OCR Text |
Show www.dailyutahchronicle.com Government must band together to avert crisis 5 OPINION Monday October 7, 2013 SATIRE Insincere politeness is ruining society AARON CLARK Columnist JACKSON HANNON Columnist T he shutdown that many were sure would not happen has occurred. With around 800,000 federal workers furloughed and many more required to continue working for no pay, the government, both the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and the Democratic president and Senate have failed the United States by not acting to resolve this issue. If this current impasse is an omen for things to come, things will only get worse. This is not only because of poor politicking by our representatives, but also to a dangerous game of political showmanship. Freezing economic recovery by holding this country hostage in a shutdown has become a national showcase of Washington's dysfunction, with little to gain for either party. We should expect — and demand — better government from our elected officials. For many, the federal shutdown doesn't have a direct effect on their lives. Even nationwide, experts say that a short shutdown is unlikely to have a serious effect on the economy. According to economists from Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, the current furlough of nonessential federal workers is likely to reduce the GDP by around .15-.2 percentage points each week, and, assuming the workers get back pay, that minor decrease is likely to bounce back. But the federal shutdown is only a minor spot of trouble when compared to the problem of the debt ceiling, which will need to be resolved in only a couple of weeks. With Oct. 17 — the date when the Treasury expects the government to reach its current debt ceiling — looming, we will only have $30 billion on hand, with only small amounts of any more expected income. Whether on that date or shortly afterwards, it is expected that the United States federal government will be forced to default on its loans due to lack of funds and inability to pay. In 2011, the government flirted with the debt ceiling, passing a stopgap measure to punt the responsibility forward, and even that close brush with default had effects. The rating agency Standard & Poor's downgraded the credit rating from AAA to an AA, and that moment set the recovery back. The higher lending rates have cost the country billions of dollars, even before we ever defaulted on our debts. Recently, another of the main credit rating agencies, Fitch Ratings, stated that they would consider lowering the credit rating of the U.S. if the debt ceiling is not dealt with in a "timely manner." Though House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has made statements that he will not allow the country to default on its debt, other House Republicans seem more willing for political brinkmanship. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said that "the debt ceiling and every appropriations bill" is an opportunity to work on how to cut waste in government, and though Democrats have argued that they would be willing to negotiate on the Affordable Care Act after the shutdown has been solved and the debt ceiling has been raised, he doesn't believe them. This is the place and opportunity to have these discussions and hash out the differences. And though some would love to pin the perilous fate of our economy on House Republicans, Issa has a point. President Barack Obama has been called too willing to negotiate at times, but many of those negotiations were hardly worth calling negotiations. For any elected official in our government, doubting the veracity of the willingness of the opposite party to negotiate is not paranoia, but a learned habit. All politicians need to look at the dangerous effects of what this political gridlock might have and be willing to lose a little face in order to compromise and save this country a great deal of turmoil and heartache. letters@chronicle.utah.edu I 'm struggling yet again to get along with my fellow human beings. I have been trying for years to tiptoe politely around the proverbial China shop that is society, but lately I feel more like being a bull. On a recent Saturday morning, I found myself waiting in a predictably long line at Starbucks along with the usual early morning zombie crowd, bleary-eyed and comatose, shuffling forward like pigs in a chute awaiting our overpriced slop. When I finally get to the counter to place my order I'm greeted by an obviously over-caffeinated barista who chirps a rather insincere "How are you doing this morning?" To which I reply with my prerecorded morning voice, "I'm fine, thanks," and then proceed to place my order. Perhaps thinking I wasn't paying attention, the barista responds by saying "I'm doing great, thanks for asking," while ringing up my order. If she didn't have my attention before she surely has it now "Excuse me," I respond, "I believe we have had a miscommunication. I'm quite positive I never asked you how you were doing so let's start over. How are you doing? No need to respond since apparently I already have your answer." There are some people that would say I was being rude but the truth is I'm a victim, yet another casualty of the disingenuous practice of pretending to be sincere that has engulfed society and made daily interactions with strangers and casual acquaintances almost unbearable. Think of the time that is being wasted at food and retail establishments from the banal and often insincere canned greetings that involve asking how the other person THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT lig THEY SAY... 