What's the point?

Over the years there have been more and more seating only music venues, fewer and fewer with an open floor for dancing.  I am not talking about night clubs, but places where headliners go to play.  And more and more I am starting to think, why bother?

Now there are many acts where I would be happy with theater type seating.  I saw Jewel that way.  I would enjoy seeing James Taylor or Shawn Colvin that way too.  But Bonnie Raitt, Frank Turner, the Rolling Stones?  Are you kidding?

I am not saying that rock and roll concerts should have no seats.  Most of the people will want to sit down at least some of the time.  And some of the people really want to see the show but can't stand up for long periods of time, if at all.  We rock and rollers are getting old.  But standing in a skinny isle in front of your seat doesn't quite cut it.

A local venue, the Uptown Theater in Napa has booked the Beach Boys (or some remnant of the Beach Boys anyway).  It is strictly theater seating, there is no dance floor at all.  Who goes to see the Beach Boys with their hands folded neatly in their lap?

I have not been, only seen the layout on their website.  And I am sure it is a wonderful venue to listen to a singer/songwriter play their heart out and wring tears from your eye with heartfelt lyrics.  If James Taylor were to play there, I would love to go see him.  But a rock and roll show?  I will have to pass.
 Tweet

Not the same thing

I have to preface this with a confession. I am a Grammar Nazi. Errors in grammar and usage committed by OTHER PEOPLE make my skin crawl, and I have to bite my tongue to not correct them. I have much more tolerance for my own mistakes.

The other day my wife and I went out for breakfast. Our server was excellent. He didn't disappear for long periods of time, When we asked for something, it was quickly delivered. It was good service and he earned the good tip we gave him.

More than once we asked for something, and his response was "No problem." While that would not be my choice of words it certainly did not cause the aforementioned skin crawling. In that instance it is just a substitute for 'Yes'.

However, when he would deliver something to the table, refill our coffee or water, and one of us would say "Thank you", his response was the same, "No problem".   "No problem" is not the same as "You're welcome".

Petty? Of course it is, and yes I am an old fart.   I was not particularly polite as a young man but I have grown to appreciate certain niceties that grease the wheels of society. Among those are "please", "thank you" and "you're welcome".  While "no problem" could be an acceptable answer to the question "May I have another cup of coffee?", it is not a response to "thank you".

This concludes my petty peeve for the day.

 Tweet

Say it ain't so DiFi

So California Senator Dianne Feinstein, aged 82, is looking like she is going to stand for re-election in 2018. Of course a lot can change between now and then. Political climate change, at 82, her health may change, but my feeling on this has nothing to do with those sorts of thing. It really comes down to this. California needs two true progressive senators. Senator Feinstein is not now and never has been a progressive. While it is true that she has sided with the progressives on some issues, but only when that was the party line. I can't recall any time she has stuck her neck out to stand up for individual rights (Patriot Act) or protecting the New Deal (Glass–Steagall). She is and always has been at best a Corporate Democrat with a dash of chicken hawk and at worst a Democrat in Name Only. She has stood by the party in most cases but she has not led the party. As most in government do, she has done a decent job of representing her campaign contributors. But she has done less decent job of representing the working people of California. I am not saying that she has been a terrible Senator, she has not been. Only that she has been less than we need, especially now. Please madam Senator, step aside and allow someone show will advance the interest of the people against the encroaching corporate monolith. The battle between democracy and feudalism is rapidly approaching. You are not up to the task, and I am not entirely sure which side you would be on. Tweet

Mince Meat, Christmas Pudding and other things British

I know this is a stretch, but just in case I have any British readers... My wife and I are considering a vacation to England next year. We will likely be using our timeshare to trade into something there so where we go will likely be limited to a few major cities. That doesn't mean we will be stuck there. We may rent a car or use public transportation to get out of whatever city we are staying in. So my question for any British readers, imagine you have friends coming to visit from another country. You have a week or two paid leave to take them around to see the sights, and they are relying upon you to selected what they will see. Where do you take them and what do they do? And now for the cooking portion of the post. Last year I made Mince meat for the first time in many years. I have long lost my grandmother's recipe, but I managed to locate something that looked very much like the one she used. Following my grandmother's (and the recipe's) practice, I combined the ingredients, including the suet, and placed the mixture in clean jars in the refrigerator for a few months before making the pies. Other recipes I have seen cook some or all of the ingredients. Can anyone enlighten me on this? Is cooking mandatory, optional, heretical?

Not politics, mince pies

We used to have these every year at Christmas growing up. At one point I had my grandmother's recipe, but I don't know for sure what has become of it. So I had to root around and find a recipe that sounded about like the ingredients that I used to have to shove through the meat grinder every fall. Every year I say I am going to make them, this year I did.

Well, that backfired

I received a flyer in the mail the other day from Uber, asking me to call my representative to complain about AB2293.  Well I went to the state's website and read the text of the bill.  I suggest you follow the link and read it for yourself, it is not very long.  But this is what I got from it. 

