Would you like to know how socially responsible your favorite corporation is? Check out this Responsible Shopper, a site that conducts global research regarding the conduct of corporations. They offer a wealth of information Here's a bit from the Responsible Shopper "About" page: Responsible Shopper reports on global research and campaign…
My computer is running a fever. The central processor overheats and shuts the system down. After a day of emails with the support center, and then a phone call of which only half the time was on hold, they admitted that the probable causes are under warranty. So I sit…
What kinds of voters are we? It’s hard to tell by looking what kind of candidates we elect. After all, we usually only have two viable choices; we often hold our noses and vote for the “lesser of two evils.” Many potential candidates never appear on the ballot, thanks to our horrifically corrupt political system, a system that requires a candidate to have corporate money in order to seen as viable by the corporate-owned media. It is a ludicrous and vicious circle.
Even acknowledging the severely limited choices we have at the polls, how well do we vote? Do we prepare ourselves carefully before entering the voting booth? Do we work hard to expose ourselves to a wide range of perspectives before voting or do we fall prey to the availability heuristic, voting on the basis of highly suspect political ads and intellectually vapid local “news”? Do most voters take time to carefully deliberate on the long-term risks and benefits of the political positions touted by the candidates? Apparently not, based upon the ubiquity misleading attack ads that invite unreflective scorn rather than a deliberate consideration of the issues.
Another bit of evidence suggesting that many of us vote without enough preparation occurs whenever citizens vote for lesser known candidates and issues. On numerous occasions, people have admitted to me that they voted for or against a particular candidate (or issue) about whom (which) they knew nothing at all. In Missouri, this happens all the time when circuit judges seeking …
What have they done with the word “simple”? It appears that they have corrupted “simple” to the point that it means the opposite of what it used to mean (They also done this to the words “essential” and “needs”). Why do I say this?
Just Google the phrase “simple living” or “living simply.” You’ll see many websites preaching the virtues of living “simply.” Many of these “simple living” websites tell us how to re-organize our massive amounts of stuff or how to spend our money wisely when we buy more stuff. Some simple living sites recognize that many of us have many times more stuff than we need. Relatively few sites sternly warn us that our culture blinds us to the fact that most of what we own, possess or desire is frivolous and unnecessary.
Many preachers of simple living fail to focus on a distinction I was taught in grade school: needs versus wants. I was taught that needs are things you truly can’t do without. In this category I would put a toothbrush, a pair of simple shoes and an outfit of clothing not suitable for “showing off.” How much more than that? For a long time, I have struggled to find a good definition for “needs.” Here’s my best shot for now: imagine that floodwaters are rising and that you have one hour to save only the most important things out of your house by placing them into one subcompact car. Those things are your needs. Everything …
With the obesity epidemic at its current rate, we can easily conclude that a lot of people have a lot of truly excellent excuses not to eat properly and exercise. In my experience, two particular excuses take the cake, so to speak: "I don't have time" and "I can't afford…