Being "Latino"

I created a Paper.li "newspaper" called Puerto Rico Now(ish), through My @gilthejenius Twitter handle. You can find it here.

Several days ago, there was an article about statehood for Puerto Rico, on the online magazine known as Being Latino. You can find it here.

I made a comment that took the article to task, with 6 links to Jenius posts dating back to 2005. (Should I point out that Being """Latino""", aside from using a nonsensical term in its title, is only 2 years old? Then again, I'm "The Jenius," right? Six years and counting...) The comment was rejected because the links were treated as spam. Website policy, as the editor Libby Vázquez pointed out to Me when I called them "cowards" for not allowing the comment. She clarified the rejection and invited me to submit a response. Libby even sent Me the submission guidelines.

I wrote My response by editing the 6 posts to fit within a 500-word limit and divided My piece into three parts. Going back to Being Latino, I noticed that a Ms. Mercedes Lebrón--a name that could ring a bell related to the town of Arroyo--had asked about My potential comment. I goosed the issue and received a response the next day, from Ulises Silva, via Libby Vázquez

The response is too long. It doesn't merit a three-part, three-week segment, especially since many of the things it raises are opinions. There's little substantiation of the claims and assertions being made, which makes the piece sound like a soapbox speech than a balanced response to Julio's piece. The claims need to be backed up with the right links to references. This could work if the response is shortened to one 500-word piece (as opposed to three), and if it includes more references.

My response?

Fair enough. I don't work for you, so I can take my words and work and place them elsewhere. Thank you.

Am I showing an attitude here? Good. I may be trying to become a "nicer, kinder Jenius," but the bottom line is I don't suffer fools, Fools or stupid ideas. At all.

So here's My distillation of previous posts, whittled to fit the 500-word limit Being """Latino""" endorses for publication on the site:

Puerto Rico: Never a State – A 3-Part Column

By Gil C. Schmidt

Bio: I lived almost 20 years in the U.S., spanning states from Nebraska to Texas to Mississippi. My appearance and name are those of a White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant, the proverbial W.A.S.P. But I was born in Puerto Rico, a fourth-generation Puerto Rican and have lived on the island continuously since 1987. You can find more of my writings about Puerto Rico at Gil The Jenius: http://gilthejenius.blogspot.com

Puerto Rico: Never a State – Part One                 [500 words]

By Gil C. Schmidt

Understand this: the U.S. will not grant statehood to Puerto Rico. Ever. It is not a “right” Puerto Rico has earned, it is not a “debt” the U.S. has to pay and it is not their "obligation" to take on a nation (a concept many Puerto Ricans shamefully deny we have) as part of their republican federation because of a simple reason: it is their house and they can say who comes in and who doesn’t.

Statehood for Puerto Rico is not going to happen for three unimpeachable reasons: 1) Ethnic and economic differences, masked or open; 2) History has spoken and 3) Under domestic and international law, the ultimate decision is not “theirs”: it’s ours.

Ethnic and economic differences: The average American doesn’t know about or care a thing for Puerto Rico. But you can bet that their ignorance will quickly change to expertise based on a single issue: We are not like them. To the average American, we are not Americans. We are outsiders. Strangers. Parasites even. For though the U.S. was founded on humanistic ideals and principles, in fact, the ideals and principles are often expressed as “If you ain’t one of us, you don’t count and we don’t want you.” Ask Arizona.

For statehood, the procedure says that 38 States have to approve. It’s easier to find 38 States to vote against Puerto Rico. First off, none of the 9 Southern states (Louisiana to Kentucky/North Carolina) would approve. If you have to ask why, you’ve obviously never lived in those States.

Large Western states, like Montana, Idaho and Wyoming are famous for having a strong sense of freedom, “America First” sentiment and an array of militia radicals. They’ll vote NO with nary a split-second’s thought. That makes 12, so Puerto Rican statehood is finished.

But to make the point clearer, take your pick of almost-certain “No” votes: New England states that are as ultra-conservative as the winter is long or some of the other 21 States that would see their comparatively small representation overwhelmed by Puerto Rico’s in the House of Representatives, where the number of votes is based on population, not State seniority.

Furthermore, unlike the Senate, which could rise to 102 Senators, Puerto Rico’s five "representatives" would be taken from high-population states, namely California, New York, Florida, Texas, Illinois or Pennsylvania. These states have high Hispanic minorities, but would these states allow one of their “voices in government” to be given to a fledgling state with a comparative poverty level that makes Mississippi look like Monaco?

And let’s not ignore the question of race. It matters. It matters a lot. Maybe 50 years from now, when the majority of the population of the U.S. is non-white, maybe it won’t matter as much. Or then again, it will, as the difference between “Them that have” and “Them that don’t” could very well make the race issue seem trivial by comparison. But for now, it’s a deal-breaker, whether it’s carried out openly (“English only”) or quietly.

Puerto Rico: Never a State – Part Two                           [499 words]

By Gil C. Schmidt

Statehood for Puerto Rico is not going to happen for three unimpeachable reasons: 1) Ethnic and economic differences, masked or open, covered in Part One; 2) History has spoken and 3) Under domestic and international law, the ultimate decision is not “theirs”: it’s ours.

History has spoken: Oklahoma, 1907. New Mexico, 1912. Arizona, 1912. Alaska, 1959.  Hawaii, 1959.

Puerto Rico has been the property of the U.S. since 1898. Three States were added since the Spanish-American War to form the contiguous 48. The addition of non-contiguous states happened once, for Alaska and Hawaii, 61 years after Puerto Rico became war booty.

To complete the nationalization and permanence of the territorial limits in geopolitical terms, essentially, to make everybody belong to the same government, it made perfect sense to add Oklahoma (in the central portion of the country) and Arizona and New Mexico in the southwest (on the border with Mexico.)

Adding Alaska, a landmass equal to roughly 25% of the entire "lower 48", and Hawaii, a Pacific sinecure, also made sense, as both were long-held territories where American interests were ripe for development. In the case of Alaska, it turned into federal reserves; in Hawaii, tourism-related development.

So, if Puerto Rico were to ever become a State, it is clear that post-1898 decisions about statehood have shown what the basic criteria are for being invited:

1) Political expediency, i.e., the forging of a potentially stronger geopolitical unit, or…

2) Economic enhancement.

Do we satisfy either or both of them?

No.

Are we being invited?

No and no and no.

By 1959, we were already being plucked by American interests and as they say in my neck of the woods: Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? There's no doubt the U.S. makes tons of money off of Puerto Rico, so statehood is really not an economic enhancement for them and in fact, it is widely portrayed and considered as either a mistake that leads to carrying welfare freeloaders or a bottomless pit of economic rehabilitation expenses. Usually both.

So what about political expediency? Well, check out point #1 above. We're not Anglo-Saxons. Or Protestants. Or native English speakers. Or descendants of the same parts of Europe that they are. Toss out all that as a unifying factor. We are way south of the border, and unlike Alaska, we are tiny with no natural resources and unlike Hawaii, we don't occupy a strategic location under U.S. interests. We did in 1940; we didn't by 1945.

If Puerto Rico--in the eyes of its political owners--were deemed worthy of statehood, it would have been decided between 1912 and 1945, when our economy was nonexistent, the potential for American investment was very high, our strategic location could have been considered vital, our population small enough (and in their eyes, malleable enough) to absorb and the "lower 48" were a unitary done deal. That it didn't happen then means it isn’t going to happen at all. Ever.

Puerto Rico: Never a State – Part Three                        [500 words]

By Gil C. Schmidt

Statehood for Puerto Rico is not going to happen for three unimpeachable reasons: 1) Ethnic and economic differences, masked or open, discussed in Part One; 2) History has spoken, as per Part Two and 3) Under domestic and international law, the ultimate decision is not “theirs”: it’s ours.

