Thursday, October 17, 2013

Why I will NEVER own a Cell Phone, or be on Facebook, or....

While lecturing at Penn State University this week I happened to mention to the audience that I do not own a cell phone and that I am not on Facebook or Twitter. 
 
Given the looks on the student's faces, I might as well have told them that I am an escaped Martian that has been hiding under the Earth living off of tree roots and cigarette butts for the past 3,022 years. 
 
So be it.
 
On the day of, and day after my lecture, I took some time to go hiking in the mountains of beautiful Pennsylania.  It was about 55 degrees outside, the leaves were at near peak in color and on both occasions I was the only living soul on the trail. 
 
My wife (back home in Florida) knew that I was going to be hiking those days but she also knew that if I fell off the side of a mountain or was attacked by an angry groundhog there would be no last "Goodbye, honey, tell the kids I love them....." over the phone or Facebook update showing the groundhog chewing through by leg.  There would be nothing until some other hiker stumbled across my body and then posted his or her findings on Facebook while cell-phoning the authorities about a dead dude in the woods.
 
So be it.  That is what life insurance is for.  And that is what life is for....
 
By the latter remark I mean without a cellphone I am able to - wait for it....... - ENJOY MY LIFE.
 
Unlike the rest of the 99.99999438% of the world I get to explore the woods, drive down the road, go to the store, watch football games, vacation with my family and a million other things without the constant societal pressure to be "connected" to everyone out there who I am "supposed" to update on what type of granola bar I am eating on top of some mountain.   I get to sit on a rock looking out at a beautiful valley of fall colors, talk to God, think about life and relax (remember that word?).
 
No one gets to know exactly where I am, what I am doing, what I am thinking, or anything.  I get to enjoy that last vestige of sanity-creating PEACE and QUIET any time I want.
 
For those of you who are cellphone junkies, you can probably not even remember the last time you got to enjoy a meal, or engage in a meaningful conversation with someone, can you?
 
Consider this...
 
Last weekend I went out to dinner with my wife and great friends of ours to celebrate my friends' birthday.
 
At a table nearby was another couple who NEVER put down their cell phones the entire meal.  I did not see them talk eye to eye once.  All they did was peck away on their phones like mindless chickens in a barnyard.
 
During our meal we were constantly talking, laughing and carrying on.  At one point, I saw the female at the barnyard chicken table shoot us a hateful glance after one particular loud round of laughing.  I guess our enjoyment of one another as human beings was disturbing her Facebook updates about her date with the guy she was not talking to.
 
I see stuff like this all the time.  At the airport on my way home I saw many parents, face down in their phones, while their kids went along with no interaction whatsoever.
 
Of course, I could go on and on but you get the idea.
 
In case you are saying, "Hey hypocrite, you are blogging right now while you could be hanging out with your family!"
 
It is 7:58am, they are still asleep, and at no point during their waking hours today will they have to compete with a stupid cell phone. 
 
You should try my life.  You might find that you will end up having a life.

Sunday, October 6, 2013

Abolishing student aid could force schools to lower prices - wisdom from a former student

New Voices:

By Holly Jean Soto (economics major, George Mason University) Special to the Orlando Sentinel
 
Abolish government financial aid for students.
 
My dear friend, who is a statistics major and a government-aid borrower, is fearful of this statement.
"Don't try to get rid of that," he says. "I need that money for school."
 
What he fails to realize, as I am sure many other  federal-student aid borrowers do, is that getting rid of aid would improve the lives of American students today.
The first harsh reality that student borrowers fail to see is that any government giving begins with government taking away. Government is the only institution legally allowed to take by force.
Government does not send a letter to each American saying, "Hello, fellow American, would you like to take a fraction of your income to fund another person's education?" No. It is taken, whether I'm willing to contribute or not.
 
Another harsh reality of students taking government aid is that progress, efficiency and effectiveness don't begin with someone else's money.
 
If students had to pay for school out of their own pockets, we would see fewer students hanging around campus on their 100th credit hour still trying to decide on their majors, fewer students accepting C's and D's as passing grades, and more students going into successful majors.
 
