of sand, in the form of a "patch."
The AMT is a lovely little tax that has only two rates - 26% and 28%. If you reach the magic IRS amount, you will be made to calculate your income tax twice - first through the traditional method, and then through the AMT - and then pay the higher tax amount. With the AMT, you cannot claim the standard or personal deduction; other deductions are very limited. You would end up paying a LOT more in taxes, and you'll be very lucky to escape alive (with a refund).
Over the past few years, the AMT has become more like a surf wave that hits more houses, as it has never been indexed to inflation since 1969. It would make sense to raise the AMT level, rather than having tens of millions of middle class earners to fork over an obscene amount of tax.
A new, revised AMT would involve the following:
1. Those earning more around $250,000 for singles, $375,000 for head of household, and $500,000 for married couples would automatically be subject to calculating the AMT. Once the AMT is paid for the year, a credit is applied to next year's taxes.
2. The percentages on which levels would be increased from 26% to 33% for $250,000-$500,000 and from 28% to 35% for above $500,000.
3. All members of Congress - including the President - will automatically be subject to the AMT for as long as they hold office.
Now, I don't earn $250,000 a year, but the people who would be affected would be the same people clamoring for higher taxes - like celebrities, sports players, entertainers, activists, and other lobby groups. It would certainly shut them up when they see that they're on the hook with Uncle Sam for at least $82,500 - the cost of a luxury car, a vacation to an exclusive island, a Rolex, or a shopping spree in New York - and perhaps more, because the AMT doesn't allow deductions. They cannot schmooze away what they really owe with fancy accounting footwork - they have to bite down and write that check. It would be a treat to watch Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and other billionaires be forced to fund the government to the tune of $350 million per billion.
This is what Obama should unequivocably advocate for - updating and raising the level of the AMT, while excluding a lot of middle class earners from it. By doing so, it would bring in real revenue from the real rich - those with an aristocratic attitude who want to influence the daily lives of others through their caprice, their arrogance, and their profligacy. Recalibrating the AMT also alienate and infuriate all his friends and supporters that contributed millions to his (perpetual) campaign, only to be backstabbed with higher taxes.
Maybe with elections, forced retirements, and other activities, some authentic tax reform will come around that everyone would agree would be fair, bring in the appropriate revenue, and finally end class warfare. But you and I know that Congress, given short time, would probably put in quick fixes until the same, tired, cliched drama rolls around next time.
12/22/2012
12/01/2012
The Fiscal Blarney Stone
It is rumored that the Blarney Stone in Ireland gives the one who kisses it magical powers of conversation. If the Irish have transported even a small part the Blarney Stone to Washington, somehow it's given its politicians the gift to bullshit the entire nation.
What we have is not a fiscal cliff, nor a bump, curb, ant hill, or anything else. It's a public pissing match between the radical wings of the left and the right in Congress, trying to put their version of fiscal and social utopia in place and trying to establish total power. Whether it's taxes, entitlements, spending, or anything else, someone's going to be hurting no matter what resolution comes about.
Which is why I say do nothing. Let the tax rates skyrocket, let the cuts to spending come home roost. Let everyone share in the misery of everyone paying high taxes, watch the unemployment rate skyrocket, and then maybe, just maybe, the public who willingly votes people into office on looks and promises will dump these losers, hacks and know-nothings out in 2014 with quadruple the ferocity of 2010.
Simply do nothing - don't fix a damn thing. For the first months, people will be fed up with gridlock in Washington. Then the volume will get louder and louder until someone with guts says, "let's cut the crap and get things moving - or our political careers are toast."
And by all means, keep talking smack to one another, Congress and Mr. President, until someone lets the real agenda slip out of their mouths - total and absolute control over the entire nation. The first person who utters on camera - even off the record - "we're doing this to grab power," and their party will be rendered into the ash heap of political irrelevancy. It doesn't matter who does it - all it takes is one admission.
But don't call this a crisis. It's a pure pissing match between the radical wings, all broadcast by a willing press. Nothing more, nothing less. And its only resolution will be to keep the status quo and kick the can down the road for another year - unless a brainstorm of lightning hits Washington and suddenly gives its politicians common sense.
