Two Older Couples Walking on the Beach

               Two Older Couples Walking On The Beach

Two older couples walking on the beach, 

 separated by gender and 25 feet.

How about that Eagles game last night?

   How are your kids and grandkids?

Everything OK financially?

   Everything OK with your relationship?

Any thoughts on where we should eat tonight?

   Any thoughts on finding that spark again?

Can you believe that political ad we saw last night?

   Can you believe that men think they can legislate pregnancy?

Do you miss working sometimes?

   Do you wish he was still working at times?

We went to another funeral last week.

   We went to another funeral last week.

Where did the time go? Are kids really different than when we were young? Do you think about moving to a smaller place? Do you worry about aging ungracefully? About being alive but not living?

Do you worry that she will be OK when you're not there?

   Do you worry about being lonely when he is not here?

Can you imagine having not have asked her to marry you?

   Can you imagine not having said yes?

Two older couples walking on the beach,

   separated by gender and 25 feet.

______________________________________________________

This year, as I sat in the sun listening to the gentle crashing of the waves onto the shore, I noticed two older couples walking past, men a bit ahead of the women. Without thinking too hard, I tried to get into their heads to discern the difference in their conversational topics, and to wonder how those discussions mirrored those I have had during similar walks. The above is the result of those musings.

Two years ago, I wrote the poem below while on vacation with Nora at Dewey Beach, Delaware, a place where we have been visiting, first with the kids, and now just us, for 25 years. The very first time we went, we decided on the spur of the moment to spend a long weekend at the beach. We had no reservations, just the naive thought that we would find a hotel, and some quality time with the ocean and each other.  We did, in fact, find a place after only the second attempt, and have returned there, most years, ever since.

Two Old People Walking on the Beach

When I was younger, I would see two old people

walking on the beach.

Sometimes holding hands, sometimes holding sandals.

What are they thinking?  What could they talk about?

Passions burnt out?  Memories of bygone days?

Thoughts of friends no longer alive?

Thoughts of family no longer in touch?

Did they wish they looked as they did in the beginning?

Wonder where the time went, and how much longer

they might have together?

Two old people walking on the beach.

One is me, one my wife.

Sometimes we hold hands, sometimes sandals.

The view is magnificent today, she remarks,

and the sandpipers so cute.

Could we live here some day or would we get used to it,

take it for granted, stop seeing its beauty.

I like the pace, or lack thereof.  Perhaps we should come

more often.

I look in her eyes, see the beautiful girl I married, 

the wonderful woman still beside me.

Two old people walking on the beach.

Pro-Fetus

I have been pondering this thought for a while, so thought it about time I post my view that the pro-life movement should be referred to as the pro-fetus movement.  

Now, to be fair, there are many pro-life advocates who are truly pro life.  They believe that the commandment, Thou Shalt Not Kill, is an absolute.  That any killing is forbidden by God.  But in reality, that is a very hard perspective to maintain when compared with all the reasons that many of us are OK with taking a life.

Of course war is our greatest exception. Whether due to a perceived threat to world peace, a preemptive attack to prevent possible aggression, retaliation for an attack, to stop the domino effect of countries falling under the influence of communism, or merely to defend our access to energy sources, America has gone to war multiple times in the past 100 years, with the idea that killing those who stand against us is justified, even desired. And if you were against any of these wars, police actions or whatever other phrase was used to name the invasion and killing of people in other countries, you were generally not in the majority. More likely, rather than being praised as pro-life, you were called anti-American, a coward, or some other such derisive name. As someone who was fortunate enough to have been just young enough to miss serving in Vietnam, but not so young as to see who was cheering our onslaught in that country, I was well aware of the evangelical community's position; communists are evil, against God, not deserving of life.

Capital punishment is another issue for which most pro-fetus advocates come down on the side of killing. Certainly, I understand that someone who commits a crime so heinous that they are sentenced to the death penalty, might be easy to grant an exception to a pro-life stance. I recall a paper I wrote in high school positing that keeping someone alive, in prison, for decades until they die, might actually be considered more cruel than a quick easy death.  Still, the commandment Thou Shalt Not Kill, does not contain an asterisk with the words, except for those who commit certain crimes. Not to mention, it has been proven time and again that certain groups, lower economic and/or minorities, receive death sentences far more often percentage wise, than other groups. One might think that a pro-life person would see that when unequal justice produces a sentence as severe as death, then perhaps those in the pro-life camp might be better served to be against capital punishment.

