Guitar Hero

“This is my guitar. There are many others like it, but this one is mine. My guitar is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life. Without me, my guitar is useless. Without my guitar, I am useless. I must play my guitar true. I will.  Amen.” - Gunnery Sergeant Hartman, senior guitar instructor, Full Metal Jacket.

After a quarter century, I have finally upgraded my guitar. 

My dream of being a guitar player was born in the same way most meaningful childhood dreams are born – from jealousy.  It was Prom Night 1980 on the Jersey shore, and everyone’s dates were gathered around the fire pit to listen to the guy strumming the guitar as the waves gently caressed the sand.  Thanks to that guy’s musical charms, that was the only caressing happening on that beach.  The girls gathered ‘round and were hypnotized by his renditions of Led Zeppelin classics, Steve Forbert ditties and Don McLean ballads.  OK, there's only one Don McLean ballad, but as we all know, that song goes on for hours.   I vowed never again would I let some musician kick metaphorical sand in my face by stealing my date’s attentions.  I would master the guitar, and the girls would swoon.

I got right to work.  An undertaking of this magnitude required deep thinking, however, and about 5 years worth of deep thinking passed quickly in the misty haze of college.  My first lesson happened in approximately 1985, when Terry Coe introduced me to the complex stylings of Pink Floyd and Neil Young.  Learn 4 chords and you can play about 80% of their entire catalog of tunes.

Practice is fairly sporadic when you don’t own a guitar, and I wanted to improve.  I must have dropped some major hints, because that Christmas, 1986 I believe, my brother bought me my first guitar.  It was a Hondo, very similar to a Fender or a Les Paul guitar since those brands also have strings and a neck - standard. The similarities end there, however.  Given my neanderthal talents on the instrument, we were perfectly matched.    It was a beginner’s model, and so was I.  Now I could play Pigs on the Wing (Part I), Horse with No Name, and Heart of Gold all day long, or at least until my fingers hurt.  10 minutes, tops.  I couldn’t sing along, though, since that skill was much like patting your head and rubbing your belly simultaneously, a trick that sounds easier than it is. 

 

For the first 18 years or so, I couldn’t play any song seamlessly from beginning to end. I knew pieces of about 10 songs, and I would pound these riffs out mercilessly, most famously jamming my interpretation of the ending of Starship Trooper by Yes.  That little sequence really helped build up my fingertip calluses.  It also helped clear the room on occasion.  No matter.  I was having fun.  I had forgotten that the original inspiration for learning guitar was to impress women.  It had morphed into a hobby that I was proud of, but only if no one ever heard me.  It was more fun to tell people that I played the guitar than to actually have to prove that I could play.

I did not treat my first guitar with the proper respect due a vintage Hondo.  I left it in damp basements.  I didn’t buy a case for it until 5 or 6 years ago.  I tuned it reluctantly.  I ignored it for periods of years in the 1990s and early 2000s.  Thankfully, I have recommitted to the art.  I am playing about 5 nights a week for 20 minutes or so.  I could struggle through dozens of songs, most of which a reasonably culturally aware passerby could recognize.  I had no idea until I bought the new guitar, though, how much that old Hondo was holding me back. 

 

With my new guitar, I know what an A chord is supposed to sound like now.

Sometimes, the equipment does make a difference.  You could have a very good golf swing, but until you hit a ball the first time with a King Cobra driver, you have no idea how good.  Upgrading from the classic wooden hockey stick to a top of the line composite can add speed and movement to your slapshot.  I now have a guitar that proves that I can play actual, recognizable songs from the beginning to the end.  I still have the strumming technique of an ape, but I am a guitar player, at least in the privacy of my basement.

I’m ready to head back to that beach in Jersey and claim my prize.

Hey, where’d everybody go?

   

Human Sacrifices

It is Ash Wednesday, the beginning of the Lenten season when we traditionally give up things for six weeks.  Many still fall back on the ol’ reliable sacrifices, like chocolate, watching TV, or gossiping about others.  I think that a Lenten sacrifice has to be more meaningful.  Choosing the proper sacrifice for the season is an intensely personal matter, but we can always use some suggestions from the public.  Let’s look to our leaders, heroes and role models for examples of what real sacrifice is all about.  What are they giving up for Lent?