Also, we would see a portion of students concluding at a faster rate that they would benefit more in an occupation than in school.
 
Why is all this true? Because it is the students' own money on the line.
 
Now some people may have concluded that students' providing the funds for their own education allows them to reach a better long-term result, but it is still difficult for students to pay out of their own pockets because tuition is too high.
 
However, the final harsh reality is that when we participate in taking away from another to pursue our own dream of a college education, we engage in the same act that raises the cost of education. Colleges see that more students than ever before are attending their institutions because the students are able to pay for it with someone else's money.
 
The CollegeBoard Advocacy & Policy Center in its "Trends in Student Aid 2012" report, found that during the 2011-12 academic year, $236.7 billion in financial aid was distributed to undergraduate and graduate students in the form of grants from all sources. Also, students borrowed $8.1 billion from private, state and institutional sources to help finance their education.
 
The report also states that in 2011-12, undergraduate students received 98 percent of federal grant aid, 99 percent of state grant aid and 67 percent of federal loans.
 
As long as these statistics remain so, colleges will continue to raise their prices. What do students with financial aid care? They are not the ones paying those fees.
 
If we were to abolish financial aid for students, at first we would see fewer students going to college because of lack of funding.
However, colleges and universities observing a lower student population on their campuses, and observing that students who pay out of their own pockets would attend their school when tuition cost is low, would now compete with other schools to offer the lowest possible price.
 
Ultimately, even the poorest of families would attend school at their own expense because getting rid of government financial aid gives universities the incentive to compete, and just as with any product or service, when competition breaks out, suppliers lower their prices.
 
If a 21-year-old student can understand the harsh realities of federal financial assistance, why can't the rest of American students?

Sunday, September 29, 2013

The Moral Case for Legalizing Organ Sales

 Several years ago, one of my all-time favorite football players (Walter Payton) died because he was not allowed to use his wealth to fight for his life. What follows is my Op-Ed in today's Orlando Sentinel.  I hope you enjoy it.


I am often asked by students in my classes to address certain goods and services that are illegal to consume in America, but perhaps should be legal.  Of course, when this question - from my mostly teenaged audience comes up, they expect me to dive into drugs, gambling and other vices.
To shake them up a bit, I often begin my answer by asking them a question:

“If a stranger approached you on the street today and offered you $50,000 for one of your healthy kidneys, would you accept their offer?”
My students find this to be an odd way to begin a discussion of government interference in the marketplace, but they end up learning about a law that has helped ruin the lives of countless Americans.

30 years ago Congressman Al Gore offered up a bill that made the buying and selling of human organs punishable by up to five years in prison or a large fine.  The bill became law in 1984 and with its passage the official price of all of the organs in our body equaled zero dollars.
Of course, as we learned in the former Soviet Union, “official prices” and market prices are two entirely different things.  We also learned that when official prices (set by government) are below market prices it is inevitable that shortages and black markets will emerge.
According to the United Network for Organ Sharing, as of September 27th, there were 119,115 Americans on the national waiting list for transplantable organs.  Data from the Health Resources and Services Administration reveals that of that figure, 97,896 people on the national list are waiting for kidney transplants.  Moreover, the data reveals that 18 people die every day in America while waiting for an organ transplant.

It does not have to be this way.

 The problem is not that there are not enough organs.  After all, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 2 million Americans die every year.  The problem is that the price of organs is not allowed to rise to a level that will encourage more of us to act.
Out of those 2 million deaths, there are probably enough healthy organs buried or cremated to give the 119,000 – plus Americans who are suffering a chance to have a healthy life. 

Relying on moral suasion to get people to donate organs is not working.  When offered zero dollars for our body parts, rational humans often opt to hang on to our organs rather than do the morally-right thing and donate them.

But what if, for example, you could contract to sell your organs after you die, or in the case of kidneys, while you are alive?

Imagine your life insurance carrier offering you an extra $100,000 in coverage for your organs when you perish.  Your benefactors would be better off, as would the insurance company who sells them for say, $150,000 to hospitals in the area.  The hospitals in turn sell them for $200,000 to various patients who would be willing and able to pay.