Update: Jonathan Krugman of the New York Post comes up with the truth: Obama wants to raise the the debt ceiling again so the government can spend more. That's what happened the last time until Congress came to a "resolution." Again, I say let everything melt down, go into a hellish talespin, and only then will someone come forward and say, "stop acting like pissy little drama queens and come to a solution - or else we vote you all out."
What we have is not a fiscal cliff, nor a bump, curb, ant hill, or anything else. It's a public pissing match between the radical wings of the left and the right in Congress, trying to put their version of fiscal and social utopia in place and trying to establish total power. Whether it's taxes, entitlements, spending, or anything else, someone's going to be hurting no matter what resolution comes about.
Which is why I say do nothing. Let the tax rates skyrocket, let the cuts to spending come home roost. Let everyone share in the misery of everyone paying high taxes, watch the unemployment rate skyrocket, and then maybe, just maybe, the public who willingly votes people into office on looks and promises will dump these losers, hacks and know-nothings out in 2014 with quadruple the ferocity of 2010.
Simply do nothing - don't fix a damn thing. For the first months, people will be fed up with gridlock in Washington. Then the volume will get louder and louder until someone with guts says, "let's cut the crap and get things moving - or our political careers are toast."
And by all means, keep talking smack to one another, Congress and Mr. President, until someone lets the real agenda slip out of their mouths - total and absolute control over the entire nation. The first person who utters on camera - even off the record - "we're doing this to grab power," and their party will be rendered into the ash heap of political irrelevancy. It doesn't matter who does it - all it takes is one admission.
But don't call this a crisis. It's a pure pissing match between the radical wings, all broadcast by a willing press. Nothing more, nothing less. And its only resolution will be to keep the status quo and kick the can down the road for another year - unless a brainstorm of lightning hits Washington and suddenly gives its politicians common sense.
Update: Jonathan Krugman of the New York Post comes up with the truth: Obama wants to raise the the debt ceiling again so the government can spend more. That's what happened the last time until Congress came to a "resolution." Again, I say let everything melt down, go into a hellish talespin, and only then will someone come forward and say, "stop acting like pissy little drama queens and come to a solution - or else we vote you all out."
10/30/2012
When "single (blank)" is code for "state monopoly"
Massachusetts operates its liquor stores by letting independent distributors purchase and sell the liquor in retail stores. Other stores let the state itself price and distribute the booze - a prime example being New Hampshire, where you can buy certain kinds of beer in drug stores but you could only buy the hard stuff at State Liquor Stores.
Due to yesterday's Hurricane Sandy, many stores were closed up and down the Eastern Seaboard. Most reopened today - except for all liquor stores in Pennsylvania (via Consumerist, Philly.com), which closed per their Liquor Control Board "to assess the damage from Hurricane Sandy."
Now, if that meant "to prevent people from looting the stores for free liquor," that's one thing (and understandable - but no one should be denied a tipple in between cleaning out from a hurricane). If it means "we want to make sure none of the stores were damaged," it's fine. But when it's a vague phrase meant to keep people in the dark (no pun intended), and when people are crossing into Maryland and Delaware to purchase - it raises a lot of eyebrows.
One of the comments in Philly.com, however, drew my attention. In reference to Pennsylvania's oft-maddening liquor purchase laws, which would make Ben Franklin drink,
In fact, "single (blank)" is shorthand for state monopoly in anything. ("Medicare for All" is the cynically cutesy code for "You have no choice for healthcare other than what we're offering, and if you don't like it, tough.") This is why it makes sense when people want "single payor" healthcare, they really are referring to a state monopoly where a thick, unwavering bureaucracy makes every decision on health care as if they have a rubber band firmly tightened over their hinterparts, controlling every single aspect of healthcare from what we eat, how much exercise we get, how much sleep we get, and what medicines we're allowed to take. The state and only the state gets to determine things, not individuals or businesses.
And that's what people really believe to their own selfish and myopic means: that if they're ruled over by the state, they will be treated benevolently. Most often, they realize the harsher reality of a dictatorship: no room complaints and criticism, no freedom of movement, and a huge cult of personality they must honor, or else.