3) The law says the ultimate decision is ours: During its 8th session, the U.N. General Assembly recognized Puerto Rico's self-government on November 27, 1953 with Resolution 748 (VIII). This removed Puerto Rico’s classification as a non-self-governing territory under article 73(e) of the U.N. Charter.

Puerto Rico held its plebiscite concerning a new constitution in 1950. The constitutionally-based commonwealth was inaugurated on July 25th, 1952. However, the U.N. recognized Puerto Rico's self-government in November 27, 1953.

Neither domestic nor international law recognizes a right to a plebiscite before a transfer of sovereignty. In short: In 1950 we weren’t empowered to choose our status.

Up until that day in 1953, we were not considered self-governing. Under domestic law (Supreme Court and Congress), we were “an unincorporated territory,” and as such, were not guaranteed anything by the U.S. So the process between the U.S. and Puerto Rico that led to the commonwealth "experiment" was not, as the pro-commonwealth party has always insisted, a deal between equals, it was merely a hand-me-down fait accompli between a sovereign nation and its territory.

Therefore, if according to international law we stopped being a colony in 1953, then we have to face up to certain truths:

--As a self-governing territory, it is up to us--and no one else--to make the focused effort to establish our permanent status. And by “us” I mean the Puerto Ricans who live, work and own property here, not “weekenders” waving our flag a couple of times a year during some New York parade.

--The only binding plebiscite the U.S. can offer—and never has--is a Congressionally-mandated referendum wherein Puerto Rico can automatically put into motion whatever ultimate status the voters choose. No such offer is being made now and won’t be: the fear of pledging itself to grant statehood to Puerto Rico is not something any U.S. politician wants to see looming ahead. Puerto Rico cannot force Congress to do this and Congress simply cannot be forced on this issue. History proves it.

I think it is way past time that we moved beyond all this statehood fantasy. For deep down, it isn’t a matter of pride, heritage, history or anything equally lofty: it simply boils down to a matter of money. They have it, they know many Puerto Ricans want more of it, and they don’t want—or have—to share it. On that basis alone, the U.S. will continue to reject seriously considering any Puerto Rican request for statehood.

And they should. Because we can do better.

Except that most of us don’t believe—or don't want to believe—that.

Not becoming a state is not Puerto Rico’s loss; not knowing how to be ourselves is.

Opinion? A good part of it, yes. Soapbox? I'd say so, definitely. References are there, mostly of historical veracity. But does merely placing quotes around a statement that is largely opinion  suddenly turn it into fact? Example, from the Being """Latino""" article itself: “We want to offer a solution, because the bottom line is that no matter what the White House Report says, it still does not go far enough to deal with Puerto Rico’s ambiguous state,” (Rafael) Rodríguez added. “We want to highlight Puerto Rico’s economic status, once it is released from its current status that is hampering that potential. We want to send a clear message for folks to understand.”

Maybe I should resubmit the articles with quotation marks around certain statements, right? 

But why bother. Being """Latino""" is what it is. However, it will be interesting to note what direction this sterile (113 years and counting; Ulises can look up a reference himself) statehood "effort" takes within the nuanced pages of Being """Latino""". Maybe. 

Wake Me up if they make it to 6 years. And counting.

The Jenius Has Spoken.

[Update: 10 February 2012: For those pseudo-intellectuals that took Me to task for implying and stating that the "American" feeling for Puerto Rico was wrapped in racism, here's the Tea Party phrase of what statehood for the Island would be: "...a Trojan Horse for the Hispanicization of the United States." Read that phrase again and see if there's any positive angle, any form of acceptance of Puerto Rico or Hispanics at all. Then bite Me.]

Tourism? Nah. Tourrette's

The Jenius returned with a different outlook, a return to the more positive mindset of several years ago. Consciously. Deliberately. A kinder, nicer Jenius. So I read the following interview with Mario González, the current Executive Director of the Puerto Rico Tourism Company (pardon Me while I suppress a sardonic snort...there; nicer Jenius upheld) and aimed My Jenial mindset at the good points.

And aimed. And came up with: Our "Tourism" is a spew of idiocy.

Fuck nice. This "Tourrette's-disguised-as-Tourism" company shit has GOT to end. Now.

(Fell off the bandwagon kinda fast, huh? Idiocy can do that to a Jenius.)

Here's the complete interview, from which I will extract some of the more idiotic outbursts of "Motormouth" Mario.

First, note the title: "Ladies and gents, Puerto Rico speaks up, finally." I feel the interviewers' pain, because I'm sure Motormouth Mario was in "Severe Bureaucratic Avoidance" mode and delayed being available for the interview until he screwed up and couldn't get out of it. Given the end result, he was an idiot for not hiding until 2012. [Disclaimer: I have exchanged a few e-mails and tweets with Raúl Colón, but never about this interview and I've never met Nelson Alcántara in any way.] 

The interview was under the banner of ETurboNews, covering the global travel industry:

ETN: Every extension is a brand, an identity, if you may. Can you identify what's Puerto Rico's unique value proposition? 
LAFUENTE: Unique value proposition is that we are more than sun and sand, which is actually one of our competitive advantages, our mountains, our natural resources. We have a beautiful tropical rainforest. We have the Camoway (sic) caves. We have a rich history, culture. So we have a diverse offer to our visitors that is, I guess, our competitive advantage to the other islands. 

If Motormouth Mario had stood up and said shitpissturdsandwich at 94 decibels, he would have been more cogent. His answer about Our unique value proposition is sophomoric at the ultimate best and the babbling of an incompetent primate at worst. Maybe the monkeys have invaded San Juan...

Motormouth, Puerto Rico's UNIQUE value proposition is your "elevator pitch," your 20-second "hook". You've been in office since August 2, 2010 and the interview was held on April 14, 2011. Isn't 8 months enough for you to learn what Our UVP is, or should be? And "you guess" about what Our UVP is? Verbal tic, Motormouth?

Here's an elevator pitch version for the U.S. of part of A. market that you can steal from Me: In the Caribbean, Puerto Rico offers a greater variety of tropical and one-of-a-kind attractions, along with ecological and adventure travel, all within easy driving distance on the Island and without needing a passport or visa to come here.  There. Maybe you can memorize that by the time you get kicked out in 2012.  "What about Europe?" you exclaim? I got one, but I'm not going to do all your work for you.

And a shout-out to Nelson and Raúl for the follow-up question:
ETN: So exactly that was the next question. What sets Puerto Rico apart from other nations in the Caribbean? Journalism 101: make sure the question is answered.

Moving on, in a downward spiral:

ETN: On Puerto Rican crime and tourism, is there a connection? 
LAFUENTE: There is no connection... 

ETN: In the history of Puerto Rico, has there ever been an instance when a tourist or tourists have been involved in such a situation? 
LAFUENTE: Yes, yes, there has. 

Motormouth answered the first question by spewing the party line, like a baboon chewing a banana. But take a look at this: A Google search for puerto rico crime tourism that shows Me 7 of the top 10 results are clearly negative:

#1: "If you look at the statistics, it's clear that Puerto Rico has a crime problem." WikiTravel.org.

#2: "...rising crime, drugs, AIDS, and other social problems plague Puerto Rico." Frommer's.

#4: "...to have the murder rate of puerto rico (sic) it would be about 8000 by now." VirtualTourist.com

#6: "I recognize that Puerto Rico has a high crime rate but it's..." GoCaribbean.com

#7: "Meet Sara Kuszak: Pregnant American Tourist Killed In San Juan". PuertoRico Country Toolbox.com (blog) [I have exchanged many e-mail with this blogger.]

#8: "...times accused government authorities of misrepresenting crime statistics for political (and tourist) purposes."