·         House Speaker John Boehner:  Jobs.

·         Rep. Michelle Bachmann:  Facts.

·         2012 GOP candidate Mitt Romney:  Everything he believed in before 2007.

·         Rep. Paul Ryan:  Math.

·         Obama:  Give up pretending to like Hillary, chucking up 3 pointers all day long, and making crank calls to Biden’s office.

·         Michelle Obama:  Sleeves.

·         Sen. Harry Reid:  Daily P90X routine.

·         Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi:  Chicago-style politics.

·         Former SecDef Donald Rumsfeld:  Accountability.

·         WI Governor Scott Walker:  Good faith bargaining.

·         Wisconsin Public Employees:  8% of pay.

·         NPR employees:  Listening to NPR.

·         National media:  Sarah Palin’s Twitter feed.

·         Glenn Beck:  Viewers and sponsors.

·         WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange: Blind dates.

·         Fan base of small market major league baseball teams:  Optimism.

·         NFL owners:  Transparency.

·         NFL Players:  16 game schedule.

·         Slugger Albert Pujols:  St. Louis.

·         Former, and soon maybe to be current running back, Tiki Barber:  Sitting at home waiting for phone to ring.

·         Tiger Woods:  Swedish massages.

·         Miami Heat President Pat Riley:  Patience.

·         Justin Bieber:  Locks of hair.

·         Lady Gaga:  Pants.

·         Bruce Springsteen:  Snooki.

·         Future princess Kate Middleton:  Privacy.

·         Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences:  Relevance to the 18-45 demographic.

·         American Idol:  Ratings.

·         Biggest Loser Contestants:  Haven’t we done enough already?

·         Miami Heat:  Winning.

·         Charlie Sheen:  Losing.

Good luck with your commitments this spring!

Smells Like Teen Spirit

As first time parents of a 15 year old daughter, we set rules for our daughter with an eye towards safety and security, and hopefully we’re encouraging personal growth along the way.  We’d like her to make smart decisions, but realize that she may not always act in her own best long term interest, or the best interest of others.  In a perfect world, she would be able to self-regulate those impulses to do foolish things for short term gain (speeding, skipping homework, staying up too late), but we know that for her own good, “trust but verify” is a good policy.

As a first time 15 year old, it is hard for our daughter to understand the rationale behind our rules and regulations.  It’s to be expected.  She tries to argue the rules, bend the rules, pretend she didn’t hear the rules, and lash out at the rule makers.  She will often employ advocates – siblings, friends, other adults – to plead her case, or to blatantly trick us into changing the rules.  She likes to accuse us of being “freakishly overprotective”, to which we respond that we are merely being “protective”, and that there is a world of difference between the two concepts.  Of course, to the one being affected by the rules, there is no difference.  Freakishly or not, she says, the rules stifle her personal growth and freedom, and must go.

The impulses of adolescence do not always follow a predictable pattern, and we as parents must remain vigilant to insure that our daughter has an environment that allows her to grow into the productive adult we know she can become, respectful of others while focused our her dreams.

In our financial and energy industries, we as a nation set rules with an eye towards safety and security, and hopefully we’re encouraging business growth along the way.  We would like these industries to make smart decisions, but realize that they may not always act in their own best long term interest, or the best interest of others.  In a perfect world, they would be able to self-regulate those impulses to do foolish things for short term gain (pollute the environment, promote dangerous financial products for short term bonuses, use cheaper materials for infrastructure to cut costs), but we know that for their own good, “trust but verify” is a good policy.

In our financial and energy industries, it is hard for these companies to understand the rationale behind our rules and regulations. It’s to be expected.  They try to argue the rules, bend the rules, pretend they didn’t hear the rules, and lash out at the rule makers.  They will often employ advocates – lobbyists, politicians, commentators – to plead their case, or to blatantly trick us into changing the rules.  They like to accuse us of being “freakishly over-regulatory”, to which we respond that we are merely being “regulatory”, and that there is a world of difference between the two concepts.  Of course, to the one being affected by the rules, there is no difference.  Freakishly or not, they say, the rules stifle their profit growth and freedom, and must go.

The impulses of capitalism do not always follow a predictable pattern, and we as citizens must remain vigilant to insure that our industries have an environment that allow them to grow into the productive businesses we know they can become, respectful of others while focused our their bottom line.