How many people, if given the choice of waiting and suffering in the hope they find a kidney would buy one for several thousand dollars if they were given the opportunity to do so?  How many people – enticed by money – would gladly offer their organs up for sale?  It is not hard to imagine, given the far greater deaths than there are people waiting for organs, a large surplus that would emerge fairly quickly, suppressing prices and helping even more people afford a chance to survive.

In the case of kidneys, doctors tell us we only need one to live a normal life.  As a free human being I should be allowed to part with one of my kidneys while I am alive for any price I find agreeable.  After all, women can sell their eggs to help create life.  What is the difference then, if I sell my kidney to save a life?

In 2011, after a series of court challenges by a woman whose daughters suffered from Fanconi anemia, the federal government legalized the selling of bone marrow.  People are now allowed to earn $3,000 in the form of vouchers for things like housing and education as an enticement to help save lives.

Unfortunately, for the tens of thousands of other sufferers there is no end in sight to the violation of their rights to offer compensation for kidneys and other organs.  

The time has come to end this suffering by allowing the forces of supply and demand to work.

 

 

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Thoughts on September 11, 2001 - nine days after..

On September 20, 2001 - nine days after the Twin Towers were destroyed - Valencia College hosted a forum on terrorism that was filmed. 

On this 12th anniversary of the day that changed everything I thought you might want to watch what people were saying only nine days after "the day".

Your comments, as always, are encouraged.

Here is the link:

http://websflash.valenciacollege.edu/videoPlayer.html?appl=ValenciaProductions&inst=Videos&vid=mp4%3A010920-04FORU

Friday, September 6, 2013

Our "Safety-first" Society is turning us into Sissies


Yesterday was supposed to be a very fun day in my household. 
 
At 5PM my two sons were scheduled to play their first football game together as members of a local junior varsity squad.
 
At 8:30PM we were scheduled to be sitting in my game room as the new NFL season got underway.
 
So much for schedules.
 
With about 38 seconds to go in the first half of their game, my youngest son intercepted a pass to give his team a huge momentum swing.
 
Then, our new age of over-zealous, over-careful, over-protective, over-reaching, "lets all run and hide from everything that might get us" society took over and killed the momentum.
 
Back to that in a moment.
 
Back in the 1970's and early 80's when I was growing up in small-town, Oklahoma, I recall that pretty much every day of my life was spent without parents, lawyers, teachers, school officials, police, the FBI or anyone else watching us as we were outside playing.
 
We played tackle football every Saturday in the Fall and never saw one adult standing by with a first-aid kit or set of rules for us to go by.  We bled, we ached, we sometimes fought, but we were allowed to figure things out on our own, wipe away the blood on our own and proceed in our implicit journey towards becoming young men. 
 
During the spring we played baseball without thousands of pages of rules and safety precautions.  We were allowed, while one batter was batting, to stand in the "on-deck circle" a few feet away.  We were allowed, while running the bases, to run over an opposing player who got in our way.  I recall once, as catcher for my pony-league team, getting run over by a bigger kid who launched me several feet in the air.
 
My coach's response?  "Don't stand in the baseline next time."  And that was it.  No ejections, no speed-dialing an attorney, no parents screaming about the unfairness of it all.
 
During the summers we would get on our bikes and ride - with no helmets - several miles out into the countryside to an abandoned gravel pit.  The company had left years earlier and all there was left was a huge hole in the ground with man-made cliffs surrounding it.  From the cliff to the water below was about 20 feet.  We would take our bikes, ride as fast as we could and do our best Evel Knievel impersonation by flying off the cliff into the sparkling water below.
 
Years later we would drive our cars and trucks down highway 93 to the Frasier Creek bridge and take turns jumping off the bridge into the creek below.  The distance of our drop?  About 50 feet.
 
I could go on and on about the times we played outside during lighting, rain, small hail, tornado warnings, dust storms and so forth but I need to get back to my son's game yesterday.
 
