Officially, as of July, 2009, 9.4% of the U.S. working population -- about 15 million people -- didn't have jobs. One in three of those unemployed people -- about 5 million of them -- had been out of work for 27 weeks or more, which is a long time to go without a paycheck. Another 8.8 million are "involuntary" part- time workers, and 2.3 million were considered "marginally attached to the labor force," which basically means they have given up looking for on-the-books jobs.

These figures come from a Bureau of Labor Statistics Employment Situation Summary issued on August 9. 2009.

What these figures don't tell you is that a lot of unemployed and underemployed people have maxed their credit cards, lost their homes to foreclosure, run up medical bills they can't pay because they lost their health insurance along with their jobs or are otherwise in deep financial shit.

None of us ("us" because I'm one of these people) are going to buy a new car this year or next year. Or, probably, the year after next or the year after that. Even if we all find work tomorrow, our credit is shot. No legitimate bank or other financial institution is going to loan us money to buy a car or to make any other major purchase. Sure, there will be "credit" available to us in the form of "rent to own" schemes and other high-interest ripoffs, but I don't think a lot of us are going to go that route. We are going to be very careful with our money for many years to come.

Lots of 'Good Jobs' Will Never Come Back

A whole lot of us aren't ever going to make as much money in the future as we did before the current economic situation began. Government bailouts and 'cash for clunkers' programs aside, American employment in the car-building industry is way down, and the laid-off car factory workers who are finding jobs at all are working for a lot less money than they were five or six years ago. Ditto laid-off journalists and people in lots of other businesses that are shrinking and probably won't grow again in our lifetimes.

Think about furniture builders and furniture salespeople. If those of us with shrunken incomes don't buy furniture (and I assure you, new furniture is not a priority for someone struggling to pay bills and find affordable health insurance), then furniture factories and retailers lay off even more people than they already have. That means even fewer people who can afford a restaurant meal and a movie ticket, which means more layoffs, which means a bunch of peope will hold onto old computers instead of getting new ones. And so on.

Meanwhile, those of us who mange to get our hands on any money at all are saving frantically. Whoopee-doo. We Americans got castigated for being spendthrifts instead of savers only a few years ago, and now that we're saving money we're delaying "the recovery."

The thing is, most of us do not want to go back to our old spending habits. We have learned, the hard way, that a seemingly secure job can evaporate and leave us worrying about paying bills that only a week before our layoffs didn't seem very large. So we are being very conservative with our money. We're not financially scarred as badly as our depression-survivor parents or grandparents, but we are learning that we really don't have to replace our 42" HDTVs with 52" HDTVs to feel good about ourselves.

Fabulous Furry Freak Brother Freewheelin' Franklin may have said, "dope will get you through times of money better than money will get you through times of no dope," but money will get you through rough times a lot better than furniture, clothes, HDTVs, computers (especially if they run Vista) and even memories of live concerts you went to before they all cost $50+ per seat, not counting Ticketron "service charges" and other crazy add-on fees.

This new financial conservatism is not infecting only the laid-off legions whose incomes may be permanently downsized, but their families and friends. You never know where the Layoff Lightning will strike next. Indeed, just before I started typing this paragraph, I learned that an IT news operation where several friends work is being sold.

Resumes are being dusted off -- and considering the lack of jobs in journalism right now, so are aluminum can collection bags and "will work for food" signs.

Get Ready for Downsizing

If you haven't already downsized (or haven't been forcibly downsized yet) you may want to consider it.

American homes have gotten much larger in the last few decades, especially here in Florida. Many newer suburban homes are literally twice as large as the ones commonly built around here in the 1960s and 1970s. If you own one of these oversized dwellings, you may want to consider renting out part of it. A lot of single people and childless couples can't afford apartments now, and will be happy to live in one or two of your rooms and even share a bathroom. Sure, your kids may have to double up instead of each having his or her own space, but kids managed to share rooms (heck, whole families have managed to share single rooms) for thousands of years.

You have a fuel hog car. Can't afford something newer and more efficient? Drive less. Every mile you don't drive is money you don't spend on gas and maintenance. And if you have two cars, use the more fuel-efficient of the two for longer trips. You may even want to consider selling one of your two cars and making do with one. Believe it or not, 100 years ago most Americans didn't have cars at all, and managed to survive.

Used clothes, appliances, and furniture: I've found that church-run thrift shops almost always offer better deals than the better-known Salvation Army and Goodwill stores. And used appliances cost between 1/4 and 1/2 of new ones. My wife and I have a "stacked" washer and dryer unit we bought for about 25% of what a similar new one runs.

Mobile homes: We live in one. We beefed up the insulation to the point where our monthly electric bill -- and we use electricity for heat, A/C, cooking, and everything else -- stays under $90 per month. We also have monster tie-downs and a roofover, along with new "140 mph" windows and other anti-hurricane safeguards. What we don't have is much square footage, as in about 640 total as opposed to 1400+ in the house we gave up when I lost my job. No problem. We live in Florida, and our outdoor patio space is at least as large as our indoor space, so we don't feel cramped.