'MP PO LINDSAY SCHURING/The Daily Utah Chronicle is doing followed by an equally insincere canned response that isn't anywhere near the truth. People are being forced to lie about how they are doing because no one actually wants to hear the truth which could involve anything from an itchy burning feeling in a particularly tender area to a sneaking suspicion that their spouse is cheating on them. I would much prefer a simple and efficient interaction that involves a greeting that gets right to the point of how I can be helped and not how I currently feel. My visits to places such as Walmart or In-N-Out Burger are for rather mundane purposes like buying toothpaste and feeding my face, not for social interaction. There are three types of people who ask strangers how their day is: people who are being forced to because of their jobs and really couldn't care less; people who actually think they care but really don't; and those rare, special people who really do care but are lumped into the first two categories because it's nearly impossible to tell the difference. Why can't Americans combine ruthlessness and indifference when it comes to social interactions with strangers in retail environments? Imagine how much quicker the lines at places like Starbucks and Costco would move with that type of dedication to customer service instead of all that wasted time involved with insulting customers by pretending to care how their day is going. Perhaps my biggest pet peeve is feeling obligated to pretend to care about what's going on in the lives of people who are firmly in the acquaintance category. This is a situation that I can only blame myself for as, after all, I'm the one who decided to put them in that category in the first place. My initial intentions were pure in that the people in my acquaintance category are people I genuinely like but not enough that I actually feel like getting involved in their personal lives. I enjoy having people I can call up to go play basketball or to shoot the breeze with while watching the Super Bowl, but should I really be expected to care about their financial woes or troubles in the bedroom? Before people start thinking badly of my seemingly cruel indifference, I would ask them to go through the 510 friends they have on Facebook — the average amount of Facebook friends for people between 18 and 24 — and I'm willing to bet at least 410 of them are firmly in the acquaintance category and at least 350 of those acquaintances are people they haven't spoken with in years, with the remaining 6o being people that they can't even remember adding as friends. Facebook itself is the most criminal example of social insincerity among acquaintances. It's a cesspool of digital indifference in the use of flippant "likes" to show supposed support for someone you barely know, much less care about. I always get a chuckle when I see someone post something sad or depressing that's going on in their lives only to have it "liked" by dozens of their "friends." Wouldn't an actual phone call of support mean more than a thumbs up on a webpage when a Facebook friend is pouring their heart out on the internet? It's quite possible I'm on to something here — the beginning of a social revolution if you will — or perhaps I'm just on the wrong side of thirty and the bitterness is starting to take over. One thing is for sure, I either need to start getting along with people and play the social networking game, or get used to carefully checking my precious Starbucks coffee for spit, which at the very least would be well deserved. letters@chronicle.utah.edu Psuedoscience creates unnecessary anxiety Public should stop believing everything they read, embrace critical thinking T he other day as I was browsing through Facebook, I came across a page promoting healthy eating and exercise habits. I skimmed the site and came across something odd — a link to a high school science fair project claiming microwaved food and water are harmful. It showed a picture of two plants: one healthy and robust, the other sickly and dying. Supposedly, the healthy plant had been watered using boiled water and the sickly plant had been watered using microwaved water. The claim was that microwaving the water changed the structure of the DNA molecules so that the plant couldn't absorb it and thus, microwaves are dangerous. I didn't buy it. First of all, microwaves, just like any other way of heating up food, make the atoms vibrate faster — which is a natural phenomenon known as "heat" — but they do not change the bonds. And not only did this site say that microwaving changes the molecules — it said specifically that it changes the DNA. Water doesn't have DNA. Second of all, this was one science fair project, not a peerreviewed study. Perhaps something was wrong with the seeds of the sick plant, or perhaps the variables weren't all accounted for. And third of all, whoever did the project only saw the plant. They did not directly observe the water molecules themselves. But those were a mild nuisance — after all, it was only a science fair project. What really got to me was how seriously people took it. People commented on the article claiming that they'd never use a microwave again and vowing to spread the word about the dangers of microwaves, all because of a high school science project. A number of people are too quick to jump to conclusions from unsubstantiated claims and anecdotal evi- rus me, I know is ienee stuff... LUIGI GHERSI/The Daily Utah Chronicle LIZI ZACHARY Columnist dence. Sometimes this is harmless. For example, there is no scientific evidence that zodiac signs can tell anything about personalities. Yet many people believe in astrology. They may take a few extra seconds to read their horoscope in the morning paper, but their belief in astrology doesn't cause anybody else harm. Other times, people endorsing pseudoscientific claims can cause harm or slow actual scientific progress. Aliso Viejo, a city in California, almost banned foam cups in 2004 — not because Styrofoam itself is a possible carcinogen, but because dihydrogen monoxide is used in its production. DHMO is dangerous if inhaled. It has also been found in meth labs and the tumors of cancer patients. Overconsumption can cause electrolyte imbalance and cerebral edema. DHMO is the chemical name for water. This is an example of how facts can be distorted to make a mountain out of a molehill. Of course it's dangerous to inhale water in its liquid form. And since water is found everywhere in the body, of course it's found in tumors. And although it's necessary for staying alive, an extreme overload of it can still be harmful. Without that context, this chemical sounds incredibly dangerous, while in reality, it's one of the least toxic substances around. If even water can be made to sound deadly, anything can be twisted with the right rhetoric. For example, microwaves. There are other topics that have been blown out of proportion that I could mention, such as genetically modified organisms and fluoridated water, but that would require two new opinion columns. The bottom line is, facts are often skewed. Critical thinking should be valued from an early age. The public should be able to read an article and evaluate the claims rather than jumping on the first scary fact they see. Hint: If it refers to water as having DNA, it's probably bunk. letters@chronicle.utah.edu |