DollarMan.com #9: "Puerto Rico's crime wave reaches Condado hotels". USATODAY.com From April 26th, 2011, not even 2 weeks after the Motormouth interview. Did a crime wave tsunami erupt April 15th or am I missing something here?

Only one result is positive, #3 on My search results: "Little crime in the tourist areas of Puerto Rico equals a worry-free visit..." It's from the PuertoRico-Guide.info. Click on the link and here's the opening paragraph: In Puerto Rico auto theft, muggings, and drug trafficking are the most commonly reported forms of crime, so stay alert, lock your car, and use any security features available in both your vehicle and your hotel. Muggings are commonly reported on the Condado and Isla Verde beaches in San Juan, so it might be wise to confine your moonlit walks on the beach to the fenced-in and guarded areas around some of the major hotels. Is this in any way a ringing endorsement?

I know Google displays geolocated results, so what I see is going to differ somewhat from what a Michigander or Iowan or Kentuckian will see, but does anyone in this Web-savvy world really think that their results will be more positive than Mine? And based on that, can anyone with any brains really think that crime and tourism are not connected when people think/search about Puerto Rico? And who is the average would-be traveler--over 83% now relying on the Web for vacation planning--going to believe: Frommer's, a neutral website, a Puerto Rico-based blog or some pseudo-official "Puerto Rico Guide"?

Motormouth, stop obsessing about the party line and party lies and party bullshit and get to work on engaging the Web as the key tool for marketing My Island. What you "think" or "believe" is buried under tons of reality checks, made every minute of every day, around the world. Puerto Rico is not the worst place in the world for crime; it's not even the worst in the U.S. of part of A. But unless We tell that to the world and help others promote Our positives, you, Motormouth Mario, will be nothing more than a feckless shill of political hyenas.

More from the mealy-mouthed interview:

ETN: What efforts are being done to entice this (the lucrative gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered) market? 
LAFUENTE: Well, we - although we do not have a specific promotion or marketing to any specific group, the way that our marketing and promotions are made, our marketing and promotions program are enticing to all groups. So I am pretty sure that there are hostelries here that market to that specific group. So like I said, you know, we are very open and very inclusive for all groups to come to Puerto Rico. 

Remember what he said here: "...we do not have a specific promotion or marketing to any specific group..."

Later in the interview, he says:

ETN: Customer service is sometimes overlooked as a result of mass tourism, like it's not given a priority. Is this the case for Puerto Rico? 
LAFUENTE: ...Puerto Rico isn't necessarily a mass-driven destination and should not be a mass-driven destination, but putting that aside, it's just, you know, marketing for the type of product that we have here. In terms of quality, we are very, very aware of the importance of quality and service, and we are very focused on developing that important factor. 

Did you lose your focus here, Motormouth? If We are not "a mass-driven destination and should not be a mass-driven destination," then why is that "...we do not have a specific promotion or marketing to any specific group..."? Are We "not niche-marketing to the masses to bring in no specific groups but not the masses"? Are We "mass-marketing to avoid the masses and the niches as well"? Just what the hell are We doing, Motormouth?

Here's another example of Tourrette's-masquerading-as-Tourism:

ETN: Puerto Rico Tourism Company has boldly claimed that Puerto Rico does it better. Let's make this case in terms of tourism. What exactly in your view does Puerto Rico Tourism do better?
LAFUENTE: Well, we do many things better. Puerto Rico does it better. 

Echolalia or incompetence, as shown by the rest of the rambling answer?

Marketing a destination is not an easy task. Trying to market a destination by not knowing what's unique and special about it is almost impossible. But trying to do so by not even knowing what the hell you're saying is totally impossible. You need help, Motormouth. For Our sake, you should get it. 

For when it comes to Our Tourism, Tourrette's is not an option We should have to put up with. Ever.


The Jenius Has Spoken.

[Note: 15 May 2010: Hey! Back on 19 September 2008, I wrote a post titled "Tourism Tour(rette)". The more things change... ]

Flipping Odds

You flip a coin 10 times and it comes up heads 10 times in a row. What are the odds it comes up tails on the 11th flip?

Politician Skanky Thief has been mentioned as a possible suspect in 6 federal investigations. What are the odds he will be indicted before the elections? Would the odds change if I named him "Honest Bureaucrat"?

The political party you support has--on average--five criminal investigations against it a year. What are the odds it will not have any criminal investigations against it in the next 4 years?

The first question has a clear and obvious answer: 50-50. In other words, no matter what has happened before, a coin flip is just as likely to land heads as it does tails. Coins don't have memories or tendencies.

Moving on to Skanky Thief, the odds are more difficult to calculate. But think about it: if a person has been shown to have a tendency--good or bad--We know the odds favor that the tendency continue. So We intuitively think that Skanky Thief is just about a lock to go down, but Honest Bureaucrat might avoid a grand jury altogether. The problem in calculating the odds is not them, but Us: if We support Skanky Thief, in essence saying "He's My thief," then We ignore the tendency shown and think he's going to get away unscathed. If We hate Honest Bureaucrat's party/politics, then We ignore the tendency again and start preparing Our mental "I hope he drops the soap in prison" tirade. Unlike the coin, the politician has a memory and a tendency. (Like the coin, the politician lacks a conscience.)

Now what about the political party? If you think about it a bit, you'll realize that calculating the odds here is still fuzzy, but easier than with the politician. Simple: Individuals are hard to predict, but systems and organizations are much less so. You grasp that instinctively, in the same way that you'll nod your head when I say that nearly every Catholic priest will come out vehemently against sexual abuse of children, but the Church will look the other way when the dozens of accusations come in every year.

So look at the political parties We have festering in Our political system and ask yourself: are they going to change? I use the example of criminal investigations, but you can substitute any topic or concern you have: education, energy policy, unemployment, ecology, drug abuse, whatever.  You know the answer.

So what about looking then at the individuals within the parties, to see if at that level We can find an outlier, a change agent, a difference maker? Too much work, you say? And that bias thing you have against members of the other party makes it impossible for you to look at "them" and see anything but "skanky thieves" compared to your "honest bureaucrats," right? The problem isn't "them": it's you.

But what choice do We have, if We want to change the system? (Not enough of Us do, but just string along here while I make My point.) The odds indicate that the skanky thieves We have steering Us like drunken monkeys are only that: thieving drunk monkeys. We aren't getting anything from them other than what We've seen. They ain't flipping to "competent nation builders" ever in Our space-time continuum. And the parties are built for and by thieving drunken monkeys to find more thieving drunken monkeys. Their "coin flips" are coming up "asses" with metronomic regularity. (I know it's supposed to be "tails"; synonyms rule.)

What's happening isn't random. We don't have this boozy con(wo)man circus of drunken
thieving monkeys by accident. The odds of something this huge and this consistent being an accident are slightly higher than that of a banana winning the Nobel Prize for Physics. Knowing that--and We do know it--it behooves Us to take matters back into Our own hands and break the system. Their system. We're given the open power to do so every four years, but We ignore the power We have every day to mold the system. Odds are, We're going to continue to ignore, to conveniently forget, that We actually do have the power and let the drunken thieving monkeys continue to flip Us off.


The Jenius Has Spoken.

Monkeys and Lizards and Snakes, Oh My!

Some people in Hawaii hate, loathe and despise the fact that some of My Brethren have taken Our little coquí frogs, producers of the musical warble that fills Our nights, to those Pacific islands. They hate the unfamiliar noise and that the noise is almost impossible to eradicate. (The coquí is a ventriloquist, so you look where he ain't.)

I understand those Hawaiians. I get their pain. But they have one kind of little animal to deal with...and We have three.