Due to yesterday's Hurricane Sandy, many stores were closed up and down the Eastern Seaboard. Most reopened today - except for all liquor stores in Pennsylvania (via Consumerist, Philly.com), which closed per their Liquor Control Board "to assess the damage from Hurricane Sandy."
Now, if that meant "to prevent people from looting the stores for free liquor," that's one thing (and understandable - but no one should be denied a tipple in between cleaning out from a hurricane). If it means "we want to make sure none of the stores were damaged," it's fine. But when it's a vague phrase meant to keep people in the dark (no pun intended), and when people are crossing into Maryland and Delaware to purchase - it raises a lot of eyebrows.
One of the comments in Philly.com, however, drew my attention. In reference to Pennsylvania's oft-maddening liquor purchase laws, which would make Ben Franklin drink,
I take "single buyer" to be the code for "state monopoly." Single buyer implied some nice middle-aged guy named Fred works in Harrisburg and buys all the alcohol for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. State monopoly evokes deep bureaucracies that we thought had died with the Soviet Union.
"The truth is if [the Liquor Control Board is] run really efficiently, and being a single buyer for the whole state, this system could really have the lowest prices anywhere."
In fact, "single (blank)" is shorthand for state monopoly in anything. ("Medicare for All" is the cynically cutesy code for "You have no choice for healthcare other than what we're offering, and if you don't like it, tough.") This is why it makes sense when people want "single payor" healthcare, they really are referring to a state monopoly where a thick, unwavering bureaucracy makes every decision on health care as if they have a rubber band firmly tightened over their hinterparts, controlling every single aspect of healthcare from what we eat, how much exercise we get, how much sleep we get, and what medicines we're allowed to take. The state and only the state gets to determine things, not individuals or businesses.
And that's what people really believe to their own selfish and myopic means: that if they're ruled over by the state, they will be treated benevolently. Most often, they realize the harsher reality of a dictatorship: no room complaints and criticism, no freedom of movement, and a huge cult of personality they must honor, or else.
8/09/2012
The real meaning behind "you didn't build that"
Mark Trumbull of the Christian Science Monitor puts forth an excellent column behind Obama's "you didn't build that" speech.
Here is the complete excerpt:
"You didn't build that" to me, doesn't mean "The government built it, it gets all of the credit, so don't try anything funny." It's more astonishment and amazement that without even the grain of help the government could give (better yet, the rules and regulations it could impose), the government is saying, "C'mon, are you serious? You got absolutely zero help from us or anyone else, and it's successful?" Then once the person proves their success, the government can say, "Well done."
Again, reading the whole speech and not cherry-picking certain phrases the left and right like, you get the full picture.
UPDATE 9/2/2012: Kyle Smith of the New York Post has more.
Here is the complete excerpt:
"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."And also the final summary, emphasis mine:
"The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together."Now if you put both of those phrases together, they do make an abundant amount of sense, don't they? Any President who is mindful that (a) people have a great opportunity to be successful and (b) are willing to put forth their dreams can do it. You could of course do everything on your own, from the sweat of your brow, and turn out to be wildly successful, but it's an uphill battle. If you get more people involved, it makes the job a lot easier.
"You didn't build that" to me, doesn't mean "The government built it, it gets all of the credit, so don't try anything funny." It's more astonishment and amazement that without even the grain of help the government could give (better yet, the rules and regulations it could impose), the government is saying, "C'mon, are you serious? You got absolutely zero help from us or anyone else, and it's successful?" Then once the person proves their success, the government can say, "Well done."
Again, reading the whole speech and not cherry-picking certain phrases the left and right like, you get the full picture.
UPDATE 9/2/2012: Kyle Smith of the New York Post has more.
6/30/2012
Chief Justice Roberts' neat tricks
Chief Justice John Roberts did something I like
in regards to the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare - it was certainly
not a dirty trick, but a fairly neat one in its cleverness and
simplicity.
After a few days of celebrating, chest-thumping, and self-congratulation, the hangover from the people who wanted ACA upheld will leave them thinking about something else. "ACA is upheld, but what did they say about that tax thingy?"