Making Do With Half as Much. Or One-fourth as Much

We accept the fact that our income for the rest of our lives will be somewhere between 1/4 and 1/2 as much as it was during my peak earning years. Instead of a trailerable 15' sailboat, a car-top kayak will have to do. Restaurant meals are now once-in-a-while luxuries, not something to be enjoyed two or three time a week. And so on.

Our current income is much closer to the federally-set poverty level (for two people) of $14,570 than to the six-figure level. But we aren't poor. We are just frugal.

I suspect that this is going to be the new American way. Some will strive and struggle to get ahead and will stress themselves out, while a whole lot of people are going to accept having less "stuff" than they used to.

Adjusting to this new reality is not going to be easy for everyone, but it's the way things are going to be for a long, long time. So we might as well get used to it.

See more of my commentaries (along with videos and other natterings) at Roblimo.com

I swear, these modern "family values" people are too silly for words. Take that Mark Sanford guy, for example. He claims to be some sort of conservative, but when it comes to marriage he obviously has some new-fangled, heretical beliefs. I mean, what's the traditional, 100% God-sanctioned method of dealing with lust? You marry her, right? If you already have a wife, no problem. The new honey becomes your Junior Wife and the one you already had is now Senior Wife.

This worked for countless Jews -- and pagans, too -- for thousands of years. Nobody whined about it, nobody tried to pass laws defining marriage as this or that because everyone knew what marriage was: a guy grabbing off all the women he could afford.

Liberals (I think most of them call themselves 'Rebublicons') who complain about a powerful man wanting more than one wife are just plain stupid. They don't realize that when they do things God's way, life goes better. There are, like rules to follow. Don't eat pork; don't light candles between sunset Friday and sunset Saturday; don't lust after your neighbor's goat, wife or other possessions; be good to your slaves... it's all written down for you sillies to read. You can even find it on the Internet.

So marry Maria already, Mark. She has two kids, you have four. You buy some bunk beds, the women take turns sleeping with you and sleeping in a guest room, you pick up a little extra food each week at the grocery store. No big deal. Your lust is fulfilled, everybody's happy.

See how easy life is when you do things God's way? :)

Friedman's idea, basically, is to help finance new and innovative business instead of propping up dinosaurs like the existing car companies. He says:

You want to spend $20 billion of taxpayer money creating jobs? Fine. Call up the top 20 venture capital firms in America, which are short of cash today because their partners -- university endowments and pension funds -- are tapped out, and make them this offer: The U.S. Treasury will give you each up to $1 billion to fund the best venture capital ideas that have come your way. If they go bust, we all lose. If any of them turns out to be the next Microsoft or Intel, taxpayers will give you 20 percent of the investors' upside and keep 80 percent for themselves.

Unions, richies with money invested in failing companies, and lots of other pressure groups will scream and cry and mobilize hordes of lobbyists to prevent anything like this from happening on a large enough scale to matter. But it makes far more sense to invest in America's future than to hold on to our past. I don't see this as a "left vs. right" argument, but as a "well, duh" piece that almost everyone who believes in American ingenuity and inventiveness ought to support.

Please read the whole article and let me know what you think.

(This piece can also be read and commented on at roblimo.com.)

We're going to have a huge economic stimulus bill, full of wasteful items that may stimulate the economy and may not. Some of the funding baked into it -- for infrastructure, research and education -- will have long-term benefits for all of us. There's a bunch of pander-level tax cuts tossed in, too, presumably as a sop to Republicans who didn't vote for it, anyway, and couldn't be bothered coming up with a detailed counterproposal. I was hoping for some principled Republican opposition, not yammer about yet more tax cuts for the richies and a stupid attempt (that backfired) to make public employees' unions look nasty. But nooooo. Instead of acting sensible, Congressional Republicans decided to paint themselves even further into the right-wing corner than they already were.

I personally prefer not to have the same political party occupying the White House and dominating Congress. When you have opposition between the two, any action that gets taken is likely to have broad public support. When one party dominates both the legislative and executive branches, it can do whatever it wants, even write two decades' worth of dreamed-about social legislation into a financial stimulus bill.

Then again, the Republican Party has drifted so far into "Rush and farther right" territory that I half-expect it to start doctor-shopping so it can get a whole bunch of prescriptions for the institutional version of Oxycontin. We can call this "being true to Republican principles" or we can call it "falling into the hands of nuts." Either way, the Republican Party has drifted so far away from what most Americans want from their government that it might as well disband at the national level and concentrate on state and local politics.

The funny thing is, here in Florida, Obama and the Congressional Democrats are busy saving Republicans. The main purpose of the state Republican Party here is to protect our richest and greediest citizens' wallets, even if that means shutting down all programs that help poor people and ordinary workers, which is extra-nasty when so many workers are getting laid off and the poor are becoming poorer than ever. But Florida Republicans can get away with their despicable behavior because (TA! DA!) those evil Washington Democrats are going to pump billions worth of stimulus funds into the state.

