Cutting Off My Nose

I'm getting acupuncture.  (I feel like a voodoo doll.)  I don't really believe in it but it was suggested to me by someone I respect, and I decided to give it a try. So far it hasn't done anything, and I don't really expect it to. I'm a skeptic. All that I read about it is that it has no scientific basis and positive results seem to be the result of the placebo effect.

My greatest fear is that it may work. Yes, I know I'll feel better, but I'll have to admit I was wrong, and that could be more troublesome than my symptoms.

I suspect it's a common feeling – I know it is for me – to want to be right, even if there is a cost. It's especially true when my outlook is pessimistic. I may, for example, want candidate A to win an election, but he's an underdog and I predict that candidate B will win. If candidate A wins I'll get the policies I want, but I'll be wrong. In my eyes and the eyes of others. Which is worse? Unfortunately being wrong is often worse than getting what I really want.

Another situation in which I'm ambivalent – one which has repercussions for others as well – is that in which I feel that I'm not properly appreciated by someone else; usually,though not always, someone important to me. And the thought that goes with that is “He'd (or she'd) really feel bad if something terrible were to happen to me. That'll serve him right.

I don't really want anything bad to happen, but I do want to punish someone else – to show him how empty his life would be without me. And how guilty he'd feel if he believed himself to be responsible somehow. Especially if he felt responsible for my absence or not being concerned for me when I was around.

The most common example of the phenomenon relates to insurance. We sink a lot of money into it, initially with the hope that it will serve as protection against a problem that might arise. Later, when everything has gone well, someone will begin resenting the cost of protection against problems that have never occurred. Some will look for ways to collect even if nothing goes wrong. Or he may look for what may be considered wrong so as to collect some of what he's already paid. Or even more. We don't want things to be wrong, but if we've paid for protection we want some return – even if it means that we suffer some harm.

In certain ways it's a competition. We “bet” against our own wishes and don't know whether we want to win or lose. We bet against our friends and family and sometimes consider losing face to be worse than experiencing a negative turn of fate. We look for ways to punish others, despite our knowledge that we're really punishing ourselves. But that's the way to win, and that's more important than anything else.

There's no doubt that insurance falls into this pattern. The insurance company has deep pockets and we don't. Our original intent was to protect ourselves, but it's not fair that because everything has gone well for us the insurance company is getting all our money. Ideally we can find a way to get our money back without suffering any harm in order to do so, but sometimes we think about other scenarios in which we my suffer harm but we recover what we've put in – or more.

The worst situation, however, is the one in which we feel that it's necessary to lose in order to win. We're usually looking for sympathy. And it's often from someone in particular. But in order to get sympathy, something has to be wrong. And it has to worse than whatever your “target” will describe. (He's competing too.) That's the down side. The sympathy, itself, is the up side. Is it worth it? That really depends on your competitive spirit and your endurance of whatever problem you have. Some glory in the sympathy but others would forgo the sympathy if they were problem-free.

And that's the way it is for all of these questions. Is the competition worth the discomfort? I guess that depends on you. As for me, sometimes yes and sometimes no.

June 5, 2017

Whose Pocket?

If you're not a large corporation with unlimited funds for lawyers (or if you haven't bribed the judge) it may be difficult for to get prompt and proper adjudication of a lawsuit. The problem is one that most affects a plaintiff who is an average citizen suing a large firm. Two of their (the defendant's) techniques (among others) are delays in trial, and extension of the proceedings in order to make the litigation too expensive for the plaintiff to afford.

On the other hand, we hear, on occasion, of a jury that finds for a plaintiff and awards not only compensatory damages, which may not be large, but punitive damages in an amount that staggers us. The payment of many millions – or tens or hundreds of millions – may be decreed. Of course the defendant will appeal and invoke any legalities that may help it (I'm assuming it's a corporation) from paying the damages – at least not as much as has been determined. So the plaintiff, who may have won the case, remains without compensation for the harm done him, and faces more time in court.

Settlements, of course, will sometimes, shorten the process. The problems with them are that the amounts paid are less and, after the lawyer is paid, may not represent adequate compensation for the damages and for the plaintiff's time and aggravation. Often moreover, the parties are not allowed to disclose the details of the settlement, in the hope that others won't be encouraged to sue in the hope of a windfall.

