If at least 50 percent of us are Covid-righteous, how did hotels and flights fill up with leisure travelers?

by philg

From a reader:

Our usual Mexico hotels are sold out, so we decided on Florida instead. We are going to be [in Hollywood, Florida] Dec 20-27. If you are up for it we can grab coffee.

My response:

I don’t know how everything is sold out when 50 percent of the country says that they’re doing everything possible to avoid COVID-19. Why is there even a single Democrat on a by-definition-optional leisure flight?

Readers:

  1. We are informed by #Science that vaccines don’t prevent COVID-19 from spreading (not to be confused with the #Science that informed us that vaccines do prevent COVID-19 from spreading and would “end the global pandemic”).
  2. We are informed that, therefore, even a vaccinated group of people will generate new infections
  3. We are informed that more infections leads to more mutations
  4. We are informed by #Nature that, over an 8-week period, a group of people wearing masks and interacting has at least 89 percent of the chance of becoming infected with COVID-19 compared to an unmasked group (i.e., in the long run, both the unmasked group and masked group will both get infected)

In light of the above knowledge, why wouldn’t leisure trips, which inevitably mix humans and thus generate infections/mutations, be exclusively the province of the Deplorables? Deplorability afflicts less than half of the American public, according to our popular vote. Maybe airline flights can still be full if the airlines cut service. But how can the typical hotel be more than 50 percent occupied?

For Americans who follow science, COVID-19 is a serious enough problem that schools have to be closed, 3-year-olds must be forced to wear masks, etc. But the 50+ percent of us who follow science don’t think COVID-19 is a serious enough problem to refrain from crowding into a 100-percent-full flight to Mexico, crowding into airport lines on both ends, and crowding into a hotel restaurant for 7 nights?

[What happened with the coffee invitation? I scolded the reader for not following Fauci and reminded him/her/zir/them (the reader identified as a “man” the last time that we were together, but I don’t want to assume non-fluidity of gender ID) that every meeting between humans is another chance for SARS-CoV-2 to infect and mutate.]

“I’m vaccinated, boosted and have no health problems. I’m traveling for the holidays” (CNN, 12/21, by Jill Filipovic):

Now that vaccines are widely available in the United States, it’s especially frustrating that we are still held hostage to a pandemic fueled by the people who refuse to get vaccinated and by the policy choices of wealthy nations not to treat this pandemic like a global pandemic and vaccinate the world.

Like millions of people the world over, I’m taking a hard look at my own risk (including the risk I pose to others) and making careful choices about how and when to grab back some aspects of pre-Covid-19 life. Travel is often necessary for my job; it’s also one of my greatest joys and a requirement to see many of my loved ones, family members and closest friends.

I masked in the airport and on the plane and have avoided indoor gatherings and unmasked indoor activities since my arrival.

The top photo in the article shows people in a jammed airport. Most of them are wearing cloth masks, which CNN’s top medical expert (“former president of Planned Parenthood”) described as “little more than facial decorations” on 12/20. On 11/4, CNN reported that the righteously vaccinated are at least half as likely to get infected, and therefore support a mutation, as the vaccinated. As of 7/3/2021, it was “Unvaccinated people are ‘variant factories,’ infectious diseases expert says” (CNN), with the article pointing out that every infection (a phenomenon that we now know is common in the vaccinated) is an opportunity for the virus to have a mutation party: “‘All it takes is one mutation in one person,’ said Dr. Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician and immunologist at Boston College.”

So… if Mx. Filipovic has been reading CNN, he/she/ze/they should know that the only way for him/her/zir/them to #StopTheSpread is to #StayHomeSaveLives. Yet he/she/ze/they is traveling for leisure, thus inevitably incurring a dramatically higher risk of infection compared to if he/she/ze/they had stayed home.