Isn't that wonderful? Because of Obama and his crowd, our Republicans won't need to cut as much as they planned, and won't need to raise taxes on the Palm Beach bunch to keep Medicaid (marginally) solvent.

The only high-profile Florida Republican who isn't angry at Obama for saving Florida Republicans' butts is governor Charlie Crist, who has publically and literally embraced Obama. Crist apparently enjoys being in office, unlike the rest of the them. Who knows? He may even decide to give up the Governor schtick, with its two-term limit, and run for Senate, where you can stay in office for life.

Naturally, many of the wrong-wing... excuse me, I meant to type "right-wing" crowd here are howling mad at Crist, just as they are howling mad at anyone who doesn't agree with them about everything from (un)intelligent design to forbidding abortions for gun-carrying pregnant teenagers.

Nationally, Republican office-holders seem to be only slightly less crazy than the ones we have in Florida. This is too bad. I rather enjoy a two-party system where we have rational debates about different ways of running our government and end up with workable compromises that keep things cranking one way or another.

Maybe one day rational people will recapture the Republican Party. And maybe a new party will come along. I would be happy with either alternative, since I truly believe the U.S. is best served by having competitive politics instead of letting a bunch of one-notes run everything.

Also published at roblimo.com

Dear Senator Martinez:

I'm not 100% happy with the Democrat-backed stimulus bill, either, but just saying "no, no, no" to it is not going to help solve our country's problems. Neither will more tax cuts and "fewer regulations" that benefit your greediest constituents, who have already gotten plenty of tax cuts and have been deregulated to the point where they can commit all kinds of white collar crimes (and even sell tainted peanuts) without fear of prosecution.

It's time for you to be a patriot and work for the majority of American citizens, not just the richest ones.

My personal concerns:

1) COBRA subsidies - Since we seem unable to do national health insurance, I must respectfully ask you to support (or at least not oppose) help for those of us who have been laid off and have no choice but COBRA to continue our health insurance without exclusions for pre-existing conditions. My unemployment payments in Florida, after taxes, are barely over $1000 per month, and my COBRA cost is $848 per month. I expect to eventually scare up enough freelance writing and video work to support my (sick) wife and myself, but a 65% federal COBRA subsidy would be a great help. Even 50% would be a big deal.

Of course, comprehensive national health coverage that isn't tied to employment would be best, but I understand that you would incur the Wrath of Rush and the other right-wing loonies if you supported this, so I don't expect you to. At least, I beg you, please try to open your heart to help with COBRA.

2) Income taxes on unemployment - I don't know who came up with this "kick them when they're down" idea, but it is evil. I am -- not kidding -- paying a higher tax rate on my unemployment pittance than famous Republican whore Paris Hilton pays on her inheritance millions. I didn't mind paying substantial income taxes when I was earning $100K+ per year, but hitting me now? Pure sadism. Please stop it.

3) Credit card usery, mortgage foreclosure, and bankruptcy - Since I'm now out of work and will soon lose my house to foreclosure, I expect the credit card thieves to raise the interest rate on my (average for my previous income) credit card debt to the point where I will not be able to pay it off without resorting to some sort of credit plan or, possibly, bankruptcy.

Since either Wachovia or the private mortgage insurance company can (hard to believe, but it is so) come after me for a default judgment after selling the house we are losing to foreclosure if -- as is virtually certain -- they can't auction it for enough to cover the outstanding loan balance, this is another possible reason for bankruptcy.

I basically see bankruptcy as inevitable for us. And bankruptcy laws were changed by Republicans (including you, I believe) to be very, very hard on those of us who are down and out, and much more favorable to your richest corporate constituents.

That was a huge evil, and one I hope you help reverse, along with the deregulation (AKA "crime facilitation) you helped engineer, and legalizing sudden "gotcha" usery by credit card lenders.

Bottom line: You have been a very bad man. Many of your legislative actions, from the standpoint of a working (and now laid-off) American, could easily be viewed as either treason or economic terrorism.

But I am basically a nice person, and I prefer to see goodness in all people, so instead of excoriating you as a devil-spawned rat bastard, I am respectfully asking you to let your better nature take over, and for you to right some of the wrongs you have helped promulgate over the years.

Repectfully yours,

Robin Miller
Bradenton, FL

Sent via email to Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Florida Rich People) on Feb. 9, 2009; also posted at roblimo.com

To: Rep. Vern Buchanan - 1 page; none to follow -
via fax: (202) ___ ____

From: Robin Miller
Bradenton FL 34207

Subject: Economic stimulus

Dear Congressman Buchanan:

I didn't like the pork-laden economic stimulus bill you voted against much more than you did. But I also dislike the idea of more tax cuts - or extending current ones - for our greediest citizens as the basis of an alternative stimulus bill.

I got laid off on Dec. 31, 2008. I get $275 per week in unemployment, and even this little bit is taxed at a higher rate than Paris Hilton's inheritance income. When I was earning over $100,000 a year, I didn't mind paying a stiff income tax rate, although it was sickening that you and the other getovers typically paid a lower percentage on your much larger (unearned) incomes. Now I feel I am being double-punished for the crime of sudden poverty. Isn't losing my house enough?

