"Choosing" to be Homeless in Hawaii

Today's NPR story about whites from the Mainland coming to Hawaii to soak up the benefits of being homeless in paradise misses the point a little. The story points to how cushy the homeless in Hawaii have it because of statewide free healthcare and $3 stays at shelters with free meals. The argument is that these non-native residents are putting a strain on taxpaying Hawaiians as evidenced by the state's $1.2 billion budget deficit.

It's a fair point, but I think there needs to be a little bigger picture thinking. Rather than blame the homeless for finding a state that offers the best resources (the two men they interview in the article were homeless in other states, and while "enjoying" the benefits in Hawaii work at either collecting cans or minimum wage jobs), why not turn the criticism to the other 49 states that don't offer any resources to the homeless.

In the story, the director of a homeless shelter in Honolulu suggests that there be different sets of laws for those that are homeless by choice vs. misfortune. While it's less painful and deadly to be homeless in a warm climate, this logic that people are choosing it seems a little off to me and the life of a beach bum may be romanticized a bit too much here.Besides, how can you really prove the circumstances of a person's homelessness, and aren't Hawaii's systems (like shelters and free health care) in place for this reason?

Rich white people from the mainland are a bigger problem to native Hawaiians than homeless white people; they buy huge expensive vacation homes drive up property values without contributing to the local economy and make homeownership for Hawaiians too costly. But yes, let's target the guy living on collecting and recycling cans for 5 cents a piece.

Thank you for Pot Smoking

I used to kind of roll my eyes at the “Legalize It” rastas and hippies. I viewed legalizing marijuana as a self-severing “never going to happen” non-political issue. But over the last couple of years I’ve learned more about why this maybe the single more obvious (and bipartisan) issue that if passed could have some of the largest and most wide spread effects.

The medical benefits: while there are lots of jokes about stoners faking glaucoma to get high, there are legit medical benefits to pot and 14 states have legalized medical marijuana, approved to treat a (yes a little suspiciously) long list of ailments including anorexia (it gives you the munchies), anxiety (it mellows you out) and even recently (albeit a little controversy) for ADD in kids. Yet this is an illegal drug. What would legal highs like booze or cigarettes ever be used to treat? Nothing, because they are actually harmful to health, yet still legal because the government has realized the tax potential. The other perhaps more compelling medical benefit of legalized pot is that it would loosen our growing dependence on pharmaceuticals. Legal pot would be cheaper and less toxic than pharmaceutical drugs, and would mean less pharmaceutical waste and residue in water and soil (good for the environment and for every living thing).

The fiscal benefit: I don’t know if you’ve noticed or not, but in the midst of the recession and huge state budget deficits, lawmakers have been looking high and low for things to tax (sugary drinks while misguided was one of the more logical suggestions). In California, where legal (non medical) pot is on the ballot for November, State-run studies have found that taxes on marijuana could raise as much as $1.4 billion in annual revenue (much needed in a state with a failing economy like CA’s). Legalizing pot and regulating it’s production, and taxing it like cigarettes and booze would not only bring new revenue streams (much larger than proposed taxes on other lifestyle choices or vices), but would save billions in arrests, court costs, and jailing minor "criminals" for pot possession and sales.

We spend $68 billion per year on corrections, and one-third of those being corrected are serving time for nonviolent drug crimes. We spend about $150 billion on policing and courts, and 47.5% of all drug arrests are marijuana-related. Cutting those criminals out of the system and giving them legit “green” jobs would not only save billions in the legal system, but help eliminate deadly drug wars with countries like Mexico. You want to help build American jobs? Why not pot farmers (unlike corn, it’s a crop that can be grown in even small urban spaces) or sellers (like the “coffee” shops in Amsterdam).

Why it’s not a liberal issue: As a political issue legal pot is not at all a liberal one, California voters don’t have a recent history of liberal voting (we all know they voted against gay marriage and elected a republican governor). The Netherlands, famous of their tulips, and legal pot and prostitution, has a very conservative government.

