Wanna know what I think? Well, I'll tell you what I think.

As you'll discover, my point of view is definitely different. Read my thoughts, learn a few things, have a chuckle.

July 2, 2003

What's with the nasty habit of newlyweds' shoving wedding cake into each other's faces? The first time someone did it, it was by accident. The next time, it was deliberate and maybe fun because the other spouse did not expect it. Now it's become a de rigueur part of the wedding reception. It's a deplorable spectacle: newlyweds starting off their married life by turning what is supposed to be an affectionate gesture into a knock down, drag out fight, ruining the rented tux and the expensive wedding dress, not to mention a perfectly fine and costly wedding cake. If my bride did that to me, it would be the shortest marriage anyone ever saw. Call me old fashioned, but I prefer my cake in my mouth not on my face.

July 5, 2003

There are regular topics that come up over and over again in the press and in popular discourse: we are running out of potable water, there is an ever bigger hole in the ozone layer, tropical forests are disappearing, 90% of fish in the oceans have been depleted, we are faced with global warming, AIDS, famine, wars, polluted streams, dirty air... Then, invariably, the person bringing up the topic talks about what to do to mitigate the problem: ban fishing in certain areas to allow fish stocks to recover, impose a moratorium on logging in certain parts of the forests, reduce greenhouse gases, etc.

Nobody seems to connect the dots and admit the one and only root source of the problem: Human overpopulation. It's the elephant in the room that no one wants to acknowledge. Each and every one of these problems is due to overpopulation (ex. there is no 'shortage' of potable water, there is an 'overage' of people) and can only be solved by getting our numbers back to sustainable levels. Everyone wants to "feed the children", but no one tries to help people make fewer children they can't even feed. We Humans have to accept that we can't have both quality and quantity. Either we can have quantity, i.e. a lot of Humans who live in primitive conditions or we can have quality, i.e. an American lifestyle for a much smaller world population. What we have right now is 6 billion people (and soon to be 10 billion and soon after that 20 billion) who all want to consume the earth's resources like Americans. That's unsustainable and will result in a global disaster. Either we work on reducing world population or scourges like SARS and AIDS will take care of the problem for us in a much more painful way. I will get the ball rolling by pledging not to reproduce. I will adopt instead. There are millions of orphans on this planet who would love nothing more than a family of their own.

As an aside, I find it strange that when Japan's population mushroomed (Human population that is -- all other populations were decimated), no one said a word. Now that Japan's population is shrinking slightly, U.S. commentators are saying it's a catastrophe and Japan should ease its immigration policies to allow its population to grow once again. Quite the contrary, the current trend is a blessing and will ease the pressure and give the Japanese the breathing room they crave. We live in a finite world and cannot have infinite growth.

Right here in the U.S., our fearless leaders have decided our population must continue to grow and have adopted liberal immigration policies to achieve that goal. Our population would shrink were it not for immigration but the "growth mindset" is so ingrained that many are convinced we must have growth at all costs: to them, population growth means consumption growth which means sales growth which means increasing stock prices and a growing economy. Once again, I have to point out the obvious: we cannot continue to grow infinitely on a finite planet. The day has come that we have to accept zero growth. In the short term, we actually need negative growth until we reach sustainable population levels at which point we can settle for zero growth. The days of constant growth have to come to an end, sooner rather than later, while there is still something left on this Earth that can be saved.

By not taking action and living in an unsustainable manner, we are stealing resources from future generations. They are the ones who will pay the price for our selfishness and inaction.

While I may not agree with the tactics it uses to implement it, I applaud the Chinese government for its "one family: one child" policy. It is the only government on this planet that realizes the need to shrink its population and does something about it. The whole planet is overpopulated, not just China. The whole planet should take action. In the U.S., we do not need a "one family: one child" policy. All we need to do is change our mindset about "growth at all costs" and lower immigration quotas so our population starts to slowly shrink. When I say this, people will often tell me: "but if we reduce immigration, many jobs will not be filled." If the population shrinks, there will be fewer jobs to fill. In other words, a smaller population needs fewer plumbers, restaurant workers, engineers, etc.

Another common response is: "this country is so vast, there is room for a lot more people." The problem is not a shortage of space, it's a shortage of everything else: clean air, water, energy, wood, food and so on.

July 8, 2003

Heard over the PA system today at the gym: "Attention all members and guests, this is a staff page for Becky Muller." If you're paging a staff member, why do you need the members' attention? It's plain silly. On my way out, I asked the young woman at the front desk why she always said "attention all members and guests" even when she was paging a staff member. She looked like a deer caught in the headlights and stammered: "but it's our policy." Two days later, I smiled when I heard over the PA: "Attention all staff, this is a page for Tim Davies."

Sometimes we do things without thinking why we do them. We operate on autopilot. All we need to change our behavior is for someone to make us conscious of it.

July 15, 2003

Proof that I am not the only one who encounters incompetent customer service reps: Popular Science magazine called Levi's to inquire about their nanotechnology-based Stain Defender Dockers. Here is the funny result.

July 17, 2003

In the August 2003 issue of Inc. Magazine (page 70), in a feature about Portland, Maine, the writer mentions its "envious" location. It's envious of what exactly? The writer didn't say.

July 23, 2003

I wanted to buy a Dell all-in-one printer/scanner/fax/copier. Dell supposedly wrote the book on e-business. I went to their website to get all the technical details on the machine. There was very little information.

I called their sales department and asked if the machine came with OCR software, what brand of software, and whether it was a light version or a full version. The representative replied: "OCR?" I explained to her what that was but she didn't have a clue so she transferred me to the department that handles printers. The person who took my call confirmed the machine came with OCR software but didn't know anything else. He transferred me to the specialist on this model. I told him my questions. He had to put me on hold to research the answers and then came back and gave them to me. These were not difficult questions yet it was arduous to get answers. When I wanted to buy a laptop, I also found Dell's website lacking in information. The sales rep was not well informed either. I ended up buying a different brand of laptop and printer. Dell doesn't deserve its reputation.

Dell should put together a list of all the technical questions its customers ask and then make sure to provide on its website detailed specs for each product that answer these questions. If I had found the answers on Dell's website, I would have ordered online -- without even calling Dell. I am willing to bet that Dell is losing many sales because its customers can't get the answers they need.

July 25, 2003

According to the New York Times, "the average American wedding now costs $22,000. Couples are so determined to stage "real weddings," with more than 100 guests and lavish food and settings, that wedding debt is driving thousands of young couples into credit counseling, bankruptcy, and divorce."

I can see the headlines already: "Weddings Leading Cause of Divorce."

Go to August

Home