It's time for you and your fellow richies to give a little back to those of us who have paid for the stable government and capitalist system that helped you accumulate your wealth. I'm not advocating socialism, but temporary help to get back on our feet. I'd strongly suggest some serious infrastructure and science/tech/engineering research funding, because in addition to creating jobs, this kind of spending helps improve our country for generations to come. Remember all those parks our parents took us to when we were kids in the 50s and 60s? A lot of them were built by Roosevelt's WPA, and we were happily using them 30 years later. Sure, the WPA's main purpose was to create jobs, but it also did plenty to make America a better place to live. This is the best kind of economic stimulus.

Another note: when we working people have money coming in again, you and your crowd will make money from us that you don't get now, so by helping us you will be helping yourself in the long run.

Call this idea "trickle up economics." I know it's the opposite of the traditional Republican approach, but it just might work. Please give it a try.

Thanks for caring,

Robin 'Roblimo' Miller
Bradenton, FL

(also posted at www.roblimo.com)

Washington Post headline: To Combat Obama, Al-Qaeda Hurls Insults. It seems the hard-core Muslim fundies aren't fooled by the hard-core American nut-cases who portray the man they often call "B. Hussein Obama" as a Muslim sympathizer. Al Qaeda knows better. They see Obama as a sympathetic figure to people of color -- including most Muslims -- who is still a patriotic American. They see the Obama-approved missile strikes on their people and compounds in Pakistan as a continuation of Bush-style toughness. And they're right. There is no evidence, beyond loonie right-wing name-calling, that Barack Obama will be any less tough on terrorists then George W. Bush or even Dick Cheney.

One thing we can expect, though, is that Obama will remain true to American Values, including due process of law and avoiding illegal torture. This is as scary to Al Qaeda as it is to the American kooks. It means they will no longer be able to use threats of "American atrocities" as a recruiting tool. In fact, it's starting to look like the only new allies Al Qaeda will have in its hatred of Obama are America's own racists and nuttiest conservatives. These are the same people who once talked about how we should all stand behind our president, but apparently meant what they said only when the president was a right-wing Republican.

So, Rush Limbaugh and fellow travelers, how does it feel to be allied with Al Queda? How are you and your new friends getting along? And where you do plan to hold your first international We Hate Obama festival? Inquiring minds want to know...

This article is also available at Roblimo.com

Obviously, cleaning up the Bush mess is going to be one heck of a job. But let's forget the work side of the presidency for a moment and talk about Barack Obama as husband, father, and regular guy, because no matter how hard the Republicans try to portray Obama as an out-of-touch elitist, he is more in touch with ordinary Americans than any Bush has been for generations. Let's start with the mother in law thing.

You may or may not have heard that Barack Obama's mother in law has moved into the White House. To me, this is more momentous than having the first black president. I mean, president or no president, I expect Marian Robinson to keep him from getting too swell-headed. She was a secretary for many years, and her late husband, Fraser, had a blue-collar job with the city of Chicago. They lived non-prosperously on the city's south side and raised not only Michelle but also her brother Craig Robinson, who Marian can repeatedly remind Barack is a better basketball player and coach than he'll ever be.

I have a vision of "First Granny" Marian charging into a meeting room at 9 p.m. and telling Barack, "I don't care if you're in the middle of negotiations that will bring peace to the Middle East. It's time for you to read your daughters a bedtime story and tuck them in."

And Michelle may be First Lady and a high-powered lawyer with ivy league degrees, but I have never met an adult who wasn't viewed, at least some of the time, as a baby by his or her mother. If we were flies on the wall in the White House family quarters, I'll bet we'd hear, more than once, "Baby, there is no way you're going to wear that dress in public. You look like you're going to bounce out of it any second."

Plus, every time Barack complains about the rigors of the job, First Granny will be there to remind him not only that she had to show up at work at a crappy job even when it was snowing, without any servants to help, but that her ancestors were slaves, and that Barack has relatives in Kenya who live in dirt-floored huts, so he should be grateful for what he has, even on days when the presidency seems overwhelming.

Cut off from the people

Barack Obama was apparently well-known and well-liked in Chicago. He hung out at the local barber shop, trading gossip and jokes while he waited for his turn in the chair. He and Michelle ate out often, not necessarily at the fanciest places in town but at family-priced, mid-scale restaurants where they were well-known (and good-tipping) regulars. Then there's the Blackberry. Yes, Barack is going to keep it. Good. He's always had a lot of friends and, president or no, is determined to stay in touch with them.

The Ben's Chili Bowl excursion Barack made with D.C. mayor Adrian Fenty soon after he arrived in the city was perfect. Yeah, Ben's is a necessary stop for black celebs in D.C. ever since Bill Cosby (not a celeb at the time) courted his future wife there. But Ben's is not fancy, and far more ordinary people than celebrities sit at the tables and counter, and customers are not necessarily black. As a limo driver, I sat and ate at Ben's more than once while waiting on charter parties who were at the nearby 9:30 Club and other U Street night spots. I met all kinds of people there, from cops to Howard University professors. Ben's is the kind of place that encourages conversation and discussion. And this video shows that, aside from secret service all over the place and lots of cameras and hand-shaking, Barack is right at home in a Ben's-type place, right down to the inevitable sports banter. And that he picked up the check. And posed for a snapshot with some of the cops guarding the front of the place, and gave Mayor Fenty a nice little hug before he left.