As for fears about a dangerous high nation of stoned kids and soccer moms, if the content of weed is monitored in the same way the content of other substances are and the laws in place are similar to the laws around alcohol consumption (age restrictions, intoxication limits and repercussions) then there is no longer an issue, so chill dude.

Now that Bees are legal (L magazine)

14 States with Legal Medical Marijuana

Why Legalizing Marijuana Makes Sense (Time magazine)

Marijuana on the CA Ballot

Health Care and Killing Babies

Much talk about the health care reform bill, the comprise that’s left the country more divided and neither side getting what it really wants. For “liberals,” it’s a “something is better than nothing” reform that will still leave many uninsured, might not take care of the struggling working class enough and will take years to take effect.

For the tea party republicans it makes us a communist baby-killing country. The whole thing makes for an interesting case study in argument tactics. BBC World News put forth the idea that those opposed to the health care reform aren’t so worried about what the bill contains as they are about the implications that it threatens the idea of American Exceptionalism —that we are above the rest of the world and don’t need the same sorts of systems that other countries do.

After all, this new law is far from radical, and leaves a lot of payment on individuals. And as noted on NPR this morning, the first benefits of the bill even go to the groups that have been complaining the most: seniors with Medicare, will get $250 rebate this year to help fill in the gap in the prescription drug coverage, and small business owners will get tax credit starting this year to encourage them to provide insurance to their employees (which they are still not even required to do).

The other major sticking point is a “moral” one of course—abortion. The irony in the pro-life panic about tax money funding abortions is that the “baby killer” screamers aren’t prolife at all, they are pro-moral agenda pushing.

As George Carlin famously said, “Conservatives are all in favor of the unborn, but once you’re born, you’re on your own, they are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months, after that they don’t want to know about you—no daycare, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare —if you’re pre-born you’re fine, if you’re preschool, you’re fucked. They are not pro-life, they are anti-woman.”

But the bill passed and it’s a law now, and I’m glad for some progress, even if it’s at the cost of a more divided country with knee-jerk flawed logic. As Joe Biden said, it’s still “A Big Fucking Deal”

Summary of Health Care Reform

No Fatties

Every body hates a fatty. Because really, why can’t they control themselves? They’re so lazy. Same reason why every one hates a poor person, it’s their fault, why won’t they just work harder?

Disparaging the fat and the poor (groups that overlap in a lot of cases) are some of the few bigoted views that aren’t taboo. Because after all, you can never be too thin or too rich and if you are thin and rich then it’s your moral obligation to point out the failings of those who aren’t. As highlighted in this pun-filled LA Times Health article, “Slim society's tolerance is wearing thin”, it’s a…wait for it…growing issue. Hi-Yo!

The idea behind the article is thin people are sick of footing the health care bill for fatties who just sit around watching TV all day and soothe themselves with food. This ludicrous notion exists in a world where:

1. We have national health care and our taxes are contributing to other people’s medical bills. (the article quotes that Obesity-related costs are expected to account for 21% of healthcare spending, but is this the obese individuals’ spending? Is it costs that uninsured individuals burden tax payers with?)

2. All people who are overweight are sedentary and/or eat too much or use food as a comfort/coping method

3. All people who are overweight are unhealthy.

These pissed off skinny people’s anger is misdirected, we market the hell out of junk food, remove consumers completely from the process of how food is produced, where it’s from or what’s in season, we make fast food that’s loaded with chemicals, fat, sugar and calories jumbo sized and one dollar and put it on every corner, especially in the poorest neighborhoods while fruits, vegetables and organics are sanctioned to farmers markets and posh grocery stores. If someone on a limited income can even find healthy food and the time to cook it, chances are they can’t afford it, because a bag of carrots costs at least twice as much as a fast food cheeseburger.