Right after my boys' interception the dreaded "lightning alarm" went off, indicating that somewhere between the field and Northern Africa a lighting bolt had hit.  So, we all were told to take cover for the "mandatory" 30-minute wait before it would be clear to play. 
 
This being Florida, lighting kept hitting here and there so we waited and waited.  At 7PM the signal was sent to go back out.  4.1 miles away, at about 7:01 one more bolt hit and the game was called due to this "safety concern".  Of course that was the last strike, the sun came out, people sat around chatting and nothing happened but the kids on the team once again learned that "Oh, my gosh, at all cost and no matter what, the safety of our poor children must, did I mention at all cost, come first!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
 
Heaven forbid we ever look at the fact that the odds of being struck by lightning is 1 in 700,000 according to the National Geographic Society.
 
The odds of being murdered?  1 in 18,000.
 
It gets better.  73 people a year die in America from lightning.  153 people a year die worldwide from falling coconuts.
 
The other odds of dying?

Heart disease
652,486
1 in 5
Cancer
553,888
1 in 7
Stroke
150,074
1 in 24
99,000
1 in 38
Flu
59,664
1 in 63
Car accidents
44,757
1 in 84
Suicide
31,484
1 in 119
Accidental poisoning
19,456
1 in 193
MRSA (resistant bacteria)
19,000
1 in 197
Falls
17,229
1 in 218
Drowning
3,306
1 in 1,134
Bike accident
762
1 in 4,919
Air/space accident
742
1 in 5,051
Excessive cold
620
1 in 6,045
Sun/heat exposure
273
1 in 13,729
62
1 in 60,453
Lightning
47
1 in 79, 746
Train crash
24
1 in 156,169
Fireworks
11
1 in 340,733

There you have it folks - My kids had a better chance of having a heart attack while riding in a car driven by someone with the flu who was trying to murder them for lighting fireworks while eating cancer-causing food than they did of being hit and killed by lightning.

By the way, did I mention that when we got home to watch the Broncos-Ravens game we had to wait 33 minutes because of a lightning delay?

Some day, historians will marvel at how our nation went from being one brave enough to fight off the British Empire to one that would eventually have to tell our enemies to please wait until it stopped lighting before resuming battle.

Sunday, August 25, 2013

America’s Critical Shortage of Character


 


What follows is my column from today's Orlando Sentinel
By now the entire world is well aware of the story of the three teenagers who gunned down Christopher Lane, a 22-year old Australian attending college in Oklahoma.

That such a cold-blooded, senseless killing could take place is numbing to the mind of any rational, decent human being.

The problem is, rational, decent human beings are becoming increasingly scarce in the United States – and I am afraid our modern definition of human liberty is partly to blame.

I often ask my students to define the word “liberty” in short essay form. Predictably, most of the answers dovetail towards the idea that we all have the right to do whatever we want to do in a free country. When I ask them where the phrase “personal responsibility” and the rights of others enters into their definition of liberty I most often get blank stares.

A few students will manage to eventually say that liberty means our right to do anything peaceful as long as we do not harm another human being. Even fewer get the connection between liberty and bearing responsibility for all of our choices.

In essence, many Americans today believe that we should be allowed to do anything we want – and someone else should take responsibility for the poor decisions we make. Moreover, it means that in today’s America, we believe we should be able to pursue whatever makes us happy without consequences, commentary or criticism.

How else, for example, do you explain how many of today’s young male Americans dress and entertain themselves? They walk around with the tops of their pants around their thighs, their skin covered with tattoos, ill-fitting baseball caps on their heads and various body piercings. They drive cars that incessantly blast all sorts of vile music at ear-splitting decibel levels.

Meanwhile, as economists have increasingly observed, more of those young “men” are failing to finish school, are often only marginally attached to the labor force while being significantly attached to their parents homes, the criminal justice system and/or the welfare state.

Unfortunately, the story is not much better for young women. How often have you heard girls of today using language that would make a sailor blush? When was the last time you saw a younger female dressed with anything approaching modesty? You get the point.

It is not just the young folks who seem to have abandoned any sense of honor or integrity.