First, monkeys. Disease-addled escapees that We have voted into office every freaking election year since 195--Oh, sorry. Disease-riddled monkeys, genus Rhesus and Pata, swam across a narrow strip of ocean from the tiny island research facility that housed them. What was once a small handful of breeding pairs has become an epidemic: estimates of the monkey population on My Island ranges from 5,000 to 12,000.

Most are sick with syphillis, the simian version of AIDS and other diseases.  Reports abound that they no longer flee when they see people and that they have attacked cars in group rages. They have expanded their range from the southwest--where I live--to the western edge of the San Juan Metro area. What they will do when--not if, when--they cross that barrier into the rain forest is a nightmare on Our schedule.

Huge iguanas, crested craggy creatures that can stretch to 7-8 feet (half of that tail) are proliferating like mad and We vote them into office every freaking elec---Oh, sorry. These iguanas arrived here as exotic pets, not lab animals, and either escaped or were tossed into the wild, like the alligators We have in Our northwestern mangroves. The problem is that, unlike the gators, the iguanas can easily find food anywhere and out-compete Our smaller native species. The large iguanas are particularly vicious when it comes to eating bird eggs, with many of Our native birds seeing a negative impact from this invasion.

I know a 5-year old boy who has a pet snake. His third in a year. The other two? Oh, they escaped. Puerto Rico--or My Island, as it is known (to Me)--had only one native snake species and We kept voting it into office eve--Oh, sorry. Now, according to Natural Resources Department personnel, We have over 20 snake species here, many of them of the boa and python families. My dad killed a 9-foot snake outside his house about 20 years ago, in the hills of Arroyo (southeast coast). His neighbors told him that was the seventh or eighth snake of that size killed in the area in the span of a few months. Those neighbors now indicate that large snakes are an increasingly common sight in the higher and drier hills of the region, the ones where people seldom roam, but dogs and cats often do.

These monkeys and lizards and snakes are a problem...and not because We keep voting them into office every freaking election. These animals endanger Our lives and that of Our native species. The Puerto Rican parrot, whose population is rising slowly after years of dedicated conservation efforts, could be wiped out in months if monkeys and iguanas ravish the rain forest the parrots cling to precariously. Farmers along the southwest coast and southwest interior have practically given up their small farms because the monkeys ravage the crops and the fines for killing one of these monkeys is in the thousands of dollars.

But what is going to happen when a monkey attacks someone and wounds them grievously? Or when iguanas wipe out most of Our birds? Or when snakes multiply to the point where Our camping and relaxation areas are biological mine fields? What then?

So far, We have no solutions. Hunting with air rifles has been allowed, but in limited fashion. Trapping has been tried, but in the case of monkeys, who will take them or how they will be destroyed has been an obstacle. (Don't tell Me these monkeys can't be killed wholesale: they can be. If you think about it, it's the only practical, affordable and reasonably-implementable solution.) Trapping iguanas and snakes is a more difficult deal, but they need to be decimated as well. And no, bringing in some other animal to eat the iguanas and snakes is not a solution. We have enough problems with bringing animals into Puerto Rico and voting them into offi--Oh, sorry.

It's painfully obvious We have dozens of major problems, exceedingly hard to solve. These animals are part of the chaotic problem set We face every day. But unlike other facets of this ugly diamond, We can do something about these animals. We can get rid of the monkeys, then the iguanas and then the snakes. If nothing else, solving one problem gives Us momentum to solve another. But whether We pick an animal or corrupt politicians or amoral thieves to eliminate, We can find all three in the current (non)administration.

Oh, sorry: We can find solutions. We just have to want to enough. Soon.


The Jenius Has Spoken.

[Update: 18 May 2011: Local officials capture an illegal shipment of exotic species, including pythons, boas, a hooded cobra, crocodiles, alligators, scorpions and tarantulas. The capture took place in Arroyo. Imagine that. And in Guayama, an alligator is jailed. No, I didn't make that up.]

Failing Parents, Failing Students

Off My previous post, Jenius Reader Prometeo waded in with his personal experiences. He is a teacher who has tried to implement some of the Finnish viewpoints into local classrooms. In his own words (from the Comments section of the post):

"I focus more on pedagogical strategies and try to find the most suitable one to use on a class. I try not to get enclosed in the Department of Education's pedagogical mold based on the USA's tried and failed but still applied theories. Finland let's it's teachers try to experiment new strategies and encourages it. ON this island it's otherwise and not fitting into the mold can get you in trouble."

Now I'm on record as having stated that most teachers on My Island are too lazy and too stupid to do any other job. Obviously, Prometeo and many many others don't fit that indictment. I am also on record as thinking of Our Department of (Mis)Education as useless at best and criminal at worst.

But.

There's a third component in this education swamp and it's one I've never truly pinpointed as such with equal vehemence. I'll let Prometeo identify that target precisely:

"Another thing is that I try to get parents involved. But that has really proved difficult. In this island people don't really care about education. So that's an uphill battle for me. The parents that do respond and work with their kids see better results. But those are a minority. Reality is that in Puerto Rico most parents don't really care about their kids education, they just want to have the school take care of them from 8-3 and when they arrive home sit them in front of the TV until bedtime. That's the sad truth."

Yes it is. Thus We can round out The Jenius' definitions of the "Educational Trilogy of Failure" in the following manner:

---The Department: "Useless at best, criminal at worst."
---Teachers: "Most are too lazy and too stupid for the job."
---Parents: "Many are too lazy, too irresponsible and too stupid to raise well-educated kids."

A quick glance and thought will lead to only one conclusion: Our education system fails because too many parents fail to do their part in it.

If you think My definition about parents and their role is wrong, answer these questions:

Have you ever known a hard-working person who didn't take education and learning seriously? Odds are that for every 100 hard workers you meet, maybe 1-2 are not avid supporters of education. Hard-working people have a simple logic about education: they know the value of hard work and the value of knowing more to make hard work easier and more productive.

Have you ever known a responsible person who didn't take education and learning seriously? Responsible people, by definition, follow through. They can plan, visualize the future and orient their behavior to fulfill their need/goal. They know the value of commitment and progress and thus make it a focal point of their attention when it comes to the ultimate platform for acquiring long-term skills: education.

Have you ever known a smart or well-educated (not the same thing) person who didn't take education and learning seriously? Those who know Me might chuckle: I loathe schools, classrooms and the fetid garbage that goes with it, like grades...but I am fanatical about learning. Many professionals are nearly obsessed with their children's grades and school progress, probably because it is a reflection on them (image being everything for some people.) But for whatever reason (or spectrum of reasons), We focus on Our children's education--or lack of it. We make Our children aware that We care and--right or wrong--make them go through the system at or near the top of the heap. We are a minority--and most of Us have Our kids in private schools.

Which leaves the public school system with a substantial minority, maybe even a majority, of the "too lazy, too irresponsible and too stupid" crowd.

Obviously, not every parent with a child in a public school fits My definition, just as not every teacher does. (The Department, on the other hand...) But as so many teachers, like Prometeo, can attest, far too many parents do. And before I get a brick off the noggin, too many parents in private schools fall into My definition, not because they are indifferent, but because they care about the wrong things. You know the type: their precious snowflake simply can't get a bad grade because they are special and I'm paying for this! Yeah, those jerks.

In a society where over half of Our adults don't work is fertile ground for "too lazy." In a society where close to 65% of Our people are on welfare, almost 60% blatantly avoid taxes and nearly 44% work for the government, it's a wonder responsabilidad hasn't faded from Our language like hundreds of Taíno words. And in a society where education has been raped, stonewalled and criminally decimated by corruption for over 40 years, it's damn near a miracle We aren't all Fools.

But sometimes--too often--We act like We are.


The Jenius Has Spoken.