This is done of course because of the huge corporate and government interests in factory farming and commodity crops like corn and soybeans (which are then engineered into delicious things like high fructuous corn syrup)

Put more succinctly, “All those snack food calories are the ones that come from the commodity crops, from the wheat, from the corn, and from the soybeans. By making those calories really cheap, it’s one of the reasons that the biggest predictor of obesity is income level.”—Michael Pollan, author of “In Defense of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto”

The government is bought by the corporations that manufacture food to make us fat and sick and then the government tells us to stop being fat and won’t give us health care when we get sick. Our awful yet or so yummy diet of genetically modified food is the major reason that 1 in 3 Americans born after 2000 will contract early onset diabetes. And the food deserts in areas like the Bronx in NYC are a main contributing factor to the fact that among minorities, the rate will be 1 in 2.

Michelle Obama’s campaign against childhood obesity is another good idea that I’m skeptical will achieve its intended goal. It’s important to encourage and educate about finding making healthier choices, being more active, controlling your portions, etc. But If you don’t have access to and can’t afford health foods, don’t have safe places to exercise, and have to rely on thing like free school lunches and dollar menus that are laden with calories, salt and fat, “awareness” does you little to no good.

I’m the last person that would ever take personal responsibly out of the equation. Exercising, and making informed choices about the food you eat and how much of it you eat and not smoking or drinking too much, etc. are all things that individuals are responsible and no one should have to subsidize someone else’s poor decisions. But there’s a bigger picture and a bigger problem than people’s apathy and appetites.

Working Harder, Not Smarter

I don't own a home to lose, I don't have a family to feed, my story isn't that sob worthy by any means. I realize this. But what it is, is demoralizing.

I lost my job, and so I started working exceedingly hard to find a new one. I've said yes to every journalistic freelance opportunity (even going so far as to try to write a press release in exchange for a haircut). And unlike many, I've been lucky to end up with assignments that will ultimately help my portfolio and perhaps someday advance my career. But as many will attest, the road of a freelancer isn't smooth, and often not well paid. Freelancing involves A LOT of hustling, and things I've never been that comfortable with like networking, being relentless in keeping yourself in someone's mind, and endless pitching ideas, most of the time with no results.

If you are lucky enough to get an assignment there's still the chance that you'll do all the work and then it will be "not exactly what they were looking for" in which case you have to go through sometimes so much editing and re-writing that it will be like doing a second article. Other times they won't use it. If you're lucky you signed a contract with a kill fee that makes all that work still somewhat worth your time.

The other piece to freelancing is the "free" aspect. As in working for. When you write a piece either for print or the web, you typically either sign a contract (with varying degrees of giving up your rights to the work you are producing for them), send an invoice for the agreed amount, or both. Sometimes there are tax forms involved. It's all very official seeming. What never seems to be official is the when you will paid. Which is why making a living as a freelancer can sometimes be next to impossible unless you have a million different gigs going at once, or a job on the side.

I've personally never been completely stiffed (yet), but I have waited over two months for a check from an assignment, and have dealt with freelancers who have waited six months or more. Gawker did a list twice of Print's Worst Late Payment Offenders (find that here and here). Some freelancers they talked to haven't been paid in 2 YEARS!

This in two words is fucked up. A freelancer can't afford to take a publication to court over a few hundred dollars, and many don't want to burn bridges in such a competitive everyone-knows-everyone industry. The publications know this, or more likely don't care. Freelancers are of course a dime a dozen.

So here's how it's been for me: I'm currently working as a freelancer for various publications in what amounts to well over 40 hours a week, in addition, I'm still looking and applying for full time work, and I'm in the middle of applying to Grad School.

I am currently making $40 a week more than I did when I was collecting unemployment. I have no benefits. When work stops for the holidays I won’t be able to collect either. When I have my wisdom tooth removed in a month, not only will I lose money by not working (the result of no sick time) but since the health insurance that I pay out of pocket for every month doesn't cover the full procedure, I will owe more than I make in two weeks of work. And I'm lucky. I'm working. I'm single, I can afford life’s necessities, I don’t have chronic or serious medical problems, and I am not unskilled. Things are a lot worse for a lot of people in America right now.

But that doesn’t mean it’s not horribly horribly flawed. Work should be rewarded with a living wage, and medical issues like an exposed sinus from an extracted wisdom tooth should be considered an essential and covered expense.

Just saying.