It's going to be hard for Barack and Michelle to slip out for the evening on a whim, even if they have First Granny and lots of staff to watch he kids. Secret service... lots of attention.... not exactly conducive to going out dancing or for a romantic dinner or meeting a few friends for a drink somewhere. And taking the kids to the park or the zoo is going to be a motorcade event that will tie up traffic, not a simple family thing, no matter how hard the Obamas try to stay normal and do normal things.

Bush and Clinton not only lived in the bubble of White House security, but seemed to like it because it set them apart from the peasants. Barack and Michelle seem totally comfortable with ordinary working people, as well they should since they have so many of them as friends and family.

This gives me more hope for the Obama presidency than political leanings or almost anything else. Barack's Blackberry dealings may now be limited, but I bet First Granny Marian will be on the phone plenty with relatives and old friends in Chicago, who will give her a streets-eye view of the country's economy that may be more accurate than all the economists' predictions Barack will be forced to wade through as part of his job.

I just hope Obama can stay comparatively normal in the White House, not only for our sake but for his -- and his wife's and daughters'. And I feel sorry for him, because the demands of the job won't let him be a regular, hang-out-at-the-barber-shop kind of guy ever again, no matter how much he wants to be.

This article is also available at Roblimo.com

I totally love both mountains and snow. On postcards, where they belong.

I believe God intended me to live somewhere I can pick oranges from my own tree and eat them immediately, while they're still fresh; where I can go sailing on a "wet" boat (like a kayak, canoe or Sunfish), wearing nothing but swim trunks, at least eight months out of the year.

And Article 149, section 2146, of the U.S. Constitution guarantees our right to free parking at all beaches unless they have special camping facilities and conveniences, a la Ft. DeSoto. If our Founding Dads didn't think going to the beach was important, free beach parking wouldn't be in the Constitution, would it?

Where and when I grew up (Orange, California, 50s and 60s), it was a child's *right* to go to the beach a minimum of once every week during the school year, and up to five times a week during summer vacation. As an adult, I believe I still have that right, even if sometimes I just sit on the sand and watch the sunset instead of going in the water.

If I want cold I eat a sno-cone.

I'm losing my house because I lost my job, but instead of leaving the area my wife and I are rehabbing a tiny mobile home just a few miles down the road. Friday I was at the new place with Tony-the-carpenter, and our new neighbor Ralph came over with fresh-squeezed pink grapefruit juice from his tree, to which we have "picking rights" in exchange for him getting ditto from our orange tree. Great juice. I can still taste it.

Snow people don't have fresh citrus.

Cold and rainy climates produce suicidal musicians like Kurt Cobain. Florida has Jimmy Buffet. Jimmy gets older and richer every year. Kurt doesn't.

Remember where, in the Bible/Torah, God promises Joshua and his people "a land of milk and honey and citrus and year-round fresh produce" and says nothing about Maple syrup? God knew Maple syrup was only grown in cold climates -- but could easily be shipped without losing its flavor. Milk, citrus, and produce are best eaten fresh. (Honey keeps pretty well, but it's nice to get fresh orange blossom honey from local beekepers. God probably mentioned this but His editors cut it because they were paying by the published word and wanted to hold their budget down.)

Also, if God hadn't wanted us to live in Florida, with its basically crappy-tasting tap water, he wouldn't have given us mount-on-the-tap water filters. Or bottled water.

I am a Godly man. I live by His plans. I am so conservative I don't necessarily hold with this modern marriage nonsense but believe the traditional ways, as followed by Abraham, David, and Solomon, should be good enough for anyone. More on that topic here: http://www.roblimo.com/node/571

And for you heretics and pagans who believe in the False Doctrine of Evolution, there is plenty of (no doubt false) evidence that we humans evolved in tropical and sub-tropical climates.

George W. Bush may claim Texan-hood but was born in chilly Connecticut, went to high school -- excuse me, I meant to say "prep school" -- in even colder Massachusetts, went to college in Connecticut, and attended grad school in Massachusetts.

Barack Obama grew up in sunny Hawaii, with some of his childhood time spent in sunny Indonesia. He is an accomplished body surfer. We don't even know if George Bush has ever *tried* surfing.

But if you want to deny God and live in a cold climate, fine. Don't let me stop you.

I believe in the freedom to make all the mistakes you want, which is also part of the U.S. Constitution.

