Depressing

I heard from a colleague at work recently that Architects have the highest unemployment rate of any profession......We're Number 1!!!

I can't say that I'm suprised based on observation and, unfortunately, my own experience.  I spent a little over a year between  architecture jobs.  In the interim, I was a stay-at-home Dad, a Community College Instructor, a U.S. Census Enumerator, a Sonoma State Extended Education Green Building Certificate recipient, a California Architect's Board Supplemental Exam candidate, and all-around busy-body.

Then today, I read an article in Salon about the state of the architecture profession.  Let's just say...not good.  Perhaps the most depressing exerpt:

Taxes as punishment

One of the arguments I always hear from people on the right, is that progressive tax rates are a "punishment" for being successful.  The theory is that people will be less motivated to produce and succeed because as they make more money, they pay more taxes. 

What I want to ask is, Why do you view taxes as a punishment?  Don't we receive goods and services in return for those taxes?  I realize that many of the benefits of government are difficult to see and understand, and therefore difficult to put a true value on.  What is the value of the freedom and safety we receive from our defense department, and how do you quantify it? 

Baseball as life, or life as baseball?

During my recent period of unemployment, there has been a lot of political discussion about extending unemployment benefits. Many Republicans have been against the extension based on their belief that people are gaming the system and not looking for work hard enough because the government checks just keep coming. All the right-wing radio personalities have been railing about how the moochers like me are just stealing money from the producers because we're too lazy to go out and produce something on our own. I feel the disgust and resentment and outright hatred in their voices when they talk about people on unemployment.


My feeling, based on my experience, is that financial status has much more to do with circumstance than with merit, particularly for those on the top and the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. We can swim around the vastness of lower and upper middle class expending all our energy trying to make it up to that next financial level, but no amount of effort will ever achieve what many are born with. What bugs me is the people who have been given so much through mere circumstance, and believe they have achieved something through merit. I read a quote the other day, "He was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple." I feel like I hit a single, and got thrown out trying to stretch it into a double. And now that guy on third is giving me a hard time, even though I've got more hits than he does.

You're Welcome, America

Apparently, my colleagues and I did a pretty good job with the 2010 census. On time and under budget. You're Welcome, America.

I'm not racist, I'm just ignorant about race.

Julian Sanchez (via Andrew Sullivan)

Yet that's precisely why Paul's 1.0 argument breaks down on its own terms: at the scene of a four-century crime against humanity—the kidnap, torture, enslavement, and legal oppression of African-Americans—ideal theory fails. We libertarians, never burdened with an excess of governing power, have always had a utopian streak, a penchant for imagining what rich organic order would bubble up from the choices of free and equal citizens governed by a lean state enforcing a few simple rules. We tend to envision societies that, if not perfect, are at least consistently libertarian.

The caveat that Dr. Paul found necessary before making his libertarian argument against a portion of the civil rights act was "I'm not racist".  My feeling is that invariably, when someone has to say they're not racist they are usually saying something ignorant.  "I'm not racist, I'm just ignorant about race."

Drill, Baby, Drill!

Every asshole who ever chanted 'Drill baby drill' should have to report to the Gulf coast today for cleanup duty - Bill Maher

I hope the environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico changes the President's mind about opening up more area's to oil and gas exploration.

Catching up

It's been a while since I last posted, so I guess I should catch up on a few things.

I took the California Supplemental Exam 4 weeks ago and, true to form for the State beaurocracy, I haven't received the results yet. (fingers crossed)

The healthcare reform bill passed with great fanfare or consternation, depending on which side of the political spectrum you were on.  I see it as a great step forward and a major accomplishment against great odds.  I, and quite a few others, lost a lot of faith in whether the bill would pass after Scott Brown's election to the Senate, and after President Obama's State of the Union speech.  Speaker Pelosi really came through, in my opinion.

I will be starting a new job with the Census at the end of the month.  Obviously the work will only be temporary, but work is work.  I'm looking forward to getting out in the community, maybe getting some exercise and meeting some new people.  I'm excited about performing a job that is actually written into the Constitution.

There was finally some significant job growth around the country last month.  Hopefully the economy has turned the corner and job growth will continue.

That's all for now.  I will try to be blogging more regularly now that I have gotten back into it.

The Health-Care Summit: The Unbridgeable Gap

James Surowiecki at the New Yorker provides a pretty good summary of the Republican position based on yesterday's summit:

For Republicans, the current health-insurance system works reasonably well—in their minds, it’s a key part of what they kept referring to as “the best health-care system in the world”—and therefore whatever changes need to be should be small. The Republicans kept using the word “incremental” to describe their proposed changes, but this is really a red herring, in the sense that it implies that their ultimate goal is to dramatically revamp the current health-insurance system, and that they simply want to do so more slowly than Democrats. That’s not accurate: the Republicans are reasonably satisfied with what’s currently in place. The fact that tens of millions of Americans don’t have health insurance is not, in their mind, an issue that government should be trying to solve—at least not if it will cost any real money.