But it gets far worse. The recent emergence of castle doctrine laws in some states, give an almost free hand to home owners to use deadly force against someone who enter their "castle" illegally. Now, like those who receive a death sentence, those who get shot while committing robbery don't generate much sympathy. But it is a far cry from chasing off an intruder with a gun (or baseball bat or big dog) to shooting them dead. I actually think that the everyday person who kills an intruder would not feel good about killing someone,  afterwards, especially considering that more than 60% of robberies do not involve an armed intruder. So, if you are pro-life, other than for self defense, defending or advocating for these type of castle doctrine laws might not reflect a pro-life attitude. 

As stark as these issues can be when one decides to proclaim that they are pro-life, what bothers me even more about the pro-life movement, and especially pro-life politicians, is that they don't seem to advocate as vociferously for a fetus once it becomes a baby, alive outside the womb. I mentioned in one of my previous posts about abortion that many of those states which have enacted the most severe abortion restrictions, have actually made it a felony to perform or even assist in an abortion, have the worst percentages in terms of child poverty and maternal death rate.

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2022/05/abortion.html

To be more specific, currently, the following states have abortion bans. Idaho, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Indiana, West Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, Louisiana. 

Nine of those states have complete bans, with no exceptions for rape or incest. (Oklahoma bans abortion at the time of fertilization, which, as I have mentioned before, means some contraception that works to prevent implantation in the uterus would now be considered an abortion). Mississippi has an incest exception. West Virginia has exceptions for rape, incest and mother's health up to 8 weeks for adults, 14 weeks for children. Idaho has exceptions for rape, incest and mother's health, but has been challenged in court for not allowing doctor's to perform abortions to save a mother's life later in the pregnancy. Indiana's ban has very limited exceptions but is not a totally complete ban. Wisconsin's ban is over 100 years old, but is being actively challenged by the governor and district attorney of that state.

Georgia and Ohio have abortion bans after 6 weeks, but courts in both states have temporarily delayed those laws taking effect.

Now, let's talk child poverty. New data from 2021 shows a remarkable decline in America's child poverty rate since 2019, an unexpected decline considering many thought that the pandemic would result in an increase in child poverty. It did not because of the various government spending plans (which began during the Trump administration and continued into Biden's term) which pumped an unprecedented amount of money into the hands of lower and middle class families, especially those with children. Now, with rising inflation, there may be an increase when 2022 ends, but at least for now, child poverty is at an all time low of 5.2%. 

I found it difficult to find 2021 child poverty rate numbers by state, but did find 2019 and 2020 numbers. In both years, the child poverty rate was highest in Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee, all in the bottom ten. Oddly, all those states have total bans on abortion. Texas was just out of the worst ten.  Of the other states, only Wisconsin was in the top half of states as having the least percentage of children living in poverty. 

As a side note, the overall poverty rate in 2021 was 11.6%, which is hard to imagine, that one out of 10 Americans, live at or below the poverty line. And, it is estimated that over 26 million Americans over the age of 65 were boosted above the poverty line via their Social Security payments. Remember that the next time a politician talks about eliminating Social Security, or who advocates reauthorizing it every few years. Especially if he/she claims to be pro-life.

Unfortunately, those same states listed above, have the highest poverty rates among all age groups in America. Since almost half of women who had abortions cited financial reasons, one would think that states banning abortion might realize that those who will be forced to carry their unwanted pregnancy to term would be those least likely to be able to support a child, which means even more children will live in poverty.  When I see the pro-life movement protesting at their various state capitals for more funding for child care, higher minimum wages, and better access to overall health care, I will give them their pro-life label. For now, they are clearly pro-fetus.

As for maternal death rates, those same anti-abortion law states rank at the bottom, with the highest maternal death rates in America. Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Missouri, and Texas all in the bottom 10, with 6 more of the 14 listed in the beginning of this post in the next bottom 10.  Only Wisconsin and West Virginia have maternal death rates lower than most other states.