Also, in Covid news, a Trump-hating friend in NYC just canceled his family’s luxury trip to the Caribbean. He felt moderately sick and, in any case, needed a negative PCR test result to enter the wife’s chosen beachy paradise. After $10 trillion in federal spending on coronapanic combined with the wise leadership of Cuomo and his girlfriends (New York State Department of Health budget comparable to Russia’s active duty military budget), the family’s best testing option was waiting in line in the cold for 3 hours on the Upper West Side. (His test came back positive, so that’s a ton of money down the drain. I still can’t figure out why so many people are willing to incur this kind of risk on both sides of an international trip.) As with Mx. Filipovic, though, I can’t figure out why he planned this trip in the first place. If he wants to support President Biden’s #science-driven approach to ending the global pandemic, why won’t he stay home?

Related:

From this week’s trip to Tampa and back, the Florida Air Museum’s catalog of terrible engineering ideas (Lockheed XFV, XF2Y Sea Dart supersonic seaplane):

The lifeboats on American Victory serve as a reminder that not every policy that appears effective will be effective:

Massive plastic Christmas Trees Of Color in Tampa:

Full post, including comments

Grinch Olympics

by philg

Adults used to compete in trying to give as much as possible to children, bragging about sacrifices of time, effort, and money to ensure that children had a wonderful time and a bright future.

At least in Maskachusetts, things shifted in 2020. The state was a wide-open playground for adults, with “essential” liquor and marijuana stores open to record-breaking sales and Tinder receiving record usage. The bureaucratic grinches, however, came up with almost daily schemes for taking things away from children: schools (closed for over a year in Boston), playing with friends, after-school sports, playgrounds, freedom to breathe during sports (mask requirements both indoors and out), birthday parties with more than a handful of guests (illegal home gathering), etc.

Is it fair to say that adults are still competing in the Grinch Olympics? From “As Young Kids Get Vaccines, a ‘Huge Weight’ Is Lifted for Families” (NYT, 11/25/2021):

When the pandemic came for Georgia, Lauren Rymer had to make a snap choice: her mother’s safety or what she believed was best for her young child.

She locked down her family for the better part of last year, living with her mother, Sharon Mooneyhan, who has multiple sclerosis, and protecting her by keeping her son Jack, 5, out of kindergarten to avoid routine household exposure to Covid. “I didn’t want my mom to miss out on being with her only grandchild,” Ms. Rymer said.

So school was scrapped for mushroom hunts in the forest between her work Zoom calls, Legos and an intergenerational exploration of a backyard chicken coop. The upside was that she and her mother would not have to live in fear of a life-ending snuggle at bedtime.

But grandma had multiple sclerosis and that means instant death if infected with SARS-CoV-2, right? From the National MS Society:

Current evidence shows that simply having MS does not make you more likely to develop COVID-19 or to become severely ill or die from the infection than the general population.

Every parent claims to be altruistic, which conflicts with the conclusions of labor economist Claudia Goldin in “Parental Altruism and Self-Interest: Child Labor Among Late Nineteenth-Century American Families”:

Nonaltruistic behavior by parents was pervasive. Even among families with positive assets, child labor was common…

The labor market evidence suggests that parents were willing to accept large reductions in their own wages to secure employment in areas having abundant child labor opportunities. They were implicitly willing to sell the labor services of their children very cheaply, indeed at a rate that suggest they placed very little value on the foregone schooling (and future income) of their children. … Neither did they permit children to retain their earnings for future use. The children were simply worse off…

The empirical results suggest that parents did not have strong (economic) altruistic concerns for their children. … the family provided little in the way of offsetting physical asset transfers (in the form of gifts and bequests) to compensate children for their lost schooling and future earnings. The increased family income was apparently absorbed in higher current family consumption.

I.e., the parents wanted money to spend on themselves. (Modern edition: family court entrepreneurs will never accept money to be placed in trust for a child’s adult use, but instead want cash that the adult plaintiff can spend right now (in West Virginia, however, child support of more than $24,000 per year per child generally will go into a trust).)