It you summon a ride on your Uber app, the car arrives and you get in, you will know that the driver is insured the way any other person offering transportation for hire is insured.  And if Uber has not done their job, and the driver done not in fact have appropriate insurance, then Uber's insurance will cover you.  Sounds pretty pro-consumer to me.

The business model of companies like Uber, and Postmates, whom I have written about earlier, is to classify the people who actually earn the money for them as independent contractors, putting all the risk on them.

I work as an independent contractor myself, and I choose to do that.  But what I charge is a negotiated fee, it is not set by fiat of my client.  I am required by my client to carry certain types of insurance, and have to produce certificates of insurance to demonstrate that I have them.  And my client never tells me “Say this, not that” because they are pretending to be a different business that they are.

So I called my representative and I said, “If Uber is trashing you, then you must be doing something right.”

I like to go to Reno for a weekend every now and then.  I have considered putting an add on Craigslist to see if I anyone around me would like to share gas in exchange for a ride.  That is ride sharing.  What Uber (and Lyft) are doing is running a taxi company.  They have been calling it something else to avoid the responsibility (and corresponding expense) that comes with running a taxi company.

No, they don't have meters.  But I have ridden in taxis that had no meters too.  Years ago, I had occasion to take a cab in Washington DC, and they looked up their rates on a printed sheet.  There was no meter, just a flat rate that you knew as soon as you got into the car.  Sound familiar?

The only difference I can see between them and a taxi, is that they cannot be flagged down on the street.  They are tied to the app for their income. 

The thing that ticks me off about this business model is the sense of entitlement, that they are just too fucking precious to have to assume the responsibility for anyone or anything other than themselves, or to follow laws that everyone else has to follow.
Tweet

Rep Thompson shows no courage of convictions, or perhaps just no convictions

As were many others, I was pretty pissed off when I read the leaked  documents fro the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations.  And I made sure that my representative knew about it.  Of course I knew that at best I would get a canned response.  I just hoped it would actually address at least of little of the more egregious issued revealed in the document.  Instead, this is what I got.

Thank you for contacting me regarding Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). I appreciate you taking the time to share your concerns with me on these issues.

TPA, informally known as "fast track," is the process by which Congress authorizes the President to negotiate a trade agreement on its behalf. In exchange for following specific negotiating and consultation requirements in the TPA law, the President may submit a final trade agreement to Congress for approval by an up-down vote. However, in 2007, the law authorizing TPA expired, and as a result any new trade agreement negotiated by the President will now be subject to debate and modification by Congress before any agreement could be approved.

Meanwhile, the TPP is a proposed regional trade agreement being negotiated between the United States and eleven other nations. Negotiations cover a wide range of issues, including intellectual property rights, services, government procurement, investment, rules of origin, competition, labor, and environmental standards. In many cases, the rules being negotiated are intended to be more rigorous than comparable rules established by the World Trade Organization (WTO). Some topics, such as state-owned enterprises, regulatory coherence, and supply chain competitiveness, break new ground in negotiations.

As we face an increasingly globalized world and economy, I believe balanced, two-way trade must be a tool in our toolbox of economic growth and expansion. Promoting American exports and eliminating barriers to trade in foreign countries will help us create good-paying jobs at home and grow our economy. However, in the past, many trade agreements that have been submitted for Congressional consideration have included inadequate labor and environmental provisions.

Before a final TPP agreement would be sent to Congress for approval, it is expected that Congress would need to first re-authorize TPA. To date, no TPA legislation has been introduced in either the House of Representatives or the United States Senate.  However, before Congress should even consider new TPA legislation, such a proposal must include incentives to keep well-paying jobs at home, promote innovation and job creation, strengthen our trade laws and enforcement agencies, and incorporate strong labor and environmental negotiating goals.

Please know, as a senior member of the House Committee on Ways and Means, which is charged with reviewing all matters relating to trade, I will review any proposed TPA or trade agreement with a sharp eye and concern for safety, labor, and environmental protections. TPA and any trade agreements must include incentives to help keep well-paying jobs at home, and to help spur new American innovation and job creation across all sectors of our economy.

Rest assured I will keep your thoughts in mind should any legislation or agreement regarding TPA and TPP come before the Committee or the House of Representatives for consideration.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please continue to contact me on all issues of importance to you and to our district.

Note the presumption that the only way the treaty can be submitted is if the president is granted fast-track authority, tying the hands of Congress (and the people) from having any input into the document.    Note also, despite specifics being available on the content of the proposed agreement he has carefully avoided any mention of them, so he can avoid actually taking a position.  No mention of how the top executives of the corporations that will benefit from this (to the detriment of most of us) have seen copies of the text, but he as a 'senior member of the House Committee on Ways and Means' has not.

Would somebody primary this guy from the left, please?

Tweet