Again, I do know some pro-life advocates who do their best to adhere to that very difficult axiom of Thou Shalt Not Kill. But most I talk to are not pro-life when it comes to war, the death penalty, castle doctrine laws, or state policies that address child poverty, overall poverty and maternal death rates. So, again, the best we can call them is pro-fetus, with a side of anti-women, and a big old helping of anti-choice.  When one consider that freedom of choice is one of the foundations of our American experiment in democracy, it surprises me that so many pro-life people would exhibit such an anti-American attitude concerning restricting half the population from making a choice about their reproductive lives. 

Like so many issues, having a strong opinion about what you would or would not do in your own life, is not the same as creating laws that mandate that strong opinion onto others.  Especially when that opinion represents the belief of a minority of the population. In the end, be pro-fetus, be against gay marriage, advocate for the abolition of contraception or inter racial marriage, by not having an abortion, not marrying someone of the same sex or different race, and not using contraception. It is your choice. 

Ah, the beauty of being pro-choice.

 

A Friend's Death

Earlier this year, I wrote a story about the loss within a month or so of two people who had shared a bit of my life with me. While neither could have been termed a "bosom" buddy, both represented different times in my life, different versions of the me that exists today.  Here is a link to that story.

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2022/03/death-and-friends.html

One of the results of that story, or I should say the sentiment in me that produced that story, is that I have spent the last 6 months or so trying to reconnect with various friends from my past. In one case, it was a couple with whom my wife and I, along with another couple, had spent many pleasant evenings at each others' homes, especially before we all started raising families. Gradually, we lost touch with this couple, Terry and Tom, so, using my internet sleuthing skills and the info I could remember, I tracked them down. That first conversation, with Terry, was far more than I could have expected. It was as if that much time had not passed, a feeling I was to experience a few more times since. As of now, all 3 couples have met once, with a 2nd event planned, and Terry even turned my wife onto a sewing club.

The second task was far more complicated. To contact the 8 friends with whom I had spent thousands of days (and especially nights), irresponsibility wasting our youth in adventures and rebellion, living for the moment. One, I had already reconnected with after hearing of the passing of her husband, one I had seen as recently as 6 or so years ago, and a few I had seen at a 50th birthday party, 14 years ago, but we had not all been together for at least 40 years. 

Slowly, I was able to tick them off as I found a phone number here, an address there, and by June I had spoken to all of them, Audrey, Barb, Jim, Kim, Matt, Mike, Teri and Tracy. During July, I had even managed to organize 2 small visits, one with Matt and Mike at Matt's house, one at a restaurant with Audrey, Tracy and Kim, plus Sue who, while not at the center of the group, flitted in and out over time.

The conversations, the memories, the updates all seemed genuine, and so we planned an all encompassing reunion in October, that being the first Saturday everyone was free.

Sadly though, today, I learned of Matt's passing. While not sure of the scope of a service which might be held for him, our own Big Chill scenario which I had consciously hoped to avoid, is now forthcoming. And while that doesn't mean everyone will be able to attend a service for Matt, it does mean that our October reunion will have one empty chair.

I have recounted the story of my mission to a number of people these past few months. Many thought it cool, some even recounted similar stories or stated that maybe they would try to do the same as well. Of course, not everyone wants to reconnect with old friends. Many people want to leave the past behind, feel that there is no going back. I understand that perspective. Our memories of the "old days" can be both tinted by rose colored glasses and marked by the regrets of decisions made, or not made. And, the reality is that while everyone sounds the same on the phone (isn't that amazing?), we all wear the years differently. 

For some, it is safer to remember what your friends looked like at 20. Seeing them at 60+ only reminds you that you are 60+ as well, and can engender thoughts of whether you have made good use of those years and whether those years have brought you to a place of happiness and satisfaction, or sadness and discontentment. Not to mention the question of whether you can plan a future 20 year reunion with those friends, and wonder if who, even yourself, might be in attendance.

For now, I expect, memories of Matt will pop into my head, as I imagine they will for the rest of the group. Most have already heard the news, partly due to my efforts of reconnecting with everyone. I am not sure if that is necessarily a positive thing, but I do know that if I had not spoken to Matt, met with Matt, texted Matt in these last few months, and then found out, a week or a month afterwards of his passing, I would be far more sad, although the knowledge that Matt was one of the first proponents of our reunion, offering his home as the site, makes the loss even more painful.