Puerto Rico: Teaching/Learning

On the heels of My last post (just below this one, for you blog noobs or Fools) (Parenthetical interjection here: In Jenius-speak, "Fools" are so-called government, business, corporate """leaders""" that almost invariably couldn't find their rectums with a mobile app/GPS combo shoved into it. Yes, that's graphic. They are that revolting. And the excessive quotation marks are My version of rampant sarcasm. Maybe I should write a glossary...) I'm continuing My line of "exploring Puerto Rico."

Here's an example, right from My Life: I have a dear friend, Jenius Supporter Extraordinaire, who just won a 2-year Education Master's Degree scholarship at the University of Helsinki. He's one of 20 students from around the world who made the cut. And why is he doing this? Because Finland has one of the great success stories in public education over the past 25 years.

And My friend, Alfredo, lives to change Our education system.

Worth exploring? Damn straight.

Now I happen to know Alfredo since 1998. He's the first person I made friends with when I moved to Cabo Rojo. He even introduced Me to My Wife, Mrs. Jenius, so if Alfredo ever needs two kidneys, he can have both of Mine. Alfredo and I have discussed education and 1,492 other topics at great length, which means I'm as proud as hell he's going to Finland to learn new ideas and teach them about Us.

Because that's the other part of this deal: Alfredo will teach the Finns about Puerto Rico. Now the general reaction of My Brethren to this statement is 23.6% "But they already know about Us!" and 74.8% "Why would they want to learn about Us?" Brethren, you know in your hearts that I'm right about this, down to the ratio. 

(You math whizzes can now get the missing portion: 1.6% will think "They won't care at all." You know I'm right about that as well.)

First of all, just because We're practically blind to the larger world outside of Disney/Orlando, Miami and the Bronx doesn't mean the rest of the world is like that. Second, Alfredo was selected--I believe--because he was as well-qualified as the other candidates, but also because he's from Puerto Rico. How many other Puerto Ricans do you think have ever applied to the University of Helsinki? Third, the Finns travel the world sharing their education success story; I even blogged about it. Twice. As smart educators, they know that learning is enhanced by diversity, and adding Puerto Rico to their mix, for what has to be the first time, increases learning for everybody. And fourth, it is an education axiom that "One learns best when teaching." For Alfredo to reach his maximum potential as an educator, he has to be an active teacher/learner...and the best teachers are invariably active learners.

It's human nature to project one's own feelings and perceptions on others. To think that Finland, or any other country, would not be interested in Puerto Rico is to project Our insecurity and lack of strong national identity. (Alfredo has lots to say about that. We need to hear it.) We swing wildly from "¡Yo Soy Boricua!" jingoism to "What We have is peanuts compared to the U.S. of part of A.," often substituting "crap" where peanuts should be. And again, you know I'm right about this. The proof: Any visit to a local zoo, park or entertainment center invariably gets compared to some mega-facility up north. The clear sub-text: What We have ain't good enough. The sub-text should be: What We have is as unique as what they have.

And that's the key: What We have is as unique as what they have. It doesn't demean what We have or disparage what they have. It simply accepts that each is valuable for each is unique. That way lies learning. And that's why Alfredo will be a great teacher in Finland.

We can all be great teachers, as well.


The Jenius Has Spoken.

Open My Eyes Wider

Over the hiatus, I gathered some 74 posts of Mine into an e-book, that will be out before the end of May. Rather than meander on My favorite topics (Me and My writings), I'll just to get to the points:

1) The tone running through many of the posts was one of anger. You knew that. I knew that. But it's one thing to "know" it in a vague, "Uh-huh, that's true" way and another to see it flashing before your eyes in rapid sequences of 10-12 posts at a time.  You'll see it, too, when you read the book. Because you are reading the book,  n'est-ce pas?

{Yeah, I'm tossing more French in here. Italian, too, later on.}

2) But the tone was not anger alone: it was anger and pain, which equals outrage.  You know the difference between anger/rage and anger/outrage: one is a scream that rises in pitch, tone and intended violence, while the other screams, then modulates its tone to explain its pain. From this balance comes the frequent comment that "The Jenius does love His Island." That is accurate, as is My consistent disappointment and frustration with so many aspects of it.

3) The final point, an undercurrent through the 74 posts: I got tired of the outrage and wanted to find a new way. Even when expressed cogently, a constant stream of outrage can only descend into whining. I don't whine, don't want to. And for those of you who have lived with anger issues for years know, anger is draining. Downright exhausting. So a change was needed, for The Jenius' sake and for My own.

So what I feel I've done is open My eyes a little wider, to broaden the scope of My attention from largely looking at the next target I'm going to shoot verbal bullets at and refocus on the people and things that make Me love Puerto Rico.

And that's where you come in: I don't know all the people and things that make My Island--Our Island--so wonderful and unique. I need you tell Me, to point out who's doing great work unsung, who's traveling their own fascinating road and what's happening that could make a profound difference for Us if We only knew more about it. In other words, help Me open My eyes even wider. 

If you've listened to the podcast, Gil The Jenius Now, with Susana Cabán, you'll get a hint of what I'm looking for. If you haven't listened to it, give yourself 16 minutes to do so. You'll see what I mean, and hopefully, you'll be able to lend Me a hand or two in the effort.

And what is that effort? To explore the good in Us, on and about Our Island, that keeps Me and so many of Us in "outrage" instead of "rage."

A tad convoluted, but I gather almost all of you know what I mean. Capisce?


The Jenius Has Spoken.

The Jenius Is Back

It was bound to happen...

After 155 days away from this little corner of heaven, The Jenius returns.

I know, you missed Me. I missed Me, too.

However, this is not the same Jenius that stepped away for a spell. First of all, I am now married, in such joyous fashion that many of Our (Mr. & Mrs. Jenius') friends still talk about the wedding. And second, in many ways thanks to the first, it's a new Jenius, one more like the ole Jenius, who could see more good than bad and enjoy it as much as the bad frosted His perineum. In other words, a kinder, gentler Jenius.

Who still hates Fools, frauds, failure, fibbing and did I mention fecal-filled Fools? Good.

And you can see, the look is different, from surroundings to--gasp!--images and even a--gasp! gasp!--podcast. I can see you trembling with eagerness. Settle down a bit...

Pause a moment and take a look at this:

The pictures show only a sample of the amazing woodcarvings of Susana Cabán, a recent (last five years) arriver on My Island. Her blog has many more images, as well as samples of her other equally-beautiful work. If you'd like to buy some of her jewelry or woodcarvings, try her Etsy store. (I get no commission, so buy lots!) And to see her work in person (if you're in Puerto Rico), drop by the Tres Puertas Gallery in the beautiful Surfing Capital of the World, Rincón. Here's a slideshow to clue you in on what you're missing...

Then there's this: Gil The Jenius now has a podcast, called (I already said it)... Gil The Jenius Now. The first podcast (15:43 in length) features Susana, recorded on the balcony of the lovely home you see in these images. Gil The Jenius Now 001 is available here. (Right click and "Save" to download; otherwise, you'll hear it seconds after you click. So click. Now.)

There you have it: The Jenius Is Back. Or as He usually ends these posts...


The Jenius Has Spoken.

IT'S MY BIRTHDAY!!

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME!!

Once again, it's the tiME of the year to celebrate that most glorious of days, MY BIRTHDAY!! And it is also My 1,000th post as The Jenius. And it's MY BIRTHDAY!! But unlike the past few years, this one has a different twist:

This is My last post.

Back in December 2007, I wrote a post that was to be the curtain of The Jenius, but soMEwhere in the writing/posting, soMEthing clicked and I decided to continue. A month later, unrelated to that, My father died and I kept going, once again taking the whole process in stride.

But not anymore. A few months ago I realized that I wasn't as "into" The Jenius as I'd always been. Instead of a release--or catharsis--it had becoME soMEthing of a burden. That wasn't the point. After pondering for a day or two, I decided I'd make it My true curtain call on MY BIRTHDAY (which you may have noticed I've MEntioned a few tiMEs) and My (semi-coincidental) 1,000th post.