Is it fair to say that the first two years of 14 days to flatten the curve have brought out the most Grinch-like behavior among American adults for at least the past 100 years?

Separately, Merry Christmas! Floridians go all-out decorating with winter-themed China-made outdoor items. Icicles, North Pole signs, snowflakes, snowmen, etc. are all on display as one walks around in shorts and a T-shirt in the 78-degree sunshine. Below is a rare example of a geographically appropriate Christmas display (the alligator), juxtaposed with what is typical (note You Know Who in the background behind the polar bear).

Full post, including comments

Your Christmas gift to the richest people in the U.S.

by philg

If you’re concerned that you haven’t spent enough on Christmas this year, the Wall Street Journal reassures you that, via your federal income tax payments, you’re subsidizing some of America’s richest private equity partners, $1,500/hour lawyers, etc. “High-Income Business Owners Escape $10,000 Tax Deduction Cap Using Path Built by States, Trump Administration” (12/6):

More than 20 states created workarounds to the limit, and New York’s law firms and private-equity firms are signing up

Here’s how it works. Normally, so-called pass-through businesses such as partnerships and S corporations don’t pay taxes themselves. Instead, they pass earnings through to their owners, who report income on individual tax returns. That subjects them to state individual income taxes—and the federal limit on deducting more than $10,000, created in the 2017 tax law.

Details vary by state, but the workaround flips that concept. The states impose taxes—often optional—on pass-through entities that are roughly equal to their owners’ state income taxes. Those taxes then get deducted before income flows to the business owners.

The laws then use tax credits or other mechanisms to absolve owners of their individual income-tax liabilities from business income. Thus, they satisfy state income-tax obligations without generating individual state income-tax deductions subject to the federal cap.

In these systems, state revenue is virtually unchanged, because the entity-level tax replaces personal income taxes. Business owners win, because every $100,000 of state taxes that go from nondeductible to deductible yields up to $37,000 in net gain on federal income-tax returns. The federal government loses money.

In New Jersey, pass-through businesses reported $1.3 billion in entity-level liability for the tax’s first year in 2020, suggesting an equivalent amount of federal deductions that might have otherwise been disallowed. In New York, more than 95,000 pass-through entities opted into the tax for 2021 before the Oct. 15 deadline.

“It’s really a slam dunk,” said Phil London, an accountant and partner emeritus at Wiss & Co. in New York, who said he has seen the owners of one business save $1.5 million and expects law and accounting firms to use the workaround. “The larger-income entities and real-estate investors and real-estate operators, they’re going to benefit from it.”

Private-equity firms have been particularly interested, said Jess Morgan, a senior manager at Ernst & Young LLP. And some businesses have restructured themselves to take maximum advantage of the benefit, she said.

After rejecting other workarounds, the Treasury Department blessed these a few days after the 2020 election, citing a footnote in a committee report from the 2017 law and a handful of entity-level taxes that predated 2017. The Trump administration, which had pressed for the $10,000 cap, offered the path out of it.

In other words, many of the richest Americans in high-tax states will be able to deduct nearly all of what would have been their state tax liability, thus keeping the subsidies flowing from workers in low-tax states and from ordinary W-2 slaves who can’t work around what was advertised as the law.

Full post, including comments

Tyler Cowen says inflation harms the poor more

by philg

In Inflation harms the elite, the working class, or the poor? I posit that the coverage of inflation by elite-controlled media suggests that inflation harms the elite more than it harms the poor (who might never see a bill for rent, health care, food, or smartphone!).

Economist Tyler Cowen tackles the same question for Bloomberg in “Who Does Inflation Harm More, the Poor or the Rich?” (shouldn’t it be “Whom”?):

With inflation now rising faster than at any time in the last four decades, economists are debating which group suffers more from inflation, the poor or the rich. This kind of economy-wide question is not easy to answer, especially when rates of inflation have been so low in recent times and hard data are scarce. Nor is it obvious how exactly to compare the losses to the poor to the losses to wealthier groups. Nonetheless, the arguments suggest that the poor are likely to take a beating.