Another consideration is that the punitive damages may actually be excessive in relation to the harm to the individual, although it may not be small when damages to all of those affected are considered. It winds up as a windfall for the plaintiff and his lawyer – one that may not be warranted. It helps them, but not the public at large. It's not fair.

Can a better system be devised? Perhaps. I'm not especially concerned about corporations that have harmed our citizens and, although aware of the faults, would continue to do so because it helps their bottom line and they don't anticipate ever having to pay the piper – or at least not having to pay very much. (I must admit my view that some companies that are following the rules and are unaware of damage they do should be evaluate differently. I leave that concern for another time.) My unease is with those who feel they have been wronged. I realize that individual suits may be a form of extortion but I'm convinced that the greater fault is on the part of those who wronged them, if that is the case.

I also feel that a large payment for silence, or excessive punitive damages awarded to an individual because a jury is feeling its oats, or for whatever other reason, does not serve the public good, however much we may enjoy the fact that a corporation with deep pockets is being humbled. I am also troubled by the long delays which deprive the plaintiff of justice.

My lack of legal credentials, however, does not forestall me from making some proposals for dealing with this situation. I'm nothing if not all-knowing – even in areas in which I lack knowledge. And I also recognize the fact that at certain levels the rules are decided locally, reflecting local views rather than those of the federal government. If they are deemed reasonable and worthy, one or more of my proposals could be incorporated into state law. There are three areas that I want to address.

The first relates to punitive damages. They should go to the government – to all of us (for tax relief, improved government projects, aid for the needy). They are fines that should not go to the individual suing. Too much of it goes to his lawyer in any case. Decisions about punitive damages should be argued following a decision about responsibility and not be part of the initial findings of the jury, although compensatory damages may, as discussed below. Government lawyers should take over if an initial decision of guilt is made. They'll have more time and backing than the plaintiff's lawyer, and are better prepared to withstand the actions of an opposing corporation's staff.

The second area of note for me is that of compensatory damages. From my perspective they should be generous if the jury believes the defendant to be at fault. In addition to repayment for the actual offense, the following areas should be compensated (assuming they are not factors in that offense): time lost related to the offense itself and the legal actions that followed; legal expenses (and perhaps these should be specified so that they don't come from the overall settlement); embarrassment and damage to the plaintiff's reputation; anticipated future losses and costs likely to result from the wrong; and any other area that the jury considers appropriate. The threat of such damages and of government lawyers in the second phase of the action may convince the wrongdoer that, since there would be no consideration of punitive damages, a quick settlement, even if generous, would be less costly than protracted legal actions. (Of course if the jury decides that the suit was frivolous, costs should be paid by the plaintiff.) Class action suits would not be affected by these rules.

Finally there is the consideration of time. “Justice delayed is justice denied.” Trials should be swift. There should be short time limits set for consideration of the facts prior to trial, for appeal of verdicts, preparations for appeals since the one appealing will already know why he is dissatisfied, and any subsequent actions. At some point the awarded damages should be paid, irrespective of the stage of litigation. Whoever considers the decision unjust would have to initiate a new suit at that time, and the rules would be the same.

The purpose of such procedures would be to speed the judicial process and ensure the rapid payment of whatever is due – whether to the plaintiff or defendant. And it is aimed at the payment to the government of sums that will be available for costs that later result from the actions that prompted the suit.

If “deep pockets” are going to cover the costs of damages they've done – both to the individual and to society, and to pay them in a reasonable time, it may be appropriate to change the rules of “the game.”

May 25, 2017

Mixed Grill XXXV

I know you've been waiting for this. Perhaps to read, perhaps to trash it. Your choice.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Your place or mine – I prefer yours. The mine is wet and drafty. Or there's always a motel, but that costs

I give at the office – But I'll take anywhere

Only the good die young – Before they can be bad

Dance on the grave of an enemy – Footloose and fancy free

“Many smart men have come out of Indiana. And the smarter they were, the faster they came out.” (George Ade)

Suffer little children – Do I have to? They're really pains in the *** who make me suffer

A Midsummer Night's Drama – Post Shakespeare staging

Ring around the collar – Joint venture of Jacques Cartier and Steampunk

The soft underbelly – I won't touch it. It's up to NOW

Odds bodkin – OMG. He's an egotist and he's in Corpus Christie

Rainbow coalition – There's no white or black in the rainbow. This sounds like the Simpsons

Can't make head nor tail – I can understand not making head, but tail?