This is one of those essential difference between convervatives and liberals.  Conservatives don't believe the government can or should fix problems, and liberals do.

The Best Healthcare in the World!

I had a discussion on Facebook a few months ago with a guy I went to high school with who is a conservative. His claim, a claim I have heard from many conservatives, is that the United States has the best healthcare in the world. I tried to point out some statistics about how the U.S. actually ranks fairly low in terms of life expectancy and other factors, although we certainly outspend everyone else by a large margin. He countered with an anecdote about a Canadian who had come to the U.S. for treatment. As is usually the case, the discussion drifted off to no real conclusion since neither party was going to be convinced. Then today an Ezra Klein post about the bipartisan healthcare summit today helped to clarify the subject for me:

There's a difference between the statements "America has the best health-care system in the world" and "With enough money, you can purchase the best health care in the world in America."

This really summed up the difference in how we were looking at the healthcare system and how well it works.

Bipartisanship

The upcoming bipartisan day of negotiation regarding health care reform has sparked some interesting conversation about what bipartisanship really is.

The Republican leadership has requested the Democrats start from a clean slate by throwing out the existing bills that have been passed by both chambers of Congress.

Health Care Reform

I'm feeling quite discouraged by the direction Health Care Reform has taken since the State of the Union Address last week. There was a lot of debate and discussion about fixing health care during the long presidential campaign. Then there was a full year of legislative debate and discussion about fixing health care during President Obama's first year. Both houses of Congress have passed a bill and yet it seems like we are back at square one after the Massachusettes election. I thought the President could take the Congress to task and drag them over the finish line with an aggressive call to action, but instead he acted as if the debate should continue, asking any member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, to come forward with good ideas if they had any. This, to me, was the weakest possible message to send, other than to say they had failed and they should move on, and he was never going to do that. Ezra Klein made it plain:

Black and White

Ta-Nahisi Coates from The Atlantic had this to say about Chris Matthews comment "I forgot Obama was black" after last night's State of the Union address:

I would submit that a significant number of white people in this country, can not stop fighting on the lie. They can't cop to the fact that they really have no standing to speak on Obama's relationship to blackness, because they know so little about black people. It's always hard to say, "I don't know." But no one else can say it for you.

This comment really spoke some truth to me, partially because of my stubborn nature, but also because of my personal history. I grew up in a homogenous, small, white town in Wisconsin. My experience with non-white people was very limited, and my relationship with non-white people was essentially non-existent.

SOTU

Tonight is President Obama's first State of the Union address to Congress.  I have high hopes for what he will say and what he can accomplish afterwards.  I hope he outlines a strong, specific plan for how he wants Congress to proceed with the healthcare reform bill.  I hope that plan includes passing the Senate bill along with a reconciliation bill that fixes some of the Senate bill's problems (omit Medicaid funding for Nebraska, create a national exchange, a weaker excise tax on "cadillac plans").  This will make Republicans howl, but they will howl regardless, and they have not been willing to compromise so it makes no sense to keep trying. 

2010

Now that 2010 is here, the political scene for the midterm elections is starting to take shape.  At this point, I don't see how the Democrats can do much better than holding onto a majority in the Senate and the House, and I don't mean that to be pessimistic.  If a Senate with 60 members caucusing with the Democrats couldn't get Health Care Reform passed by now, then it doesn't really matter that much whether they have 51 or 60. 

With that in mind, I look to FiveThirtyEight.com to get reliable information about where the races stand. 

"We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us."

Here's an essay I wrote a few years ago for the AIA Redwood Empire newsletter in support of the SMART train funding that was on the ballot in November 2008.  I like to think it was my essay that pushed the voting over the top and got the SMART train funding passed.  (A boy can dream, can't he?)

“We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us.”

These famous words by Winston Churchill reveal the important role that architects have, not just in designing the physical world, but also in affecting the people and communities that are shaped by those designs. I suspect this important role is part of the allure of architecture for many people because architects have the chance to create an enduring mark on the world. I believe this desire to leave a legacy can and should also be manifest by architects in active and educated political involvement.

Yes We Carve

It's good to google yourself every once in a while.  For my sake, I'm glad that this gem still comes up on the first page.  Yes We Can!

George Washington

This quote from George Washington (via The Dish) really spoke to me:

"Much indeed to be regretted, party disputes are now carried to such a length, and truth is so enveloped in mist and false representation, that it is extremely difficult to know through what channel to seek it. This difficulty to one, who is of no party, and whose sole wish is to pursue with undeviating steps a path which would lead this country to respectability, wealth, and happiness, is exceedingly to be lamented. But such, for wise purposes, it is presumed, is the turbulence of human passions in party disputes, when victory more than truth is the palm contended for," - George Washington, in a letter to Timothy Pickering, July 27, 1795.

It feels very difficult lately to navigate through the extreme partisanship that tries to pass for legitimate political debate these days.  It's discouraging to see that the same problems plagued politics in 1795.  How has anything good ever gotten done by anyone?