How often do we read about the failings of our business leaders, politicians, public servants and parents in carrying out their duties in an honorable fashion?

While I am the first to defend businesses and the profit motive, I must admit that these are not good times for liberty-loving supporters of capitalism.

Today, our economy has been high-jacked by the Crony-Capitalists – those corporations who have learned how to rig the formerly free enterprise system into one where lobbyists line the halls of Washington, D.C. to steal the taxpayers money or rig the economic system to keep other competitors out of the market.

This is accomplished, of course, with the assistance of politicians from both parties who actively create laws, regulations and taxes that punish the virtuous and rewards those who have learned how to effectively engage in legalized plunder.

Today, over 47 million Americans live on food stamps. Almost half no longer pay any income taxes. Fully two-thirds of all federal tax dollars received by the Treasury end up as a transfer to another person in our growing welfare state.

While we have only 5 percent of the world’s population, we have 25 percent of its prisoners.

Our public schools continue to rank at, or near the bottom, in scholastic achievement. And on and on…

Theodore Roosevelt once said, "Alike for the nation, and the individual, the one indispensable requisite is character - character that does and dares as well as endures, character that is active in the performance of virtue no less than firm in the refusal to do aught that is vicious or degraded."

The teens who murdered an innocent man for doing nothing more than jogging are simply symptomatic of a nation that has stood by and tolerated the erosion of virtue in our homes and in our institutions in favor of a definition of freedom that is devoid of personal integrity.

Until that changes, expect more senseless crimes in our “free” country.

Sunday, July 7, 2013

When Summer was Easy

As I prepare to take a break from, well, everything, I came across this terrific article that puts modern America in an interesting perspective.  I hope you will take the time to read it, reflect upon it, comment on it and pass it around.  Enjoy the rest of the summer.  If I am alive when September arrives I will chat with you again then...