Originally posted @ http://roblimo.com

Today I join the ranks of laid-off over-50 men who will probably never find a job as good as their last one. Let's face it: the demand for journalists has been going down every year for the last decade. Worse, the demand for senior-level editors has never been huge, and is dropping faster than the need for young college graduates who will work for next to nothing. Sure, in addition to being a competent writer and editor with a good grasp of technology and science, I am also skilled in the art of building viable (and profitable) online communities, but does that mean anything in today's horrible economy? Will I be able to find another job? Failing that, will I be able to get enough freelance work to survive? I have no idea.

In any case, I'm preparing to give up my mortgaged house. Without a job I can't afford the payments. Luckily, my wife and I have already bought a small (and very cheap) house trailer we hope to have fixed up and ready for occupancy around the middle of January, so we'll be out of here long before Wachovia forecloses on us.

I always did well as a freelance writer, and since I last freelanced 10 years ago I have become a competent video shooter and editor, too, so I probably can build enough freelance trade to produce a decent living before my small savings account runs dry, especially if I can collect some unemployment (I'm eligible) while I scrounge up enough freelance work to live on.

My biggest problem -- and biggest fear -- is health insurance. My wife and I are both 56, and we have pre-existing conditions that no private health insurance plan will cover for at least two years. My only choice is to continue my current employer-paid health plan through COBRA, and that's going to cost $848 per month. Meanwhile, Florida's maximum employment payment is $275 per week -- which means my wife and I will have a total of about $300 per month to cover all other expenses.

There's no point in complaining. I've voted for more than a few Republicans over the years, and this is my payback for that mistake. I've voted (mostly) for Democrats since 2000, and hopefully the Democrats now in office will realize that people like me need as much help as bank and Wall Street executives.

That's enough for now. I need to get some employment applications and freelance story proposals out. I don't know what you're doing this New Year's Day, but that's what *I'm* doing. :)

We need to legalize, regulate, and tax marijuana. This would make Florida a more attractive place to live for many young, creative people who could help us move the state's economy from its current dependence on 19th century-style "exploit and ruin the land" businesses to a sustainable, technology-based economy. This move would also save billions in law enforcement and prison spending.

Legal marijuana would also make Florida an attractive retirement destination for people who suffer from chronic pain, whether as a result of cancer, diabetes-related neuralgia or any other cause.

And then there's tourism... imagine how many tourists we'd get if, after a day of gambling or hanging out at the beach or at a Mickey park, visitors could go to a little Tiki Hut and light up a relaxing joint before going back to their hotel rooms -- with each one of said joints generating $1 or so in tax revenue.

Not only that, we could run a "Buy American" campaign that would encourage residents and tourists alike to smoke or ingest "Ocala Oh!" or "Manatee Marvel" or "Sarasota Supreme," all evocative brand names that would make it clear that "Florida Cannabis is the BEST Cannabis," no doubt with a state-funded marketing campaign to help get the word out. (Note to self: see if Anita Bryant is available.)

So: lower police/prison costs, a new and lucrative agriculture-based industry, attract both tourists and permanent residents, and an additional source of tax revenue, all in one.

Why aren't we considering this? Sure sounds logical to me...

PS - This was originally a response to a local newspaper article.

CNN (CRANK NEWS NETWORK) -- A Dayton, Ohio company that once made seat cushions for the automobile industry but recently switched to manufacturing urine-proof liners for birdcages and kitty litter boxes says that, despite large companies all over the U.S. laying off thousands and tens of thousands of workers, it is "in hiring mode."

"But please don't print our name or contact information," said the harassed human resource manager. "We already have over 40,000 application in, and we don't need any more."

According to a source close to the company's C.E.O., "One of the main impetuses behind our growth is the shrinkage of daily newspapers. That's what people used to use to line birdcages and kitty litter boxes and also to wrap fresh fish purchases. But today's newspapers are so thin that millions are turning to our product instead."

While the company would not reveal specifics of the job opening, which reportedly has drawn applications from former stockbrokers, former investment bankers, and former hedge fund managers, we spoke with several applicants who described the salary as "minimum wage," and noted that the successful applicant was expected to have a post-graduate education, 20+ years as a Perl or Python programmer, knowledge of MS office and carburetor rebuilding, and to be able to lift 50 pounds or more.

"But please," the HR director asked once again, "do not use our company's name in your story. Times are so tough out there that we already have many highly-qualified applicants. Aren't there any other companies out there that are also hiring?

Sadly, the HR director answered his own question: "No."

And then he terminated the interview, because that was the moment his boss walked in and told him to pack his personal belongings because he was being laid off, effective immediately.

An identical version of this story was also posted at Roblimo.com

One sad but salient fact about America's current standing in the world is that lots of our old allies now dislike our country, and countries that used to mildly dislike us now openly hate us. Our next president had better be used to being hated and attacked and called names, and able to function competently in an international atmosphere of mistrust and suspicion. Hillary Clinton has been repeatedly attacked by right-wing nutjobs, left-wing wackos, and every single candidate for president in both parties, yet she keeps on keepin' on. Whether you love Hillary Clinton or hate her and call her names, you've got to admit that her ability to withstand hatred is a necessary quality for a post-Bush president, and that she deserves our respect (and possibly our votes) on that basis alone. But another necessary quality for cleaning up the G.W. Bush mess is managerial competence, and this is an area where Mitt Romney is the only shining star in the current constellation of candidates.