In an election year, raising taxes in an election year is an election killer. Walter Mondale, when running for President in 1984 against Reagan, stated thus when nominated by his party: "By the end of my first term, I will reduce the Reagan budget deficit by two-thirds. Let's tell the truth. It must be done, it must be done. Mr. Reagan will raise taxes, and so will I. He won't tell you. I just did."
Little wonder why Mondale was trounced; Reagan won 49 states; Mondale his own home state of Minnesota plus the District of Columbia. 525-13 was the soundest trouncing of a Presidential candidate since 1936.
If you were running for office, would you want to celebrate imposing tax increase on those who don't have health insurance? If a person doesn't obtain health insurance in the first year of ACA in 2014, they pay a $95 per year/1% of income fine. Later on, it increases to $220/2.5% of income fine. Multiply that by hundreds of millions of people who can't afford or choose not to purchase health insurance and you have the biggest tax increase in American history, as the ACA will be funded not just with people who elect to pay the fine, but people who might be fined for not having adequate health insurance as defined by the government. Update 7/1/2012: Terry Keenan of the New York Post has more - including fines for small businesses paying anywhere from $40,000 to $140,000 for not supplying health insurance to workers.
Chief Justice Roberts' tricks? First, he took away Obama's ability to implement the ACA through executive order, which might have happened if the ACA were struck down and caused even more problems (executive branch usurping the judicial branch would have caused a huge firestorm). Second, he gave Obama and the remaining Democrats the distasteful task of telling voters why the ACA must be funded through taxes. Voters who brought in the Republicans in 2010 through a "shellacking" will now likely make sure those who mention ACA as "good for them" be drummed out of office. Third, and most importantly, Roberts assured the public that judicial activism - ruling from the bench - does not replace or circumvent the right to vote to strike down laws.
Hence, you could be a judge who is hell-bound to rule for their own whims and biases, yet it ultimately comes down to the voters who will make the final, absolute decision to uphold or strike down a law, directly through referendum or indirectly through voting in someone who will strike down the laws in question. That's what voters did with Scott Brown in 2010 and with Congress months later - they took their displeasure to the ballot box.
Chief Justice Roberts handed the Obama administration a victory - but not a victory they want to promote. In effect, Chief Justice Roberts said, "Try to defend your law as a tax increase on every single American - and don't be surprised if more voters decide to speak loudly through the ballot box."
Full disclosure: I work for a health insurance company. My opinions do not reflect those of my company and are wholly my own.
After a few days of celebrating, chest-thumping, and self-congratulation, the hangover from the people who wanted ACA upheld will leave them thinking about something else. "ACA is upheld, but what did they say about that tax thingy?"
In an election year, raising taxes in an election year is an election killer. Walter Mondale, when running for President in 1984 against Reagan, stated thus when nominated by his party: "By the end of my first term, I will reduce the Reagan budget deficit by two-thirds. Let's tell the truth. It must be done, it must be done. Mr. Reagan will raise taxes, and so will I. He won't tell you. I just did."
Little wonder why Mondale was trounced; Reagan won 49 states; Mondale his own home state of Minnesota plus the District of Columbia. 525-13 was the soundest trouncing of a Presidential candidate since 1936.
If you were running for office, would you want to celebrate imposing tax increase on those who don't have health insurance? If a person doesn't obtain health insurance in the first year of ACA in 2014, they pay a $95 per year/1% of income fine. Later on, it increases to $220/2.5% of income fine. Multiply that by hundreds of millions of people who can't afford or choose not to purchase health insurance and you have the biggest tax increase in American history, as the ACA will be funded not just with people who elect to pay the fine, but people who might be fined for not having adequate health insurance as defined by the government. Update 7/1/2012: Terry Keenan of the New York Post has more - including fines for small businesses paying anywhere from $40,000 to $140,000 for not supplying health insurance to workers.
Chief Justice Roberts' tricks? First, he took away Obama's ability to implement the ACA through executive order, which might have happened if the ACA were struck down and caused even more problems (executive branch usurping the judicial branch would have caused a huge firestorm). Second, he gave Obama and the remaining Democrats the distasteful task of telling voters why the ACA must be funded through taxes. Voters who brought in the Republicans in 2010 through a "shellacking" will now likely make sure those who mention ACA as "good for them" be drummed out of office. Third, and most importantly, Roberts assured the public that judicial activism - ruling from the bench - does not replace or circumvent the right to vote to strike down laws.