Of course, my daughter will outgrow puberty and all of its hormone-fueled behaviors.  At that seemingly distant point, she will set her own rules and guidelines for self-control, grounded in the lessons and dysfunction that we instilled in her.  The financial and energy industries in this country will never outgrow the sometimes self-destructive urges of take-no-prisoners capitalism, and reasonable regulation will always be required to protect our nation and its citizens – as well as protect the industry from itself. 

 

Reasonable people can debate the web of regulations that can stifle industry when government oversight runs amok.  Examples of over-regulation clothed in good intentions are everywhere.  Just like parents, we as citizens can be blinded by disappointment and anger when things go wrong or mistakes are made, and we can vote and act out of emotion instead of calm, deliberate reason.  Rules and regulations require constant review to remaining meaningful and effective in changing times, and that’s true for daughters and businesses. 

Reasonable people should also recognize that those who are to be regulated will lash out like teenage girls when confronted with any restrictions on their activities.  It’s human nature, and we should be wary whenever a company cries out reflexively, “It’s not fair!”  We need to tell our financial and energy industries firmly and in a unified voice our motto: “I know you don’t think it’s fair, sweetheart, but if I’ve told you once, I’ve told you a thousand times - trust but verify.”

Works in my house...as far as I know, anyway.

True Wellness Balances Left and Right

Health care in America is an intensely personal and private matter that has enormous public implications.  As much as we would like to compartmentalize our personal health decisions away from the public impact of those decisions, we cannot.  If we contract the flu and do not seek treatment, we are more likely to infect others.  If we do not participate in a health insurance program and become injured in a car accident, the costs of emergency care are shared by all.  As a national ethos, we value independence and self-reliance; as a society (and humanity as a whole), we are interdependent and affected by the decisions and actions of our neighbors.  It may not always be obvious in the moment, but it is nonetheless true.  Somewhere in the middle of these competing values lie privacy rights, and therein is a philosophical battleground.

With this in mind, I am drawn to a current debate regarding wellness programs.  Wellness programs have gained popularity with employers as a way to encourage positive private health decisions that promote positive outcomes for the entire group.  Most wellness programs allow individuals to voluntarily participate to improve their own health, while the employee’s participation has the added benefit of keeping down potential health care costs for the entire population.  Productivity of workers has been shown to increase in work environments that promote personal wellness.  These programs include among other things weight loss contests, health risk screenings, and exercise classes.  This sounds like a perfect solution that has both an individual and group benefit.  Things get slightly more complicated when we start talking about effective metrics for these programs, and the potential for privacy breaches.

Here’s an example of what is being debated right now.  According to some interest groups, regulatory barriers exist that discourage employers from offering wellness programs.  The main barrier seems to be the rules protecting personal private health information.  Health care advocates and employers need this data to measure results and encourage behaviors that benefits everyone in the select group.   Some labor advocates have accused employers of sponsoring wellness programs to penalize or remove employees from their health plans, and some regulators agree. 
   
Another example is the collection of family medical history information from employees during employer sponsored wellness screenings.  Medical professionals will tell you that without information on someone’s family medical history and the person’s predisposition for certain conditions, it is more difficult to draw up a proper wellness regimen that fits the individual.  Without family history, you are left with a generic one-size-fits-all approach, hardly the best advice for custom situations.  The GINA law (Genetic Information Nondisclosure Act) bars employers from offering any incentive to employees to divulge this family history.  Is this classic overregulation, or reasonable privacy protection?

Gretchen Young, senior vice president for health policy at The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC), a not-for-profit representing large U.S. employers, recently spoke to regulators at a meeting held by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services:

Even if plans do not give their participants a financial incentive to complete a risk assessment, they are still unable to use any family medical history obtained from the risk assessment to guide these individuals into disease management programs, Young explained, noting that “experience has shown that without the encouragement of a health professional, many participants who would benefit from participation in a disease management program will never enroll.”

Source article:  http://www.shrm.org/hrdisciplines/benefits/Articles/Pages/RegulatorsImpede.aspx 

Employers, it can be argued, are trying to help their workforce with wellness programs tailored to individuals.  Regulators, it can be argued, are suspicious of employer’s motives for wanting to be so benevolent, and have a critical role protecting workers.  Can both sides be right?