A penny for your thoughts – For two cents I'll give it to you

Don't stand nest to the apple tree – With anyone named Tell

Too late to make dessert – But I always have time for you

You don't say! – Anything worth hearing

We're all on the same page – Unfortunately we're using different books

Kscrslhv Brothers Mzrshkk & Mzrgnmpp Circus – The greatest show on Pluto

The rain won't hurt the rhubarb – Boy do you have another think coming

I've got your back – With a gun. Your money or your life

Check mate – A good place for pea coats

Rome wasn't built in a day – Actually it was in Lazio

Cut off your nose – To spite the plastic surgeon

The U. S. Constitution – Precedent of the United States

If you can't beat them, join them – Unless the heat's up, it's difficult to make scrambled eggs that way

We stand behind every door – Motto of the Acme Door Company

That's above my pay grade – Go away. You bother me

They're new paradigms – Don't give me that crap. Twenty cents is twenty cents

Anywhere I hang my hate is home – For a bigot, home is where the hate is

Close Encounters of the Third Kind – Your place or mine? And should we get someone else?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

OK. You read it. That was your responsibility and I take no blame.

May 29, 2017

Passing On (Advice)

You know you're getting old when you start dispensing advice to those younger than you, and I accept the adjective. I'm old. I wobble some, but I still think. And while I can, I regret that I must inform you that you get to be subject to my “wisdom,” if you choose to be. So I'll tell you how I've lived my life – and it's worked out pretty well. Perhaps some of my personal rules (“my” is an overstatement since they're hardly original, but they worked for me) will resonate with you.

1. Hope for the best. I'm optimistic by nature. Pessimism doesn't improve anything. It just makes you worry about it.
2. Prepare for the worst. For many of us the worst isn't so bad. I'm far better off than most of the world's people but I know there are going to be problems. There are always problems, and only you can guess what they might be. So, as the Boy Scouts say, “Be Prepared.” (For the Coast Guard it's “Semper Paratus.”)
3. Play the hand you're dealt. It is what it is. Fix it if necessary and if you're able, but you can't hide from a situation just because you don't like it. Deal with it. It's not only about you, so it's important to react to what's happening around you. Do something. Remember that things are only inevitable if you don't change them.
4. Plan for the future, but act in the present. The past is informative so you should use it. But don't let it paralyze you. Act when you must act. Never confuse what you want with reality.
5. Trust small, but verify large. The promises of others aren't always kept.
6. Do everything you can for others (and that includes cheering them up)– as soon as you can – but,
7. For better or worse, family comes first.
8. Honor your obligations, whether a promise or a note on the calendar. (Remember that appointments are promises, and schedules should be respected and followed.) Your word should be your bond.
9. Remember that others may not be as reliable as you. Cut them some slack.
10. Never give up.

“Pablum.”

Admit it. That's what you're thinking. (Cover your mouth when you yawn.)

And that's what I would have thought when I was young. A lot of sentimental advice of an old man. And it is. But that doesn't invalidate it. You may not agree with it all and you may not follow it, but it's worth considering. As time has gone by I've realized that life is not simply a series of isolated experiences that you can finesse but a sequence of challenges that all bear on each other, and which, with a reasonable amount of thought and preparation, you'll find a consistent and effective way you can meet.

There's more that I wanted to say, but I can't remember what it is. Which brings me to a final bit of advice. It's hardly new, but it's very effective. I learned it from my father. He didn't consciously teach it to me, but it was easy to see what he was doing. In his shirt pocket he had a stack of index cards which contained lists of what needed to be done. Nowadays all those things would be listed on some sort of battery-operated pocket device. I'm sure there's an app for it. But I'm a troglodyte and I scorn such devices. I still use paper and a pen. The older I get the more I forget. I still remember, however, how to write, while I have doubts whether I'd be able to learn enough about the “smartphones” and their equivalents to make them worth both the expense and my time.

In any case, however, I've presented a few rules by which I live. Perhaps they're of interest to you. Perhaps not. I suggest that it might be of value to you to give some thought to how you might conduct your own affairs in a manner that will reflect reasonably well on you at a time when you're too old to make significant changes. We don't live forever. There are no do-overs, so we might as well get it right the first time.

Enjoy.

May 22, 2017