I had a few moMEnts of doubt about the decision, earlier this week, but that was more from thinking of what I'd miss rather than focusing on what I'd do. It's been said that in one's endeavors, you notice first when things are slipping, then your critics (your closest observers/supporters) and then the general public. Sure enough, a month or so after My decision, I wrote a post titled "Charity Really Does Begin At Home," about how We are, per capita, the largest supporters taking care of children through World Vision.

As I pointed out a few days later, that post was important, because it focused on Our charity regarding World Vision, but failed to indict the appalling lack of charity We have amongst Ourselves. The title, which I uncharacteristically wrote first, set up My premise; and yet, the post failed to deliver it in Jenius fashion. I chose that inaction.

A dear friend called Me the next day from Europe to tell Me he was worried about The Jenius. In his words, I had not been critical in the way The Jenius is. I told him he was right, that I preferred to leave it as it was posted rather than "take the shot." He told Me The Jenius always took the shot. I agreed, but that I had taken hundreds of shots over the years, had hit the intended target hundreds of tiMEs and that each tiME I did, I bled too, for these are, for better or for worse, also My people.

And that I was getting tired of taking shots.

He felt compelled to write a "Defense of The Jenius", saying he was concerned "about the character." I thank him for that, for he was and is 100% right. Parts of his essay are in the Comments of this farewell post.

The oft-repeated definition of insanity is to do the same things and expect a different result. The Jenius has plenty more to say, but the current format is no longer enough. Whether The Jenius returns here or in some other cyberspot or MEatspace is up for grabs.

To those who read My words over the years, your support has been amazingly profound. To the double-handful of people I MEt because of The Jenius, My life is much richer because of you. And to My critics, nice try. Maybe next time.

And a special Jenius Salute to Global Voices Online, especially Ms. Janine MEndes-Franco, for not only choosing so many of My posts for that wonderful forum, but also for being such a good sport in letting Me modify her naME to satisfy My preening BIRTHDAY celebration.

To My Special One, thanks for cringing and still supporting Me. And to My Son, never forget I love you.

TiME to go. For a while.



The Jenius Has Spoken. Thank You.

"A Moment Of Zen" Answered

Back some years ago, on 24 February 2006 to be exact, I had My shortest post. In its entirety it read "What is the power of choice?"

I'm certain that said 6-word post would delight many of My Readers for any number of reasons, not the least of which is brevity. And though it is a question that I have answered indirectly many times, it behooves Me to answer it directly.

Some thinker, Robert Heinlein actually, pointed out that so long as one could think, one could pursue happiness. I like that observation because it makes it very clear that happiness is internally-guided and your own responsibility, not some external reward that "Life", "Government," "Society" or "the World" are obligated to give you.

It also makes very clear that it is your choice that sets the process of pursuing happiness in motion, and with little analysis, you can see that in fact, it is your choice that sets every mental/emotional process in motion. Given that, you can see that the power of choice is the ultimate power, the only true power any of Us has and that learning to use it properly is the difference between happiness and strife, success and failure and a progressive society versus what We have now.

"What about instinct?" you ask. What about it? If you ask that to claim that instinct can consistently and regularly overcome your power of choice, then you're saying that a human being is no better than a base animal. True in the case of Fools, but they aren't human anyway. If you ask because instinct has a way of causing thought and emotional processes, then yes, it does, but it is still your power of choice that determines whether you are ruled by them or you rule them.

Follow the train of thought and you will see that your present condition--whatever it is--is the product of your power of choice. (I'm assuming you're an adult. Kids under the age of 16 or UPR students on strike are exempt because they are still in the "Take care of Me" stage of Life.) And by extension, where We are as a society is the sum product of Our power of choice...or refusal to use it, which is still a choice.

In that sense, you are not unique, for the power of choice is the same for everyone; thus in that sense, as a society, We are not unique either. We are where We are--and are not--because We have chosen this situation. And because We chose Our way into this, We can choose Our way out of it.

Some choice cannot be unmade. That's Time's irreversible flow at work. But many choices can be modified, ameliorated and ultimately changed by making more choices, by actively seeking amongst the options We have and can create. We simply have to be aware that Our choices matter, that We choose to ignore matters and that what We choose to focus on will ultimately defines Us, as individuals and as a society.

What is the power of choice? The power to truly Be.


The Jenius Has Spoken.

End The War (On Drugs)

Federal Judge Juan Torruella, to reasoned legal analysis what Daffy Duck is to veterinary medicine, hit the front pages of the largest local puppy pee-pad with his statement that "marijuana should be legalized because the war on drugs has failed."

Now if it isn't obvious by now, My level of support for "Tort(ellini)" Torruella is on the par with My desire to pick a blind squirrel to play shortstop for My fantasy baseball team. But even a mentally-challenged blind squirrel--as the saying goes--finds a nut now and then. And Tort(ellini) is spot-on right: the war on drugs has been a colossal failure and legalizing marijuana is an option worth exploring.

Remember Prohibition? Neither do I, but Let's glance back at history. An anti-liquor (temperance) movement swept through the U.S. of part of A., led largely by women for whom alcohol was a key factor in violence, dissolution and poverty. The 18th Amendment, ratified in 1919, just past the end of World War I, made the sale and possession of liquor a crime.

Now how long has alcohol--wine, beer, hard liquor--been a part of humankind? Exactly. People didn't stop drinking, the demand stayed about equal, but now there was a huge price increase in spirits...but not the kind the temperance movement cared for. Enter clandestine stills, speakeasies, organized crime, gangsters and the Mafia culminating in the horrors of NASCAR rolling ads going in endless circles.

How bad did it get? Only one amendment has ever been repealed? Go ahead, guess which one...Right. By the 21st, in 1933. The cost of trying to police/prohibit human nature reached a point of total imbecility.

Fast-forward to 1970 and Tricky Dick Nixon's public relations-fueled "War on Drugs." Penalties were increased, new crimes redefined, law officers empowered, troops deployed and 12 years after the 1998 "deadline", what do We have for this "War on Drugs"? Plenty of drug use, plenty of drug-fueled violence, the largest peacetime prison population in a democracy, with a higher percentage of minorities in jail than South Africa at the height of apartheid.

Are We winning this "war"? How about asking how badly We are losing it? The fact remains, since 1970: people want to use drugs and because demand stays high, prices and profits drive all sorts of consequences, from street-level violence to international arms dealing, the government-prison-industrial complex and a society gutted by fighting a "war" that is caused by its own desires.

So is marijuana legalization a solution? The failure of Proposition 19 in California notwithstanding, (and Let's make this clear: marijuana is California's #1 cash crop and is close to the #1 cash crop in the nation), legalizing marijuana and other drugs is an option. Given the horrendous cost and colossal failure of this "war on Our people's greed for drugs," legalization, and its ally decriminalization, should be explored immediately.

Now most of you will say "Nuh-uh, Jenius. Never happen. Don't work." I have one word and three links to make you rethink your nuh-uh: Portugal. Link One. Link Two. Link Three.

Some of the highlights: reduced drug use and abuse; reduced street crime; lowered prison population; national budget savings and greatly-reduced rate of AIDS/HIV cases. Does that sound like the apocalypse?

Now Portugal didn't legalize much in terms of drugs: it chose a middle path of reducing penalties for its possession in small quantities and personal use. But the results, heading now into their 6th year, are indisputable: an option exists to a useless war on drugs.

Maybe the fact that a federal judge makes the statement is what causes consternation. Granted. Or that it's coming from someone with the acumen of houseplant. Granted. But if 1,000 monkeys typing at random can ultimately produce Hamlet, does it make the play less of a classic?