By Dave Shiflett, July 5, 2013 Wall Street Journal
 

[image]Of all the seasons, summer seems to evoke the most childhood memories, probably because of its singular status as the Season of No School! Ah, the freedom to frolic beyond the reach of scolding teachers and paddle-wielding assistant principals, to pursue the idle arts of cloud-gazing, star-counting, making firefly lanterns and perhaps even skinny-dipping with an adventurous cheerleader (or, more likely, her less-glamorous cousin).
As we grow older (I was born in 1955, during Eisenhower's first term), we are naturally inclined to compare summers then with summers now. To no one's surprise, many of us, from the heights of our knowledge, wisdom and middle-age distemper, find that summers aren't what they used to be.
Let us count a few of the ways.
First off, most of us born in the '50s spent summers in the raw, sweltering bosom of Mother Nature, which, with all due respect, wasn't exactly paradise, especially when the mosquitoes started feeding. Home air-conditioners were rare; only about 10% of homes had them by 1965 (around 80% of modern homes are climate-controlled). When it got hot, you turned on a fan. When it got real hot, you prayed for a thunderstorm.
People prayed a lot more back then, at least publicly, perhaps in part because it was still legal. At my public school in Roanoke, Va., we started each day with the Lord's Prayer, and heads bowed prior to most sporting events, weenie roasts and any other occasion where food was consumed. We were also likely to Praise The Lord when the DDT-spewing antimosquito fogger appeared on the horizon (haven't seen one of those in a while). This was, of course, the era of Mutual Assured Destruction, so it was important to have your bases covered at all times.
Also unlike today, we didn't watch much television during summer break. There were only three channels, and TV played a far-distant fiddle to the preferred vehicles of entertainment and enlightenment: books. We might be out of school, but we had summer reading lists, which these days don't seem to be as rigorous. A National Education Association newsletter noted a couple of years ago that middle-school students in the Arlington Central School District outside New York City were required to read at least one book during the summer. One whole book!
I recall (dimly) reading 40 books one summer—some assigned and some part of a local library program. This wasn't our only bookish experience. For many children in our neck of the woods, Vacation Bible School was a requirement of citizenship (VBS participation is also down). Besides dispensing cookies, watermelon and Kool-Aid, these programs focused young minds on talking snakes, parting seas and Jezebel's dangerous allure. We still sang "Onward Christian Soldiers," which was excellent preparation for many an afternoon's chief activity: playing war with toy guns.
Contemporary gunophobes will gasp, but guns were as common as iPhones are today. Most boys I knew had at least one toy rifle, pistol or submachine gun (preferably, one of each). We took our marching orders from guys like Kirby in "Combat!" (Kirb was the Baryshnikov of the Browning automatic rifle), Illya Kuryakin of "The Man From U.N.C.L.E." (played by David McCallum, who has devolved into the mild-mannered Ducky of "NCIS") and of course the indomitable Sgt. Rock of comic-book fame. As we grew older we got BB-rifles, which were used (one cringes to recall) to reduce the local bird population and harass squirrels and other creatures further down the Great Chain of Being (we were all devout speciesists). We later graduated to .22s and shotguns; summer camps had rifle ranges and offered National Rifle Association gun-safety courses.
These days—when a 14-year-old West Virginia student can be arrested and suspended from school for refusing to take off his NRA T-shirt—a high body count would be assumed. I am happy to report that no member of my heavily armed circle ever shot anyone, though honesty requires the admission that one summer afternoon I did manage to shoot myself.
It happened after a small but heavily armed platoon of us was dropped off at a rural lake for an overnight camping trip. As I was taking a drag from a cigarette (essential to looking cool back then), my pistol fell off a nearby bench and discharged, blasting the Marlboro from between my fingers, cutting a groove in my right index finger and nearly trimming the tip of my nose.
Some readers may wonder why parents weren't hauled into court for sending their sons into the woods with loaded weapons. As it happens, my parents, who had earlier been traumatized when my older brother threw a spear into my back (it stuck, but only for a few seconds), are learning of the shooting incident for the first time as they read this article.
The larger fact is that, by today's standards, most parents of that era deserved to do time at Leavenworth. What sinners they were! They sent us outside without sunscreen, let us ride bikes without helmets and jump on trampolines without "safety barriers," and smiled as we vied with our siblings for the premier spot in the family sedan: the ledge underneath the back window, where you could stretch out and take a nap.
This isn't to say that they didn't run a tight ship. When we got out of line we were "corrected" with the help of leather belts or expertly wielded hairbrushes (known in some households as "Officer Porcupine"). If we cussed (about which more in a minute), we got our mouths washed out with soap. If someone had told us that a few decades hence parents could be arrested for such manifestations of concern, we would have assumed the commies had made good on their promise of world domination.
Yet back then, fixating on possible death and injury would be seen as neurotic. Perhaps this was because our parents had been through the Great Depression and World War II, which made postwar life seem relatively placid. Accidents happened, but they were accepted as part of life.
Another personal story illustrates the point. One summer I got a job on a local farm, where I was soon run over by a tractor and hay trailer, which drove ribs into both my lungs. Though I was initially thought to be dead, a crack team of surgeons revived me. Being young and resilient, I was out of the hospital in a little over a week.