Unfortunately, even something as universally accepted as personal wellness and overall health awareness has its challenges, and Right and Left have conflicting, and in my opinion, legitimate views on the subject.  This issue isn’t even viewed uniformly within the same political persuasions.

Some on the right would question the corporate intrusion into personal health choices, another example of the ‘nanny state’; others on the Right might reflexively see these regulatory barriers as another government expense driving up health costs, and therefore support elimination of these regulations.

Some on the left will argue that this invasion of privacy will be used to discriminate against high risk individuals in employment decisions (and it is an invasion if those who comply with the medical history requests receive financial benefits that others who are more guarded with their history do not); others on the Left will say that wellness programs like this are the best way to promote a stronger workforce, and these programs represent an employee-employer relationship model worth expanding.

Clearly, it will take some unlikely alliances to move wellness programs into the 21^st century.  The answer to this issue may not fit neatly onto a campaign bumper sticker, and each side’s proponents cannot easily be given political labels.  Real life, as it turns out, is much more complicated.

Editor’s Note:  A full posting on wellness, and I haven’t even mentioned the silly attacks on Michelle Obama’s promotion of healthy eating habits.  Who knew telling you to ‘eat your vegetables’ like your mama told you was the 3^rd rail of politics.  Bon appetite, and be well! 

The GOP is Right

One of the GOP’s regular talking points resonates with populist power.  “The government should manage its budget just like hard working families manage their household budgets.”  It has common sense appeal, and many of us can relate to having to make difficult trade-offs in life because some want (and sometimes some need) is beyond our ability to pay for it, either now or in the future. 

So I’ll join in the experiment, and imagine our government managing its finances just like my family would, and many of my neighbors do today.  It is not fair to compare government revenue to household revenue, since household revenue is generally fixed by salaries of the parent(s), and government revenue fluctuates based on economic conditions across the country and the globe.  We can focus on spending, however, and that seems to be the focus of today’s debate anyway.  Let’s see…

Our house needs new windows.  The old windows are unsafe for our children because they are heavy and they have a tendency to fall quickly and without notice.  The windows are no longer well sealed, and the drafts of cold wind from the outside are driving up our heating bills.  The cost of the oil to heat our home can fluctuate from month to month, and it is tough on our budgeting to predict the price.  We make the decision to buy the new windows, and finance the cost over a period of years.  While this puts our family into debt in the short term, it does reduce our dependence on the volatility of the oil bill, and better protects our kids from injury.  As an extra benefit, the value of our entire home increases more than the cost of the windows.  This is a good debt to incur.

We value our kid’s education, so we are saving money for college every month.  Since college could cost more than we have saved so far, we are prepared to incur some debt to finance part of their education.  Of course, we are open and honest with the kids that we will contribute towards their future in this manner, but part of the bill will come to them.  As beneficiaries of the great American college education, they will need to shoulder some of the burden, but we believe that a college educated child has a better long term earning potential than one without a college education.  This is a spending decision that will pay off for us as a family.

We need transportation to get to and from work.  We could consider moving into an urban area with public transportation available, but that has its own trade-offs, and it isn’t entirely cost-neutral.  We decide to buy a car, and regularly maintain that car according to manufacturer’s recommendations.  We want the car to last as long as possible.  There are times when paying for the next tune up puts us behind, but we realize that a repair bill would be far more costly.  It doesn't need to be the newest car, but it does need to be efficient.  Paying a little more up front for the most efficient car will pay off down the road. 

We contribute to charitable causes that our friends and family support.  If someone is running a 5K for cancer research or a bike ride for MS, we will allocate some dollars to these worthy efforts.  We know that it is important as contributors to society to be engaged in this manner, and our children need to know that no matter how tight things may be, supporting those in need during their time of need is worth the sacrifice.  We are not one family in isolation, but one family that is dependent on the health of the entire community.  These contributions may need to be reduced, but never completely eliminated.

We save money for our future health care expenses, knowing that it is inevitable that we will someday need health care assistance.  We pay the premiums as insurance protection, and live a lifestyle with smart eating and regular exercise.  We take responsibility for our own health, but realize that the insurance is mandatory.  I try to work for the company with the best health plan, usually the one with the largest pool of participants.