Remember how Romney turned around a hopelessly inept (and corrupt) 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics Committee? That was a stunning management feat. He didn't do badly as Massachusetts governor, either, or as the founder and managing partner of Bain Capital, where he ran (or hired people who ran) an impressive array of well-known companies.

Forget Romney's religion and political positions for a moment. Think of the president not only as commander in chief of the world's most potent military force, but also as CEO of our country's most important "company" -- one to which we pay large sums of money every year (in the form of taxes) and from which we expect high level of service in return. Romney is totally qualified to deliver good value for your tax dollars, and deserves your respect (and possibly your vote) for that reason alone.

Now back to Hillary Clinton. Use the search words I hate Hillary on Google and you get links to over 2.5 million pages. Some of them are as strident as Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad talking about the United States or Israel. Others sound more like North Korea's crackpot "dear leader" Kim Yong-il.

Wow.

We need a president who can stand up to people like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Kim Yong-il and G.W. Bush's good buddy and fellow torturer, Vladimir Putin.

Sen. McCain stood up to his N. Vietnamese captors, and deserves huge props for that (as well as extra "presidential qualification points" for being a veteran), but in recent years he's shown a tendency toward irrationally angry responses to personal attacks. Much as I respect McCain, I do not want a president who might suddenly nuke another country because its leader calls him some of the same nasty names our more disgusting "Republicans" use to describe Hillary Clinton. I also don't want a president who is (or whose core supporters are) comfortable using personal insults to describe a U.S. Senator and former first lady. People who would do that are likely to call Putin or Chinese premier Chang Chun-hsiung or someone else with a large nuclear arsenal a poo-poo head or some other insulting, childish nickname, thereby setting off a worldwide atomic war that would end civilization as we know it.

A hard choice...and some help making it

I am not overly impressed with this year's crop of presidential wannabes. Huckabee would be a cool choice for some sort of ceremonial entertainment post, since he's the best guitar player and singer of the bunch. Ron Paul is also suitable for a ceremonial post. If we had a cabinet-level Department of Doomsaying, he'd make a great head for it. But electing Ron Paul as president would be as stupid as hiring a strict vegetarian to run a meat-packing plant or a PETA leader to run a mink coat factory. Edwards is a lawyer who made a bunch of money on class-action suits and by taking 35% and 40% of poor people's "pain and suffering" judgements. We can get dozens just like him by looking through the Yellow Pages. Bill Richardson seems like a nice guy, but doesn't really stand out in a crowd. Rudy Giuliani would be a great head for the Department of Post-Distaster Speechifying but is otherwise problematical (corrupt friends, tendency to wear dresses, messed-up personal life, etc.), and as for the rest of the field.... if I can't remember their names, neither can most other Americans, so they don't stand a chance.

One cute thing I found online just a few moments ago (isn't the internet fun?) was a quiz that supposedly helps you find the candidate whose stated positions on high-profile issues most closely match your own. It showed that my best "match" on the Democratic side was Joe Biden, and that my best Republican match was John McCain. It also showed that, based purely on ideology, I should support Ron Paul over Mitt Romney, and Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton.

The thing is, as I age, I find myself increasingly likely to base my personal voting choices less on ideology than on demonstrated competence. Compromise may be a dirty word to many partisan purists, but it is at the heart of the American system of government. Our Declaration of Independence and Constituion were both compromises, the result of protracted negotiations between northerners and southerners, big-state people and small-state people, federalists and states-righters, and so on.

Remember the post-Katrina mess in New Orleans? I'm sure that even the most partisan supporters of both (Democratic) Louisiana (now former) governor Kathleen Blanco and (Republican) U.S. (soon to be former) president George W. Bush were sickened by how poorly these two elected offiicials handled hurricane relief efforts. I was disgusted by both of them, too, and I don't recall worrying about their positions on stem cell research or homosexual marriage while I watched the way-too-late evacuation of the New Orleans Superdome on TV.

We need a government that, more than anything else, is capable of handling disasters and even -- when possible -- preventing them.

This is why I make my voting choices the way I do, and why a general election choice between Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney would be a hard one for me to make, while choosing either one of this pair over any of the other (current) potential nominees would not cause me to lose a minute's worth of sleep, even though I disagree with both of them on many hot-button political issues.

A modern electric-drive hybrid car consists of a series of discrete mechanical systems, The major ones are:

• Electric motors (ideally built into the wheel assemblies)
• Batteries (drive the motors; recharged either when the car is plugged in or from an onboard generator system)
• Onboard generator/battery charger
• Power source for generator (can be gasoline engine, fuel cell, diesel... whatever)
• Computer-based control system (to make everything work smoothly together; also powers lights, turn signals, wipers, and other accessories)
• Brakes (same as in today's cars)
• Steering (same as in today's cars)
• Suspension (same as in today's cars)
• Chassis (hopefully better than in today's cars)
• Body (hopefully better than in today's cars)
• Passenger & cargo accomodations (seats, trunk, etc.)
• Amenities (A/C & heat, music players, phones, navigation, etc.)