One major factor: The poor is the socioeconomic group that finds it hardest to purchase a home, and real estate seems to be one of the best inflation hedges. U.S. real estate prices have been on a tear for some time, including through the recent inflationary period.

Rents are rising at a rapid clip, due to the mix of rising demand and bottlenecked supply. The biggest losers there will be the poor. And if poorer people are trying to live somewhere relatively prosperous, perhaps to enjoy future economic mobility for themselves and their children, rising rent will eat up an especially large share of their incomes.

As noted above, I’m not sure it makes sense to talk about the “poor” paying rent. If they live in government-owned “public” housing, what do they care about the nominal dollars that their apartments might fetch in a market economy? It is Americans who aren’t quite poor enough to be officially “poor” who get killed by higher rents. (i.e., the chumps who work 60 hours per week to end up with a spending power just 15 percent higher than someone who doesn’t work at all and/or someone who had sex with a dentist).

Professor Cowen makes a great point about the richest of the nouveau-est riche:

Another asset class that has risen in value recently is crypto. There is no good data on who is buying crypto, but it seems likely that the poor are underrepresented here as well, if only because they have less disposable income.

The rise in crypto prices is mainly due to factors incidental to current retail price inflation, but a more general point applies: The poor hold a disproportionate share of their assets in pure cash, which has no potential for price appreciation and is hit hard in inflationary times.

He makes another good point about cars. Anyone who is at least upper middle class has a car that can last for 10 more years if necessary:

The poor do buy fewer cars than do the wealthy — but they also buy lower-quality cars, and find it harder to postpone a car purchase for a few years if they do not wish to pay a higher price. This is yet another illustration of the point that the poor can have a harder time making adjustments in an inflationary environment.

He counters my big argument, i.e., that real Americans bury themselves in debt and therefore will be delighted to pay back creditors with near-worthless dollars:

Probably the strongest argument in favor of the notion that the poor are less affected by inflation is that inflation can, under some circumstances, lower the real value of debt. If prices go up 7%, and your income goes up 7%, all of a sudden your debts — which typically are fixed in nominal value — are worth 7% less.

This mechanism is potent, but it assumes that real wages keep pace with inflation. Right now real wages are falling, and with higher inflation may continue to do so. Furthermore, many poor people roll over their debts for longer periods of time. Repaying those debts will eventually be cheaper in inflation-adjusted terms, but not anytime soon.

His conclusion is powerful. Countries that have high levels of inflation aren’t packed with cheerful poor people:

I’ve been focusing on the U.S., but elsewhere in the world the general correlation is that high inflation and high income inequality go together. Correlation is not causation, but those are not numbers helpful to anyone who wishes to argue that inflation is a path to greater income equality. Have very high levels of inflation done much for the poor in Venezuela and Zimbabwe? And if you ask which group would benefit from an improvement in living standards prompted by higher rates of investment, as might follow from a period of stability — it is the poor, not the wealthy.

Whether my original post was correct or, as seems more likely, Professor Cowen’s article, Joe the Plumber will still be living comfortably! (from Legoland Florida, just outside the restrooms)

Full post, including comments

Should police departments hire Kyle Rittenhouse to train officers?

by philg

Now that Kyle Rittenhouse has had a month to relax after his year of being targeted for what turned out to be, at least in the eyes of the unanimous jury, a meritless prosecution, I wonder what he will do next.

Although I did not follow the trial closely, I remember that Gaige Grosskreutz testified that young Kyle did not shoot him until Mr. Grosskreutz actually pointed a gun at him (NYT):

“So when you were standing three to five feet from him with your arms up in the air, he never fired, right?” Corey Chirafisi, a defense lawyer, asked.

“Correct,” Mr. Grosskreutz answered.

“It wasn’t until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him with your gun — now your hands down, pointed at him — that he fired, right?” Mr. Chirafisi said.