Hence, you could be a judge who is hell-bound to rule for their own whims and biases, yet it ultimately comes down to the voters who will make the final, absolute decision to uphold or strike down a law, directly through referendum or indirectly through voting in someone who will strike down the laws in question. That's what voters did with Scott Brown in 2010 and with Congress months later - they took their displeasure to the ballot box.
Chief Justice Roberts handed the Obama administration a victory - but not a victory they want to promote. In effect, Chief Justice Roberts said, "Try to defend your law as a tax increase on every single American - and don't be surprised if more voters decide to speak loudly through the ballot box."
Full disclosure: I work for a health insurance company. My opinions do not reflect those of my company and are wholly my own.
6/20/2012
A thirst for common sense
Mayor Michael Bloomberg introduced an idea to limit soda sizes to 16 ounces. The limit is only for sugary drinks that have over 25 calories per 8 ounces. Diet sodas and water would likely exempted. However, the city of Cambridge thinks this is an equally delightful idea, would likely include ALL drinks, all the name of "the war on obesity."
But myopic rules like these don't work. They're designed to be stifling and show the laziness of governments not to do their research on health, to knee-jerk their way into control of the populace who consumes these drinks. This is why rules like this get ridiculed; no law is worse than when proposed by someone who doesn't like what others do (and is tyring to get money from the government to fund such cockeyed schemes) and try to control others.
Furthermore, by disguising these stiff laws as "it's for your own good," they hide the real motivation behind them, which is "we don't like what you're doing, regardless of it being harmless, and we'll prevent you from doing it any way we can." Types of laws like this usually devolve into resentment, confusion, and then revolt and black markets. See the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s for an example of that success story.
A better idea would be to suggest that occasionally, a 20 ounce drink with as much sugar as your pancreas can handle is fine, so long as you balance it out during the day. That's better than being laughed at as a crank and a control freak.
But myopic rules like these don't work. They're designed to be stifling and show the laziness of governments not to do their research on health, to knee-jerk their way into control of the populace who consumes these drinks. This is why rules like this get ridiculed; no law is worse than when proposed by someone who doesn't like what others do (and is tyring to get money from the government to fund such cockeyed schemes) and try to control others.
Furthermore, by disguising these stiff laws as "it's for your own good," they hide the real motivation behind them, which is "we don't like what you're doing, regardless of it being harmless, and we'll prevent you from doing it any way we can." Types of laws like this usually devolve into resentment, confusion, and then revolt and black markets. See the prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s for an example of that success story.
A better idea would be to suggest that occasionally, a 20 ounce drink with as much sugar as your pancreas can handle is fine, so long as you balance it out during the day. That's better than being laughed at as a crank and a control freak.
6/16/2012
Five Years from Now: A new kind of commencement speech
I got this idea from Suldog, who in turn got his idea from a commencement speaker who put forth a pretty astringent speech to a set of high school students in Wellesley. Mine might not be as funny as Suldog's, but all I ask is that you read.
Good morning.
I'm not here to give you a happy, "the world is yours" speech. I'm here to give you an idea of what happens in the real world - not the overpaid celebrity commencement speech world.
In the past few weeks, you've cleaned out your dorm rooms, said your final goodbyes, had your final off-campus party, survived your final collegiate hangover, and likely had your university supply you with your usual senior tradition.
This morning, you are here in your shirts and ties, your best dresses, your hair combed and curled and blown out just so, wearing your best shoes or heels, so your chancellor or principal can hand you a piece of paper stating you've met all the requirements of your degree.
Fast forward to five years from now.
Today, you may wear your spiral curls, spread out on your shoulders like the goddess Aphrodite, wearing your favorite slinky dress you wore to a sorority party where you met your future husband, plus a sparkly pair of Louboutin sandals to show off your opal-painted toenails. Five years from now, you may be pregnant with your second child, with one screaming two year old in your ears, your hair tossed in a frightful mess, and cursing the husband you met at the sorority party for "working late" again, wondering if he's having his way with the secretary in his office.