We never sued the farm owners. Lawsuits were far rarer than today. "Ambulance chaser" was an epithet with a significant societal sting. Fewer than 90,000 civil cases were filed in 1970, according to public policy analyst JΓΌrgen O. Skoppek, a number that by 1986 had risen 192%. These days we're suing each other over mold, hailed as the "next asbestos." None of which, to my mind, represents progress.
Summers past also looked a lot different. Around 13% of Americans were obese in the early 1960s, as compared with 36% today (about two-thirds of contemporary Americans are considered overweight or obese), which can make a trip to the beach a jarring experience.
The seashore of my youth was populated by people who were, relative to now, fairly thin. Huge people were rare: If you weighed in at 350 pounds or more you had a good crack at getting a job at the freak show (a staple of traveling summer carnivals). Nowadays beaches are covered with human manatees (I should disclose that I could be considered a junior manatee). This may be a testament, in part, to the self-esteem movement, which routed the notion that body size should be a cause of shame. Or maybe it's simply another reminder that there's safety in numbers.
Another cosmetic change: tattoos, which were largely confined to men with military or maritime experience, and bikers. Nowadays, according to a Harris Poll, 38% of adults 30 to 39 have tats, as do 30% of those 25 to 29 and 22% of those 18 to 24. Inked women slightly outnumber men. By comparison, only 11% of Americans 50 to 64 say they have tattoos, a number that drops to 5% for Americans 65 and older.
Why the proliferation of body ink? Twenty-five percent say tattoos make them feel "rebellious," like growing long hair back in the 1960s, while 30% say that they make them feel more sexy, 21% more attractive or strong and 8% more intelligent. Meanwhile, 45% of Americans without tattoos believe those who have them are less attractive, while 39% say they're less sexy and 27% less intelligent.
Of course, you could always cut your long hair if you got tired of it or faced an unexpected court date. Getting rid of a tattoo is not so easy, though 86% of tattoo bearers said that they have never regretted their decision, perhaps belying the idea that the younger generation has commitment issues.
Modern beaches are also different intellectually. When I was a kid, you saw lots of thinner people reading fat books. Now you see larger people staring at thin phones. Many are no doubt chronicling the adventures of their favorite literary character—themselves—updating their Facebook accounts with descriptions of eating Oreos, watching a seagull peck the eye out of a dead fish and spending 15 minutes the prior evening flushing the sand from between their massive glutes. It's almost enough to make one pity the NSA snoops who might be called upon to monitor these communications, thus putting themselves at extreme risk of acute inanity poisoning.
Which brings up another significant change: the rise of the wildly popular salutation/exhortation/denunciation/benediction known as the F-word, which not so long ago was the hydrogen bomb of obscenities, used primarily by men in combat, stevedores and golfers. Now it traipses lightly off the tongues of 14-year-olds at the slightest provocation—should that seagull, for example, hop over and steal a potato chip. Should cell coverage lapse, the oratory might match that of a pirate whose beard had caught afire.
Many oldsters blame rap music and Hollywood for this loss of a great tradition of selective cursing, but I would point instead to the deeply mundane existence of today's adolescents, nowhere more in evidence than during the long months of summer. Could the F-infestation be, at least in part, an attempt to dramatize lives made dull by design—a design requiring mandatory bicycle helmets, risk-free trampolines, pools without diving boards and now an attempt to drop the presumptive drunk-driving alcohol level to 0.05%, which some people can reach with a single glass of wine?
As always, proponents argue that if one life can be saved, it's worth it, though if that's their key concern, they might also focus their hysteria on such threats as falling out of bed, which claims around 600 American lives a year, according to Time magazine, and autoerotic asphyxiation, which takes another 1,000 citizens to early graves, according to WebMD.
Hypercaution has saved lives, but it has diminished life in the bargain.
Summers saw other enormous changes. In August 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. gave his "I Have a Dream" speech, which became as familiar to my generation as the Declaration of Independence. The Summer of Love in 1967 spread the gospel of getting high, enlightening some and blighting others, while in July 1969, Apollo 11 landed on the moon, a testament to aiming high. Richard Nixon resigned in August 1974, AIDS was formally recognized by U.S. health authorities in June 1981. Along the way, summers saw the passing of national figures, ranging from Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford to Judy Garland, Jonas Salk, Jim Morrison and Jerry Garcia.
There were also personnel changes closer to home. Adults who seemed immortal in our youthful summers had their brushes with disease and death. Ditto for some cousins, friends and siblings—and ourselves. We rarely know the names of current bands, usually go to bed when we used to be going out, and say things like "I'd rather get a colonoscopy—make that a double colonoscopy!—than go camping."
Still, for all our nostalgia, we have accepted some of the changes that make modern summers so different from summers past. Should the sun suddenly blink off, for example, we might acknowledge this as a significant setback for our species—but a giant leap forward in the battle against sun-related cancers and premature wrinkling.
And just the other day, I was thinking that if my family had more progressive ideas about lawsuits when I got run over that long-ago June, I might today be living on a very nice farm.