Ignore the messenger, because he's the wrong one, but glom on the message...because it's absolutely right.


The Jenius Has Spoken.

For Sale: Puerto Rico

Like contracting dysentery when afflicted with cholera and treating it with Ex-Lax, the flow of stupidstupidstupid ideas in this (non compos mentis)administration continues. The latest fetid batch-dump is the """""idea""""" of selling houses in Puerto Rico to folks in the U.S. of part of A.

Let's look at this closely, holding Our noses in silent comment of the validity of this crapfest.

Puerto Rico has one of the highest rates of homeownership in the U.S. of part of A. Bully for Us. We also have the lowest income per capita--by far--in the States, so what's going on? How can people who are comparatively "poor" be so successful in owning homes?

Credit. The average Puerto Rican family--usually a young couple-buys a house and makes it the basis of their financial portfolio for growth, relying in tough times on family and even friends to help meet payments so as not to lose the property to foreclosure. But with low income comes a need for low income-accessible housing...and what We have on the market are boricua McMansiones sitting empty.

As I've posted before here, when land is as expensive as it is here, contractors have to find a way to insure their ROI. But the tendency went from affordable housing to "mega-projects," with gates, security guards, tennis courts and prices hitting $400,000 for a shack (but with benefits!) and regularly hovering around $600,000 and more. Rather than "many houses sold," contractors (and their partners in crime: see below) went for "exclusivity."

Politicians and government weasels, of course, loved this scam because it allowed more money for greasing the skids. Banks loved it because it's always good business to charge high interest on more money. (Note the many mortgage scandals that shit-spotted Our banking industry in the past decade.) And We, as pathetically envious, image-obsessed, keep-up-with-the-Jimenez's dirtbrains bought into this.

The first projects sold very well: there was a market for them. Second-wave projects sold fairly well, with many houses bought by people who didn't live in Puerto Rico. Third-wave projects, started and built in the last 3-4 years are empty of residents...and are now being offered for sale to people in the States.

Why?

Politicians and government weasels are not getting their skids greased anymore. Bankers aren't shoving high-interest mortgages down birdbrain gullets anymore. And contractors, those skid greasers and abetters of mortgage rape are sitting on houses set to self-destruct in the coming months.

Boo-fucking-hoo.

Sell the houses to folks in the U.S. of part of A.? Really? Who'd buy them, Oh Larva of Lunkheaded Limpness? (For those of you late to this party, The Larva is My dismissive nickname for (non compos mentis) governor Luis Fortuño, Nature's answer to the question "Can a vacuum occupy space?") You're sitting on a crappy economy, a crime surge, an increased tax load, upward price spiraling, declining jobs and constipated political and economic deadlock that you are significantly responsible for? What the hell is your sales pitch? "Puerto Rico: not as crappy as you think?" Or are you going to go with: "Overpriced concrete beats cheap wood"? Or how about "No power, no water...no problem"?

I once suggested that Our slogan should be "Puerto Rico: Closed for Repairs," but you Limp Larva have actually put up a "Puerto Rico: For Sale" sign. It does make clear one thing though: your voter base is not "the poor" that statehood supposedly cares so much about, but the fat wallets that slime your (non compos mentis) administration's hooves and tentacles.


The Jenius Has Spoken.

Another (Yaaawn) Student Strike

The students at the--yawn--University of Puerto Rico are--yaaawn--protesting again and threatening another strike.

Yaaaaaawn. Reminds Me it's sunny and warm in the Sahara today. Big deal.

Of course, the students are protesting the socioeconomic inequality that undermines the very foundation of Our nation...

No? Yawn.

Then they must be protesting the rampant corruption that pervades what We sneeringly call "government" and "business" in order to help focus attention on how much We are losing day after fershluggin' day...

No? Yaaawn.

Hold on, I'm wiping My eyes here... Seems the students are protesting over--money. Again.

Yaaaaaaawn.

A new--yawn--$200 fee that the University wants to charge to offset--yaaawn--debts.

A debt that the federal government has agreed will be covered by the Pell Grant. Yaaawn.

It means that some students will see a small decrease in the amount of money they get from Pell Grants, adjusted as they were last year. But the idea that these students could be out some $85 or so every semester has them in a frenzy--again--because Let's face, nothing upsets one of Our students more than seeing money given to them for nothing going to someone else. Burns their britches. Pisses them off. Makes them want to act, you know? 'Cuz this is important, man!

Here are some words of advice, Oh Students of Free Money: Get a job. Be frugal. Focus on the big picture. And learn something, instead of using college as a social club/adult day care center.

One more thing: stop making Me yawn.

The Jenius Has Spoken.

Still, Loud Silence

Blaring next to Me as I write this--loud enough to make an elderly woman cringe under her umbrella--is a loudspeaker-laden little truck jabbering about a local candidate, in a primary scheduled for December 5th...23 months before the next local election.

Now why does a party--in or out of power--schedule primaries almost 2 freaking years before the election? There's only one reason: They consider their supporters nothing but weak-minded dullards.

The argument--for they do have one--concerning the (il)logic of this practice is that primaries this early allow time for the party to "heal" before the elections. In other words, the primary process is so divisive, so painful, so filled with struggle, strife and sturm ünd drang that their very presence threatens to destroy the party come election time unless the party faithful are given enough time to forget what happened. About two years should be enough.

Weak-minded dullards, unite!

That this is the party that supports the current status We, uh, """""enjoy""""", is not a surprise, for this is the party of "In shit up to Our necks, but I can smell fresh air when the wind is right." To wit: the party of "Don't think, be happy."

The secret, of course, is to take things on faith, to avoid any proper use of rational faculties and simply accept things for what you are told they could be. Faith. Like "enhanced commonwealth" or "associated republic," words you cannot--no, no no!--actually question and ask a simple definition for, but must take as "concepts" that are "in the works," in much the same way that powdered water is "in the works."

Faith, like ignorance, can be a matter of simple passivity (you believe because you never get a chance to think about it, i.e., you're never told about the concept, so you follow the prevailing trend) or choice (you believe because you don't want to think about it.) As such, the burden of proof remains with the presenter of the concept--enhanced whatever, associated thingamajig, divine somesuch--but the reaction and acceptance or rejection of the concept equally remains with the recipient audience of the concept.

So what does this mean for the blaring idiocy of an idiot running in an idiotically-early primary? Only that the party faithful should have told the """""leaders""""" of their clustergangbang to stop treating them as slow-witted sheep and make the primaries a stronger case for re-energizing government than merely a shadow play by people whose IQs are as high as that of shadows and their morals just as deep.

Maybe next time. Then again, these are the same people who have "waited" 30 years for "enhanced reaming" or "associated raping" to be plopped on the table...



The Jenius Has Spoken.

Puerto Rican Roulette

The idea has the appeal of greed on both sides. We, as consumers, get a chance to win maybe $1,000 a week in a lottery. The government, taking asswipery to a new low, try to force businesses to report their sales in order to collect the sales tax, known locally as IVU, as in "I violate u."

Enter the IVU-Lottery, or IVU-Loto as it is called. Every customer is now expected to request a receipt with a unique serial number, in order to participate in two weekly drawings of $1,000 each, or after the government takes its cut, about $620.

Not bad money, right? Just for buying stuff? The usual stuff you usually buy? So why, Oh Jenius, is this such a bad idea? In fact, Jenius, you say it's one of the worst ideas from a government that practically perfected the stupid idea factory?

It's a dumbfuck stupid idea because the reward system is wrong: it doesn't reward the customer for forcing the retailer to conform to the law, instead, every week, it punishes all but 2 customers in exchange for the government increasing imposition of a numbnuts tax that doesn't work.