Today, you may wear a Hugo Boss suit, a $125 tie, and tied shoes. Five years from now, your human resources department, with your supervisor, manager, and two HR representatives, will hand you a box for your personal belongings because the company has gone out of business. The remainder of the company will get that speech too, but as there is no more money, there will be no severance. For many weeks after, you will not be able to find a job; whatever you did save will dwindle to pocket change; your health insurance will be cancelled, and that the only jobs you're qualified won't even cover your rent.
Today, you may have ended your academic career with straight A's from primary school, through middle school, high school, and college. Your 4.0 GPA has showered you with accolades, praise, and the title "summa cum laude." You were likely the class valedictorian. Five years from now, you're in a hospital bed, IV's dripping with chemotheraputic poison because your PCP didn't like a spot on your brain and it turned out to be Stage IV brain cancer - which explains the slurred speech, the migranes, the dizzy spells, the vomiting, and the occasional spacing out. All of your hair is gone; you've dropped from a robust weight to a thin, cachexic skeleton of yourself, praying for that last seizure or the death rattle.
Of course, today you're just here to get the hell out of this college. You didn't want to be here; you got a 2.0 GPA just to avoid academic probation; you partied all the time, took drugs, and just didn't care. Five years from now, you're in a prison cell. The reason was spelled out by a judge who was tired of seeing you again and decided the rest of your life would be served best away from modern society. She was tired of looking at your heroin-wasted, hyper-tense body, pleading for just one more chance to do good, even after the five other times you were caught hustling for drug money, but the last straw was a home invasion with your friends, and in turn one of your friends - to save himself from your fate - plead and turned state's evidence. Karma got him - he was stabbed to death by a vicious prison gang member.
Those are the extreme cases. You may experience other things nowhere nearly as unpleasant as what I've described. I'm here to shatter perceptions, to transition you from the dream world to the real world, and to grab your attention, I used those stories as extreme examples.
Reality happens. Dreams are often killed by something we don't prepare for - fate, if you will, has something in store to prepare us for real life. To have commencement speakers pump the "go forth and be successful" drivel into your brains does you no good. You could work hard and get nowhere. You could follow your dreams and hit a hard brick wall. Meanwhile, the commencement speaker is cashing their check for a new trip to the Carribean Islands.
Mary Ann Esposito, when telling her audience how to get the hairy "choke" out of artichokes, told us in an easy, laid back fashion, "You do nothing." What she did is braise the artichoke in chicken stock, lemon juice, parsley, garlic, and mint, let it rest for awhile, and then with a spoon, popped out the choke very easily.
Like the hairy choke that Mary Ann Esposito told you to "do nothing" with, "do nothing" with your life.
Forget five year expectations. Better yet, don't plan. Let things happen, and you'll be pleasantly surprised where fate might lead you.
If you're successful in some things but not in others, that's fine.
If you choose not to marry, whether because you don't want to or for other political reasons, that's fine.
If you don't earn a million dollars, but can live very well with thirty thousand, that's fine.
If you choose not to have children, or decide to adopt because you physically can't, that's fine.
And for those of you who weren't valedictorians, who were satisfied with a 3.0 GPA, who didn't party all that often and got an occasional hangover, who didn't have a SO, who have a small balance on their college loans, who stayed anonymous - you were fine all along.
There will be times you'll have to live with your parents because you still can't afford to live on your own, attend court hearings to get custody of your children, go weeks without pay because you're on strike, sit through boring, pointless meetings peppered with business cliches and jargon, and so forth. That's life. Just sit back, relax, don't plan, and let things fall into place.
Thank you.
Good morning.
I'm not here to give you a happy, "the world is yours" speech. I'm here to give you an idea of what happens in the real world - not the overpaid celebrity commencement speech world.
In the past few weeks, you've cleaned out your dorm rooms, said your final goodbyes, had your final off-campus party, survived your final collegiate hangover, and likely had your university supply you with your usual senior tradition.
This morning, you are here in your shirts and ties, your best dresses, your hair combed and curled and blown out just so, wearing your best shoes or heels, so your chancellor or principal can hand you a piece of paper stating you've met all the requirements of your degree.