We believe as a family that the future belongs to those who have a creative streak and can synthesize information in new ways.  Rote book learning is a good foundation, but our kids need exposure to the arts to truly succeed and stand out in the 21^st century.  Therefore, part of our limited household budget will go towards dance and music classes for the kids.  Some may see this as an extravagance, but we see it as a necessary part of raising a well-rounded generation of active, curious, lifelong learners.

We eat out at restaurants too often.  If we divert that money to grocery shopping and eating at home, the cost per meal is less.  We are not delusional – we recognize that money not spent at a restaurant doesn’t flow directly to our family’s bottom line.  We understand that the real savings is the difference between the restaurant cost and the grocery store cost added to our home infrastructure cost (heat, light, water, cooking utensils, etc.).  Eating at home is cheaper, but not as the full cost of restaurant meal.  We can cut here.

Home defense is an area where we can reduce our costs monthly.    We can buy better locks, and install better lighting around the outside.  An expensive alarm system might make us fell safer, but there are other, less costly ways to provide for our defense.

In short, we as a family understand the difference between good debt and bad debt, and we manage our finances accordingly.  We agree with the GOP that our government should manage finances with the same philosophy as our family.  Not all dollars within our budget are equal. And each cutting and spending decision does not carry equal weight. 

Our family financial future is a marathon, not a sprint.  We go up and down, debt rises and fall based on circumstances.  If we keep our eye firmly fixed on the end of the road, financial freedom, we will get there.  We also recognize that trying to get their by exclusively eliminating all of our spending is counterproductive, and ultimately the wrong course. 

Our family will invest in infrastructure and education, so perhaps our government should do the same.  Thanks for the advice, Republican Party!

Two Cheese Heads

I have tried to remain calm.  I would not call myself an alarmist, and in matters of politics and economics, I prefer to take the long view.  The pendulum swings left then right then left then right again, and the genius of our form of government is that things never sway too far in either direction for too long.  The nation endures, and in fact, prospers.  Things are never as grim as they seem.  What is happening in Wisconsin, however, has me alarmed.

Like many of you out there in Internet Land, I have been following the situation in Madison, WI closely, and I have been dumbfounded by the new Governor’s reckless actions all in service of a transparently political agenda.  I am not sure how else to make sense of the fact that the unions have conceded to the budget’s financial demands of reduced pay and benefits, yet the Governor still insists that they give up their rights to collectively bargain in the future. 

 

I was even more dumbfounded after the Governor was taped on a prank phone call admitting that he considered planting agitators in amongst the protesters, and that he was preparing to negotiate with the Democratic opposition in bad faith (basically tricking them to return to the state as a trap, with no intention of truly hearing their position).  The episode inspired me to make my own call to the Governor, and as luck would have it, I was connected directly to Scott Walker himself.  Good thing I had my tape recorder handy. 

I think that the pressure of the situation is getting to him.  You can judge for yourself, from the transcript below, if he is becoming increasingly unhinged as the protests rage and public sentiment turns against his proposals:

MSRP:  The Right wing media has compared your battle with public service unions to Reagan’s battle with the air traffic controllers in 1981.  Of course, that comparison is absurd on many levels; the two situations couldn’t be more different, except for the fact that unions are in both stories.  They say that Reagan was tough as nails in that moment of crisis.  What about you?  Are you the new Reagan?

WALKER:  As I think it was nails that said, and I’m really really flattered, cos he got it right. I mean he might be nails, but I’m frikin bayonets, you know. I’m battle tested man. I’m tired, I’m so tired of pretending like my life isn’t perfect and bitchin and just winning every second and I’m not perfect and bitchin and just delivering the goods at every frikin turn, because, look what I’m dealing with man, I’m dealing with fools and trolls, dealing with soft targets and its just, you know its just strafing runs in my underwear before my first cup of coffee because I don’t have time for these clowns. I don’t have time for their judgment and their stupidity and you know they lay down with their ugly wives in front of their ugly children and look at their loser lives and then they look at me and they say “I can’t process it” well no you never will stop trying, just sit back and enjoy the show. You know?  [Copied from: Transcript of Charlie Sheen Meltdown on Alex Jones Radio Show | The Global Herald http://theglobalherald.com/transcript-of-charlie-sheen-meltdown-on-alex-jones-radio-show/12032/#ixzz1FT54KAak]

MSRP:  That’s tough talk about the Democrats in the State Senate, don’t you think, Governor?  Your careless rhetoric is not helping solve problems in your state.  Face it, you’ve won by getting the unions to agree to your financial conditions.  Now it’s all just about politics and pleasing your corporate masters, isn’t it?