“Correct,” he said.

Imagine if 33-year-old Mohamed Noor had shown the same restraint as the 17-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse. Justine Damond would have lived to enjoy her 41st birthday and Minneapolis taxpayers wouldn’t have had to pay $20 million (George Floyd turned out to have a higher value than Ms. Damond; his survivors received $27 million from the City of Minneapolis). What if Michael T. Slager had received training from Mr. Rittenhouse? Walter Scott would be alive today and North Charleston (S.C.) taxpayers would be $6.5 million richer.

Should cities ask Kyle Rittenhouse to come in and train officers on how to recognize when it is time to shoot?

On a separate topic, the Ministry of Truth at Facebook recently lifted a ban on writing anything positive about Mr. Rittenhouse or searching for him by name (CNN), but the Ministry “will continue to remove posts that glorify the deaths involved in the Kenosha shooting.” Illustrating the limits of artificial intelligence, a Deplorable friend of a friend managed to post regarding Joseph Rosenbaum, who unwisely singled out the kid with the AR-15 as an appropriate person to attack. Background from an Arizona newspaper:

Rosenbaum had multiple convictions in Pima County, spending just over 14 years in prison. He served the first 10 years on his first rape charge. However, for the two other rape charges he only received sentences of 30 months.

WRN Investigates reported that Rosenbaum was charged by a grand jury with 11 counts of child molestation and inappropriate sexual activity around children, including anal rape. The victims were five boys ranging in age from nine to 11 years old.

According to Yahoo News, “Hours before the fatal encounter, Rosenbaum had been released from a local hospital in the wake of a suicide attempt. He had pending charges in Wisconsin for alleged domestic abuse and jumping bail at the time of his death.”

This kind of information would certainly be forbidden by the algorithms and humans at Facebook. But the Ministry of Truth did not flag the following from the above-mentioned Deplorable:

Not many people get to die doing what they love. Those who do are truly fortunate.

Jojo Rosenbaum was one of those fortunate souls. He died chasing an unwilling minor.

Readers: What do you think Kyle Rittenhouse will do next?

Full post, including comments

Update on my friend with COVID-19

by philg

Today is the day that my friend, who woke up with a fever on Thursday, December 16, would have been tested for COVID-19 had he been willing to drive to Lynn (about a one-hour round trip).

Here’s a screen shot from last week when I logged into the Project Beacon site to see what was available at what is advertised as the highest capacity testing facility in Massachusetts (state-funded and organized by the best and brightest):

Results aren’t ready for 1-2 days, which means if he’d gotten his test today at 2:10 pm, he would have gone a full week from having symptoms to getting a test result.

(The beauty of Massachusetts is that people can go from spending hours in line at the Registry of Motor Vehicles to days waiting for an appointment at the government-organized COVID-19 testing facility and conclude “Our lives would be much better off if the size and role of government were expanded.”)

How’s the impatient patient doing? (instead of waiting for what would have been his test appointment today, he drove one hour round trip and to the closest CVS that had an at-home test kit in stock; he got a positive result the evening of 12/16)

From a previous post:

  • Day 1 of COVID for my friend: fever of 102 (chronicled in Why is it still almost impossible to schedule a COVID-19 test? (at least in Maskachusetts) Note that he had been feeling less than 100% for a few days prior, so this technically could have been considered Day 3)
  • Day 1, evening: temperature down to 100. [discussion about Regeneron]
  • Day 2, morning: Right now about 100F in each ear. Throat doesn’t hurt as much, coughing subsided. Although now that i wrote that it subsided i needed to cough. I can feel the vaccine working.
  • Day 2, afternoon: Gone. It was pretty much gone this morning.