Electric motors, batteries, generators, and onboard power source designs are going to change rapidly over the next decade. But what does not need to change, within broad limits, is their form factors. Just as there are standard sizes for desktop and server computer sub-sytems like motherboards, RAM, power supplies, and hard drive enclosures, we could have standard-sized automotive sub-systems.

One size will not fit all. A large manufacturer such as Toyota or General Motors would probably have three or four basic chassis sizes they'd use for passenger cars and light trucks, with (ideally) the ability to swap out some components between adjacent chassis sizes. This would mean they could produce, for example, a high-performance version of a small car by equipping it with the "next size up" electric motors, and possibly a higher-powered charging system. Or they could produce an "ultra-economy" light truck for local use by equipping it with the minimum-power electric moters needed for operation at or below typical urban freeway speeds and -- if the vehicle was never going to do intercity travel -- leaving out the charging system and its power source entirely in exchange for more cargo capacity.

I have listed chassis and body as separate sub-systems. Why not have a tube-frame or other integrated chassis with lightweight, molded body panels? Once you start thinking in modular terms, this allows production of a two-seat model with a cargo bed (pickup truck), 4/5 seat version with trunk (sedan), and many variants between these two basic extremes, from hatchbacks to convertibles, possibly with the "convertibles" being models with extra-large pull-open tops or removable hard-top panels.

A car you can upgrade for years to come

The biggest benefit of a modular vehicle isn't the chance to buy it in a variety of body styles or with varying "mix and match" amenities, but in the fact that it could be upgraded when technology inevitably advanced.

New, better batteries come on the market? Replace your old ones. They'll fit!

Want more power? Buy new, "one size up" electric motors!

Upgrade to four-wheel drive? That should be easy; a matter of changing two wheels and connecting new cables to the battery system and plugging control wiring for the new pair of motors into the control system. (Plus, most likely, a little control system reprogramming or replacement of a ROM chip.)

Hydrogen-powered fuel cell powerplants come on the market? Buy one and bolt it in!

And so on.

Even a crash.... most of the systems would probably still be fine. Yes, replacing some or all of the chassis and body would be a major job, but if parts were priced correctly (and a strong, competitive aftermarket would spring up and hold parts prices down) it would still be less costly than buying a whole new vehicle.

Planned obsolescence won't necessarily go away

Right now I'm faced with a binary choice regarding my 1994 Jeep Cherokee:

• Keep it, perform minimal repairs until it totally dies (has 180,000+ miles; little things like wiper motors and air conditioning parts are failing regularly)
• Replace it with an equivalent new (or at least newer) vehicle

A third "sort of" alternative would be to have all likely-to-wear-out parts replaced at the same time, from light bulbs to brake hoses and linings and cylinders/calipers to drive belts and coolants hoses. I have actually done two rounds of 100% hose/belt replacement on my Jeep, which is probably why it has only had one breakdown, ever, that stranded me at the side of the road.

But there is no reliable way to upgrade my Jeep and turn it into a "newer model." If I had that alternative, say at a cost of ~$12,000 instead of the $25,000+ a new (and in my opinion inferior) equivalent enclosed Jeep sells for today, I would probably go for it. As it is, though, I can't justify the cost of a new Jeep or similar vehicle, and if I want a used one.... well, that's what I already have, and I see no point in buying another used Jeep Cherokee unless the one I have now has some sort of catastrophic (i.e. engine or transmission) failure.

If I had a modular vehicle, I'd be in the market for an upgrade about now. An Chrysler and their local dealer (or an independent "upgrade shop") would be getting a whole bunch of money from me. Not as much as they might get by selling me a while new vehicle, but a whole more than the $0.00 they're going to get under the current system.

But I don't have a fully-modular, upgradable passenger vehicle, and neither does anyone else in the United States. It's sad that our automotive industry hasn't started to think in terms of modular, upgradable cars and light trucks, but so it goes. Even worse, when an enlightened auto manufacturer does move to a sensible system such as the one I've imagined here, I suspect that it will be one based in China, India or Korea, not in the United States. :(

It all began when I entered a Prototype Newspaper of the Future contest, sponsored by the Southern Newspaper Publishers Association. (Grand prize: $2,000!) Okay, I haven't exactly won it yet, but my ideas are so cool and innovative that I am sure to win. I doubt that other entries will combine sex, computer-controlled newspaper delivery robots, drugs, and rock and roll. Why, I have so much confidence in my entry, fellow OJR readers, that I am daring you -- even double-daring you -- to come up with something better.

Idea #1: Sex! Also, cover the future, not just the past and present

Any idiot can write stories about events that have already happened, and even the dumbest, most makeup-wearing TV reporter can bring you "live, on the scene" coverage of events that are happening right now, but only visionaries and psychics can bring you news of events that haven't happened yet and that, indeed, may never happen at all.

(The contest ad said, "Think big. Think radical." So I am!)

Read the rest @ ojr.org.