WALKER:  Boom, that’s the whole movie, that’s life. That’s life, there’s nobility in that, there’s focus, it’s genuine, it’s crystal and it’s pure and it’s available to everybody. So just shut your traps and put down your McDonald’s, your magazines, your TMZ and the rest of it and focus on something that matters. But you can’t focus on things that matter if all you’ve been is asleep for forty years. Funny how sleep rhymes with sheep. You know. Anyway. We’re getting off topic. We don’t care anymore Alex, we don’t care. Let’s get to the work business because there’s been a lot of speculation, a lot of rumors. Imagine that with the media.  [Copied from: Transcript of Charlie Sheen Meltdown on Alex Jones Radio Show | The Global Herald http://theglobalherald.com/transcript-of-charlie-sheen-meltdown-on-alex-jones-radio-show/12032/#ixzz1FT5GfhoD ]

MSRP:  My name isn’t Alex and I am not a legitimate member of the media, but thanks.  I heard that the Democratic leader in the Senate has been trying to contact you directly to see if there is any common ground that will allow for a resolution of this problem.  Republican state Sen. Dale Schultz was open to a resolution that would temporarily strip workers of the collective-bargaining rights, but then bring them back after 2 years.  This doesn't sound like much of a deal for state employees, but still you announced that this isn’t good enough. You want both the cuts and the union-busting provisions, and will accept nothing less.  Will you take his phone call and agree to listen to reasonable compromise options for the benefit of all Wisconsin residents? 

WALKER:  Yeah I didn’t care about that vanity card. In fact I went right straight home with that one and just dispelled that. And that was actually, you know, one of the few compliments that clown has paid me in freakin almost a decade. But I’m excited to get back to work and not to completely discount what you just talked about, if you bring up these turds, these little [inaudible] losers, there’s no reason to then, you know, bring them back into the fold because I have real fans, they have nothing. They have zero. They have that night and I will forget about them as my last image of them exits my beautiful home. and they will get out there and they will sell me and they will lose. And they will lose the rest of their lives as they think about me and my life the rest of their lives, so, bring me a challenge somebody, because, you know, it just ain’t there. Winning.  [Copied from: Transcript of Charlie Sheen Meltdown on Alex Jones Radio Show | The Global Herald http://theglobalherald.com/transcript-of-charlie-sheen-meltdown-on-alex-jones-radio-show/12032/#ixzz1FT5TuRcJ]

MSRP:   Those unions who supported your campaign are exempt from the proposed law.  This is so embarrassing to the State Trooper’s union that they have rescinded their endorsement from the 2010 election.  Gov. Walker, I do not believe that saying “my bad” is good enough, do you?

WALKER:  It’s yeah, it’s an understatement, you know it’s, I’m sorry man I got magic and I got poetry at my fingertips most of the time and this includes naps. I’m an F-18 and I will destroy you in the air and I will deploy my ordnance to the ground.  [Copied from: Transcript of Charlie Sheen Meltdown on Alex Jones Radio Show | The Global Herald http://theglobalherald.com/transcript-of-charlie-sheen-meltdown-on-alex-jones-radio-show/12032/#ixzz1FT5jfPWY]

MSRP:  It appears that you are gambling that your extreme position will make you a darling with conservatives.  You are looking for support from within your own party, but that support has been tepid at best.  Gov. Daniels in Indiana, possible GOP candidate for President, will not support an elimination of collective bargaining rights in his state.  Tea Party darling Rick Scott in Florida will not support elimination of collective bargaining rights in his state.  Scott was quoted as saying, “My belief is as long as people know what they’re doing, collective bargaining is fine.”  Romney issued a weak statement that did not even mention you by name.  You must not be feeling the love.  What would you say to them if they were in the room right now?