Fast forward to five years from now.
Today, you may wear your spiral curls, spread out on your shoulders like the goddess Aphrodite, wearing your favorite slinky dress you wore to a sorority party where you met your future husband, plus a sparkly pair of Louboutin sandals to show off your opal-painted toenails. Five years from now, you may be pregnant with your second child, with one screaming two year old in your ears, your hair tossed in a frightful mess, and cursing the husband you met at the sorority party for "working late" again, wondering if he's having his way with the secretary in his office.
Today, you may wear a Hugo Boss suit, a $125 tie, and tied shoes. Five years from now, your human resources department, with your supervisor, manager, and two HR representatives, will hand you a box for your personal belongings because the company has gone out of business. The remainder of the company will get that speech too, but as there is no more money, there will be no severance. For many weeks after, you will not be able to find a job; whatever you did save will dwindle to pocket change; your health insurance will be cancelled, and that the only jobs you're qualified won't even cover your rent.
Today, you may have ended your academic career with straight A's from primary school, through middle school, high school, and college. Your 4.0 GPA has showered you with accolades, praise, and the title "summa cum laude." You were likely the class valedictorian. Five years from now, you're in a hospital bed, IV's dripping with chemotheraputic poison because your PCP didn't like a spot on your brain and it turned out to be Stage IV brain cancer - which explains the slurred speech, the migranes, the dizzy spells, the vomiting, and the occasional spacing out. All of your hair is gone; you've dropped from a robust weight to a thin, cachexic skeleton of yourself, praying for that last seizure or the death rattle.
Of course, today you're just here to get the hell out of this college. You didn't want to be here; you got a 2.0 GPA just to avoid academic probation; you partied all the time, took drugs, and just didn't care. Five years from now, you're in a prison cell. The reason was spelled out by a judge who was tired of seeing you again and decided the rest of your life would be served best away from modern society. She was tired of looking at your heroin-wasted, hyper-tense body, pleading for just one more chance to do good, even after the five other times you were caught hustling for drug money, but the last straw was a home invasion with your friends, and in turn one of your friends - to save himself from your fate - plead and turned state's evidence. Karma got him - he was stabbed to death by a vicious prison gang member.
Those are the extreme cases. You may experience other things nowhere nearly as unpleasant as what I've described. I'm here to shatter perceptions, to transition you from the dream world to the real world, and to grab your attention, I used those stories as extreme examples.
Reality happens. Dreams are often killed by something we don't prepare for - fate, if you will, has something in store to prepare us for real life. To have commencement speakers pump the "go forth and be successful" drivel into your brains does you no good. You could work hard and get nowhere. You could follow your dreams and hit a hard brick wall. Meanwhile, the commencement speaker is cashing their check for a new trip to the Carribean Islands.
Mary Ann Esposito, when telling her audience how to get the hairy "choke" out of artichokes, told us in an easy, laid back fashion, "You do nothing." What she did is braise the artichoke in chicken stock, lemon juice, parsley, garlic, and mint, let it rest for awhile, and then with a spoon, popped out the choke very easily.
Like the hairy choke that Mary Ann Esposito told you to "do nothing" with, "do nothing" with your life.
Forget five year expectations. Better yet, don't plan. Let things happen, and you'll be pleasantly surprised where fate might lead you.
If you're successful in some things but not in others, that's fine.
If you choose not to marry, whether because you don't want to or for other political reasons, that's fine.
If you don't earn a million dollars, but can live very well with thirty thousand, that's fine.
If you choose not to have children, or decide to adopt because you physically can't, that's fine.
And for those of you who weren't valedictorians, who were satisfied with a 3.0 GPA, who didn't party all that often and got an occasional hangover, who didn't have a SO, who have a small balance on their college loans, who stayed anonymous - you were fine all along.
There will be times you'll have to live with your parents because you still can't afford to live on your own, attend court hearings to get custody of your children, go weeks without pay because you're on strike, sit through boring, pointless meetings peppered with business cliches and jargon, and so forth. That's life. Just sit back, relax, don't plan, and let things fall into place.
Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)