I have proposed a number of versions of what Judgment Day might encompass in the course of my posting on this blog. Perhaps it is as simple as, the more people who call you their friend, the higher up in the clouds you rise. In Matt's case, I can envision him up towards the top, making stupid jokes with his fellow angels. His passing is sad, but I am glad to feel that sadness knowing that I would not be experiencing if if not for our friendship those many years ago. 

I am sure we all had someone like Matt in our life. If you are game, perhaps you should try to see how he is doing. 

Good bye Matt, I will always remember your laugh, and your sense of fun loving adventure. 

Student Debt Decision

I saw a commercial the other day which showed a series of blue collar workers complaining about Biden's decision to forgive some student debt.  At the end, it encouraged us to contact our legislators and ask them to tell Biden not to bail out rich kids.  Since, in my last post about student debt, I mentioned that my own children and son's wife would benefit from any debt relief (my post predates Biden't announcement), I thought it prudent to text my children and daughter-in-law to tell them that they were rich, just in case they were living some type of middle class life.  

Here is a link to that other post.

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2022/05/student-debt-crisis.html

I did some research on the sponsors of that ad, American Action Network.  They are a conservative issue advocacy group aligned to the Republican Party, which was formed in 2010 by Fred Malek and Norm Colemen as a 501 organization.  For those who don't know it, a 501 organization is a non-profit organization, many of which pay no federal taxes and do not have to disclose where their donations come from.  One of those dark money organizations (and yes, I know Dems have them too).  

Fred Malek (who died in 2019), worked for a number of past Republican presidents, and supported the more recent GOP presidential candidates (although, curiously, not Donald Trump).  He made his fortune via the Marriot Corp, Northwest Airlines, and a couple of private equity firms.  He received his bachelor degree from the US Military Academy and his MBA from Harvard.  While his childhood was certainly not of the silver spoon variety, his two children were certainly rich kids, probably more so than mine.

Norm Coleman has a curious bio.  Participated actively in the counter culture movement, (claimed to have been at Woodstock), a law school graduate, was elected mayor of Saint Paul, MN, as a democrat.  But switched to the GOP in 1996, and continued to be the mayor of that city. In fact, he was the last GOP mayor of St. Paul.  Also served as Minnesota's senator in the early 2000's. Like Malek, someone most people might label "elite": an attorney who has held a few elected offices.  

Not withstanding that there are hundreds of 501 organizations who take donations from very rich people to buy ads to advocate for their beliefs, if we assume that this conservative organization is against providing relief for young people with high student debt, why would they go out of their way to phrase this as a rich vs middle class issue, especially when we know that many of the donations to this organization come from very wealthy individuals? And that, chances are, they don't pay any federal income taxes.

Also, since the income level stress test for student debt relief is $125K for an individual and $250K for a couple filing together, aren't those numbers reflected of, at best, upper middle class citizens.  Perhaps I am off base, but I consider the definition of a rich kids as someone coming from a family with millions of dollars.  A family where the kids don't even apply for federal student aid.  A family where the kids most likely don't go to state schools, certainly not community colleges.

Also, while $10K is a nice chunk of money, at least for my kids and those I know who have graduated from a 4 year college, most graduates start with at least $25K in debt.  As far as I can tell, the data seems to suggest that perhaps 30% of those who receive this relief will have their debt completely paid off, while another 20% or so will see their debt halved.  That is a far cry from the ad's suggestion that Biden's plan will eliminate everyone's student debt.  Also, let's not forget that if a student who started with $25K plus in debt, paid $300 a month for 5,6, 7, 8 years, paid off the majority of their debt and is really only getting student loan interest relief.  That is the case for my son who graduated in 2014.  Finally, anyone who has $50K or more in debt, while certainly grateful, is far from student debt free.

If you read my previous post, I talked about solving the root causes of this problem, one of which is the high cost of college education. Sadly, while Biden's plan does not address this, it does alter the payment rules so that no young adult has to pay more that 5% (I believe) of their income towards their student debt, and can seek debt relief if they pay the minimum for 10 years, which kind of links to my idea of loaning this money with very little interest, and/or focusing on debt interest relief once the principle is paid.