WALKER: I would say, I am sorry if I offended you. I didn’t know you were so sensitive.   I think the mistake I made is that people misinterpret my passion for anger.  It’s all about judgment. No real gratitude. They are not welcome to be in the presence of what I am delivering. They need to say wow, look what this guy’s doing for all of us. [Copied from: Transcript of Charlie Sheen 20/20 interview, ABC Television]

MSRP:  I hope you get the help you need, and quickly.  It could be time for an intervention.

WALKER:  (Dial tone)

To Infinity and Beyond!

How long can we live?

No one knows for sure how long they will live, but science does give us a rough idea of how long we can live.  In the year 1900, life expectancy was 48 years for men and 50 years for women in the US.  Thanks to surgical advances, food and water safety improvements, immunizations from diseases, and other factors, by the year 2000, life expectancy grew to 74 years for men and 79 years for women.  Medical science holds the promise of raising these average ages well into the future, but what’s the age at the top of the curve? 

 

There must be an upper limit to life expectancy.  Even if we cured all diseases and perfected nutritional intake to maximize our flesh and blood selves, eventually we age and “wear out”.  We will all ultimately die, although more and more of us will succumb to the scourge of old age than some other underlying condition.  In fact, more of us are reaching the end because of age instead of illness now.

Yes, more people are dying of old age these days, but not necessarily because more people are growing old.  The reason code for “Cause of Death” on various state and international death certificates is being updated with this cause.  “Old age” has only recently become the reason code of choice in some jurisdictions, and it isn’t exactly the most specific reason you could use.  If you think about it, some other event typically accompanies the onset of the end.  When old age strikes, the heart may stop.  It’s tired and worn out.  The victim is 104.  Did she die of a heart attack, or old age?  Increasingly, medical professionals are opting for the more generic, non-specific “old age” code, and that decision has far-reaching impacts.

Researchers use the data collected from countries around the world on cause of death to allocate dollars towards preventable diseases.  Deciding that someone passed on from old age, therefore, is not merely an academic exercise.  It has real world, financial implications that affect the living.  For example, if one person is listed in the records as having died of cancer, that’s a “preventable” condition, eligible for funding.  This is where that one reason code on a certificate versus another has implications beyond the deceased and their grieving family. 

 

While old age is getting more of us, either through a statistical counting anomaly or actual old age conditions, we are discovering a route to virtual immortality to circumvent Father Time.  Our lives were once defined by the stuff we kept, the stuff that wore out or was thrown away, and greedy grandkids and distant relatives were left to fight over the antique lamp or the valuable coin collection that remained in the attic.  In modern times, more of our creations and belongings, however, are ideas and messages and personal diaries in cyberspace.  What happens to our blog posts, our YouTube videos, our Flickr photo albums, and our Facebook accounts?

 

Businesses are springing up to handle the expected demand for afterlife digital management.  Some businesses are as simple as warehouses for our online content and passwords.  Legacy Locker already provides data content and password management services for the deceased.  Other businesses allow you to plan messages and virtual activities for the post-flesh years.  For example, DeathSwitch.com will send messages or tweets from you to loved ones at specified times in the future when you cannot.  You can plan digital confessions, or virtual revenge, because what do you care?  You’re already gone! 

 

Margaret Wertheim, author of The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace, wrote that some believe that “our essence lies not in our matter but in a pattern of data.”  In this belief system, we can live beyond our mortal years in the bytes we leave behind.  While you may think that great writers and public figures have done this for centuries through books and paintings, the difference today is that you and I can enjoy the same immortal legacy, and our work product will never gray, fade or disappear.  This represents the promise of the Internet Age – a flattening of class and station, the ultimate in democratization.  We can all have our own reality shows that never end, and the living can experience us whenever they choose with the click of a mouse.  While I believe that there must be an upper limit to how long a human being can go on, it does not appear that there is a limit to how long our virtual being can survive.  It’s immortality, whether we like it or not. 

 

With over 500 million users of Facebook, over 50 million Twitter messages sent daily, and countless personal bloggers out there, perhaps the question should not be “How long can we live?”  The new question should be, “How long should we live?”  The answer may no longer be up to us once we hit “save” or “send”, and dying of old age may become an anachronistic concept to tomorrow’s techno-generations. 

 

Narcissus fell in love with his own reflection, and died in that very spot.  I hope we do not suffer the same fate and die staring into our computers at the megabytes of our virtual selves.  Yikes.