To this we can add the following:

  • Day 3, morning: I am perfectly fine – just some snot in the nose. No temperature.
  • Me: Denial is one of the classic symptoms of Long COVID
  • Day 4, morning: A little congestion in the nose. Temperature completely normal: 98.4 in both ears.
  • Through today: still some lingering congestion, thus proving my Long Covid theory

Full post, including comments

Photography suggestions from the Google

by philg

If you remembered to put your Canon mirrorless system in the back of the Rolls Royce for the trip to the Bal Harbour mall, here’s the Google Maps suggestion for where to stop and take pictures… Haulover Nude Beach (note camera icon pin):

From February 24, 2020 (from the same date… “Nancy Pelosi Visits San Francisco’s Chinatown Amid Coronavirus Concerns” (NBC): She said there’s no reason tourists or locals should be staying away from the area because of coronavirus concerns. “That’s what we’re trying to do today is to say everything is fine here,” Pelosi said. “Come because precautions have been taken. The city is on top of the situation.”), at the Bal Harbour Shops:

The red vehicle at top left is a Ferrari Enzo, available as a 20-year-old used car for about $3.5 million.

Full post, including comments

Vaccine papers checks in the Cradle of Liberty

by philg

From “MAYOR WALSH SIGNS EXECUTIVE ORDER ESTABLISHING GENDER NEUTRAL RESTROOMS IN CITY HALL” (boston.gov, 2016):

“Boston is well known as ‘The Cradle of Liberty,’ and for nearly 400 years Boston has led the way in providing equal human rights for all of its citizens. Over 5 years ago, on May 5, 2010, The Boston City Council passed a Unanimous Resolution In Support of An Act Relative to Gender-Based Discrimination and Hate Crimes (S. 1687/H.1728). Because the Massachusetts Legislature has still not passed this important Human Rights Bill, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh is today taking a very courageous and important action by making two restrooms in Boston City Hall Transgender Inclusive. …

Starting January 15, the vaccinated will be more equal than the unvaccinated in the cradle of liberty. From state-sponsored media (NPR/WGBH):

Boston mayor Michelle Wu announced Monday that the city will require proof of vaccination for indoor recreational activities and will tighten the vaccine mandate for city workers.

The moves are intended to tamp down the city’s winter surge of COVID-19 cases and the threat of the emerging omicron variant.

Beginning Jan. 15, people aged 12 and up looking to patronize venues like gyms, restaurants and museums will have to present proof of at least one vaccination dose for access. The following month, everyone aged 12 and up will need to present proof of vaccination through an app, a CDC vaccination card, or photo of a vaccination card, or other official immunization record.

Children ages 5-11 will be phased into the new requirements on a slightly extended schedule and won’t have to provide proof of first vaccination doses until March 1. Then, beginning in May, children will need to show proof of full vaccination.

“This is a response that is rooted in science and public health and we need to take every available action to protect our city’s residents, businesses and institutions,” Wu said of the testing elimination.

Where did the scientist learn #Science? According to Wikipedia, while majoring in economics as an undergrad. Where did the public health expert learn medicine? At law school. What about the paranoid conspiracy theories of the Deplorables that a cabal of elites are controlling every aspect of American life? Mx. Wu attended Harvard University for both bachelor’s and law school.

What does the manufacturer of the drug that will be required for children to leave the house say about this medicine? The label: “this unapproved product… which is not an FDA-approved vaccine.”

With 95 percent of subjects, age 12 and up, having received at least one shot, is SARS-CoV-2 giving up on life in the Cradle of Liberty? NYT:

Related:

Full post, including comments

Should Zoom let you choose the size of your pronouns on others’ screens?

by philg

“On Being a Trans Abortion Provider” (MedPage Today):

“I’m so glad it’s all women in here.”

As a family doctor and abortion provider, I hear this all the time. I know how important it is for many of the patients I care for to be seen by someone who shares their experiences. But I am not a woman.

I am trans. Getting dressed for every shift, I put on my they/them and he/him pronoun pins. Like many trans folx, I use multiple pronouns. Often these go unseen. People assume my gender based on what they’ve been taught about which bodies look like a woman and which bodies look like a man. I get it though. Patients have a lot on their minds when they come to see me. The middle of someone’s abortion doesn’t feel like the right time to talk about the difference between gender identity and gender presentation anyway.