First, a sales tax of 7% was too high to begin with and instead of making the collection of government monies easier and larger, it did the opposite. That was clear to bright minds long before The Jellyfish and his cabal in both major parties rammed the buttplug up Our descending colon. Not only was the tax too high--3-4% would have been better, if at all--but the whole reporting process was so hideously complex and asinine that it cost the government more than triple its expected implementation and management cost...for less revenue.

Second, because the tax was stupid, too high and too complex to deal with easily, it forced businesses to bypass it altogether and opt for a gray market approach. So the stated purpose of "tapping into the underground economy" went unfulfilled and it actually did the opposite: it helped make the underground economy more fertile.

Now the asshats We elected want Us to play the numbers so they can get more money and piss it away like the retarded VD-infested monkeys that they are...and We'll end up paying more for it. 

Ya don't think? Here, take a ponder on this one: what do you think stores that already report IVU will do when their competition has to spend money to become part of the program? Think it through. I pointed out years ago that the IVU would raise prices by about 13-14% and the statistics bore Me out to a penny. Will the situation change just because it's three years later? Uh-uh. Stores that already report IVU will marginally raise prices because the cost of compliance by some (about 35%) of their competitors will be passed on to the customer. It's simple business economics: if I have to pay more to provide goods and services, I pass on the costs to My customers or I close up shop.

And that means that the IVU Loto will place upward pressure on prices that only 2 customers a week will benefit from, while the rest of Us lose another percentage point or two to unneeded inflation.

Woo. And hoo.

What will the underground economy do? Think it through. If the gray market knows it has the advantage of a cash-based economy, with the customer holding the trump card of "I can report you," do you think prices will rise or fall in that economy? Exactly. Now where will you go to buy those "gray market optional" items, which have now increased beyond "flea market junk" to fresh fruit and vegetables, new clothing, electronics, eyewear and even appliances?

Right. You'll go where your dollar has greater buying power, not where your dollar gives you less than a 1-in-a-million chance of winning a few dollars...to be taxed.

Once again, the IVU Loto is another boon to the underground economy and its effects will be noticeable within weeks, not months. How will We know? When flea markets expand in size and numbers.

Were there better options? Damn right there were, but what can you expect from retarded VD-infested monkeys other than screeching, scratching and stealing? Here are two options that would have been better-suited to the government's uncontrollable lust to get and thus waste more of Our cash:

1) Drop the sales tax to 4%. It might seem counter-intuitive, but hundreds of economic studies across decades and frontiers have shown that when consumption-based taxes are reduced, consumption--and tax collection--goes up. For one, the 3% difference means customers can get (by demand and competitive pressure) "instant savings," and nothing spurs consumption that the feeling of getting a sweet deal. Just as the underground economy, for Pete's sake.

2) Switch collection to quarterly. Once again, the hassle of complying with the idiotic tax every month needs to be assuaged in order to make it easier to comply and manage. To the monkeys and their monkey-groupies who say that revenue needs to be collected monthly for proper collection, I have two words for you: April 15th. Once a year, and it works (somewhat) okay. Plenty of business and corporate taxes are paid/collected quarterly and with one "free" month in the three-month period, enforcement can take a higher priority.

But no, since these ideas require the R.V.D.I.M.s to (a) drop "their" percentage and (b) reduce "their" control, they will avoid the ideas like cowards flee from dignity. They are and they do. In their disease-ravaged minds, it is better to have Us all play a version of economic Puerto Rican Roulette and increasingly risk suicide than to think things through and do what's right.

So what else is new?



The Jenius Has Spoken.

Politics As (Un)Usual

If you haven't read it, take a look at My previous post. Make a note of it. I'll be referring to it again soon.

A little over a month ago I saw a campaign poster for a local candidate, running for mayor. He wants to dethrone the current mayoress, a woman with the visual charm and accomplishments of a drunken train wreck. You might wonder why I bring this up, seeing as there are elections in the U.S. of part of A. tomorrow.

Well, We don't have elections until 2012. And two years is a damn long time.

I should be used to it, having arrived here in the summer of 1972 in full campaign season. I remember an evening in Orocovis where two political caravans, each loaded with dozens of cars and hundreds of blowhards, met down the only big street the little central mountain town had--birthplace of My father--and created a raucous, blaring, overwhelming, nauseating traffic jam-barrage of car horns, shrieks, exhaust and so-called music that made Me sick. Literally. I spent the rest of the night throwing up and wondering if My head was going to fall off into the toilet.

Almost four decades later and My aversion to politics and political campaigns continues. In 2008, I walked the streets of Cabo Rojo as the election results came in and noticed there was more energy and passion placed in celebrating victories than in actually doing anything in the campaign outside of dissing the opposition. People were jumping and shouting, many racing to winner headquarters for their expected reward--or promise of one. The happy grins included Me until I didn't respond, at which point I was dismissed as having supported a loser and thus of no consequence. No matter. Political campaigns bore Me and I pay them very little mind.

But.

Last Thursday, a gentleman I met a few years and who asked for My help in setting up an antique car show, called Me before 9:00 a.m. He told Me his sister--who I helped with a medical claim within the U.S. Postal Service--had received her due and was happy. Then he said he was working with a guy who wanted to run against the mayoress in the primary, that the guy would win, and that I could be a valuable resource to this guy. Would I like to meet him? That day?

Primaries will be in late 2011 or early 2012. I had some stuff on My day's agenda. I said yes.

We met for lunch at a local restaurant and the glad-handing was out in full force as candidate and pseudo-frontman were greeting and meeting like the election was a week away. Except Me. I barely got a glance. Maybe the glad-handing is all the time, but it never includes Me. No reason to.

I got some background on the candidate and he told Me his basic pitch. I gave him Mine: I get paid for My work and nothing else. I get no jobs in the Municipality, I do no favors and I ask for none, for anybody. I do no campaigning or public work except writing. And I don't have to agree with the candidate, but as long as I see honest work for the town's progress, I stay. The guy gave Me a long appraising look and said yes.

Later on, over dominoes, it seemed to help a great deal that one of his grandkids came over and started talking to me about basketball and the current league's season. The man said his grandson never spoke to anyone as easily as he did to Me and that simple act impressed him a great deal. I've known the boy a little for 2 years and...well, his team did eliminate Mine in the current league.

So where am I with this? Don't know. We discussed a few general ideas as We pasted Our opponents in dominoes (don't care to play it, but I hate to lose at anything) and found Our viewpoints to be compatible. What that leads to, Time will tell. My prediction is that I will present several good ideas, hear a couple in return and as the campaign heats up and things start rolling into chaos, I'll simply stop being an active contributor and become a distant advisor, a troubleshooter with specialized knowledge.

But one thing is clear to Me: I'm trying something new because I have to give Myself the chance. In the best case, I can become an active agent of change; in the worst, I piss off a few people I don't care about. Somewhere between those two extremes, there's ample margin to carve a niche I can make a difference with. That is the seductive lure of this dirtiest of games, the one where no one wins.

Since I've made My case clear that I don't care for a government job or to become a broker for political favors, I have eliminated the two major hooks for getting caught up in politics. And as plenty who know Me are aware, My penchant for showing how much of a smartass I can be in the presence of pomposity and idiocy makes Me useless as a seeker of public repute in a political context. I want to piss certain people off and they roam in herds within politics. If the choice boils down to whether I should shut up and let it slide to benefit My plans or speak out and the hell with the whole shebang, I know exactly what I'll choose; I often have already. That might mean that My efforts are doomed to fail, that it's simply a matter of time before I let fly and damn the consequences. Agreed. But even a small effort could lead to decent results down the road. It has before, far from Me so that no proper credit could accrue. Politics.

However. Once again, and in a different way, I think it's worth the effort...but once again, for as long as it remains aimed at progress and not politics.


The Jenius Has Spoken.