But again, I return to the question, why does the GOP, a party with a reputation of catering to the rich, seek to drive a wedge between the blue collar workers of America and rich kids? 

Here is where I see the insidiousness of this effort by organizations like American Action Network (AAN).  First, they know most Americans will not do the research of who is sponsoring this kind of ad, instead assuming it is some kind of organization that advocates for blue collar, everyday citizens.  Americans are notorious in their lack of attention to details, which AAN would know.  This reluctance to drill down on issues, leaves far too many Americans vulnerable to information which, on its face might resonate, but when researched results in questions such as the one I posit above. 

Second, I think it reflects another part of the overall plan to paint college graduates as elite, people who do not work, people who do not reflect the values of "real" Americans, even though those very people who run and donate to these organizations are themselves, elite as defined in this way.  Remember, Senators like Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton who also oppose this plan, are Ivy League graduates.  But they know, like American Action Network, that the demographics  of recent elections show that voters without college education vote GOP more than DEM, and those with college degrees the opposite.  So, first they pretend to be on the side of blue collar voters, even though they themselves are far from blue collar, then they pass tax laws that overwhelmingly favor the rich while providing crumbs for the rest of us, all the while pretending that the fault lies in the elite who are out of touch with the common man. 

But ultimately, what really upsets me is that this kind of attitude, being against federal assistance for others when it doesn't help you, in this case, non-college attending citizens, reflects the level of selfishness that seems to be so prevalent in our country.  This "where is my share" disease, yes, like a virus I call it a disease due to its ability to spread from person to person, is fast becoming our national motto.  Like America First, it tells everyone that unless a policy or program helps me, I am against it, even despite the fact that it most likely benefits a niece or nephew, or a fellow church goers child, or the relatives of your co-workers.

The fact is, there is no such thing as a government program that helps everyone.  We can certainly debate if our tax money is being used most efficiently, but that is not the "don't bail out rich kids" message. Do we scuttle the child tax credit because not everyone has children? Do we cease spending money on mass transit systems because most people don't take the bus or train? Do we cancel the mortgage interest deduction because not everyone owns a home? Do we end school lunch programs because some people are able to provide their kids with lunches? When do we stop worrying about what we aren't getting, and appreciate those programs that help us, or be grateful that our health and circumstance and efforts have resulted in the fact that we don't need assistance, but know that others were not as fortunate.

I recently had a discussion with a neighbor, family man with 2 young children, who was lamenting about the cost of health care insurance.  That in itself is a fair discussion, and we both have had many examples of how health care costs have skyrocketed, yet we also know that a lot of that cost goes to insurance companies, not to medical providers.  We shared many complaints.  

But one complaint we did not share was the problem of having to pay for health insurance even though he was healthy. Now, clearly, as an older adult, I value health insurance much more than a young man would. I am sure his attitude will evolve when he is 60 years old. But for now, I tried to balance his concern over this "wasted" money with the idea that perhaps he should be happy that he is healthy, and that he doesn't need to make use of his insurance all that much.  Sort of like, I am not upset that I paid my life insurance premiums for 30 years, but never got to use the service, because I didn't die. Isn't it better to have insurance and be healthy, than feel you are getting your money's worth because you are sick?

It is bad enough when middle and lower class Americans are jealous of a program which helps some other person in their economic status but not them. But seriously sick when organizations such as AAN, organizations funded and run by wealthy people via a tax law that allows them to raise and spend money without paying taxes, sponsor ads that attempt to drive a wedge between Americans who should be working together to address the economic inequality that has rewarded those AAN affiliated people, and penalized the majority of us.  Remember, about 90% of Americans earn less than $125K, so we should be happy for those in our boat, even if it is not us personally, because it is "our" boat.  Please keep that in mind when you see TV ads sponsored by dark money organizations run and funded by the rich, that tell you that you should be against assistance to people who need help. It is those people, the people who earn middle class wages and purchase middle class products and take middle class vacations that are most like you. When you protest programs that help people more like you, you are falling into the trap of the rich who can use their money to twist an issue and take advantage of your needs by fooling you to believe that helping someone else takes money away from programs that might help you. They don't want any program to help any of us, and until we realize that, we will continue to vote against our best interests.