I can make space for patients misgendering me. I believe abortion can be a very empowering experience, and for many of my patients, the solidarity between women is a part of that. People with uteruses suffer so much violence from men. Invasive exams and procedures can trigger that trauma, especially when performed by men. A great deal of what we, as medical providers, do to people in gynecological care was developed through violence, intentional abuse, and oppression of women of color. This legacy, rooted in white supremacy, is especially on my mind when providing reproductive care. So I choose not to correct the women who misgender me while voicing their appreciation for my presence out of respect for their experience and comfort.

But what I cannot make space for is being misgendered by my colleagues. It is a daily occurrence. Sometimes followed by over-apologizing, asking me to excuse the mistake to assuage their discomfort at my own expense. It happens despite the pronoun pins and Zoom name. Despite me talking about how weird it is to give myself testosterone injections. Despite the they/he in my email signature on that email I sent months ago announcing my pronouns and asking for some basic inclusion. All of the efforts I am asked to take on to become a part of a “more just” and “more diverse” workforce and movement are for naught if the very people they are trying to include are continually made to feel othered, a hassle, or forgotten.

The author’s name is Quinn Jackson. According to baby name web sites, this is roughly equally prevalent for boys and girls. Therefore, I’m not sure why Dr. Jackson believes that putting their/his name on Zoom will cue others on the call that they/he wants to be referred to with “they/them and he/him”. Zoom lets a user pick his/her/zir/their preferred pronouns for display, but the pronouns show up in a smaller font than the name. From https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/4402698027533-Adding-and-sharing-your-pronouns

“Your pronouns will appear next to your display name in your participant video or thumbnail and next to your display name in the Participants list.”

What would work, I think, is if Zoom users could specify how prominently to display chosen pronouns. Dr. Jackson, for example, could show theirs/his in boldface 48 pt. type smack in the middle of the video image. A virtual face tattoo, essentially. Fellow participants in a Zoom call wouldn’t miss that.

(Separately, if “[p]eople with uteruses suffer so much violence from men,” as Dr. Jackson says, why is they/he injecting themselves/himself with testosterone, a hormone that leads directly to violence? (see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3693622/ )) Shouldn’t trans folx who abhor violence refrain from using this hormone?)

Related:

Full post, including comments

Demotivated from non-summer travel now that we’re in Florida

by philg

When we lived in Maskachusetts, this is the time of year when I would start surfing travel web sites. Maybe it would be nice to go to a beach resort, a tennis destination, a sunny mountain town out West.

Now that we’re in Florida, though, even if travel were free of coronapanic-related hassles (e.g., testing and risk of multi-week quarantine/stranding) it is tough to come up with the motivation to go anywhere that the minivan or a feeble 4-seat airplane won’t take us. If we want to be on a beach, that’s a 12-minute drive with free parking and clean restrooms on arrival. If we want to be on a world-class soft white sand beach with gentle waves, that’s on the west coast of Florida, a 2.5-hour drive away (or 3 hours by plane, after factoring in driving to the airport, updating the GPS data cards, flight planning, etc., etc.). If we want to do some sort of outdoor activity, e.g., tennis or golf, that’s walking distance from our apartment. If we want sunshine, that’s almost every day. If we need our brains rewired, the theme parks of Orlando are 2.25 hours away by minivan.

There are a lot of interesting destinations that are more accessible from MIA and FLL than from BOS. The UNESCO World Heritage sites of Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia (Cartagena at least!), etc. (101 cultural, 38 natural, and 8 mixed) Without cold, gray weather as a spur, though, it is tough to find motivation. Maybe that will change after we get burned out on all of the things that make our own corner of the world a popular year-round tourist destination. And I’m sure that will change on May 27 when the kids are done with school and it is 90 degrees every day.

Full post, including comments