That’s it, that’s the post.
https://bsky.app/profile/kenjennings.bsky.social/post/3mbuedepurs2x
No doom.
Go to bed, Emily.
Call your Senators tomorrow.
A very difficult read
Trigger warnings: corporal punishment, child abuse.
Continue reading “A very difficult read”It is okay to have low ambitions.
I agree STRONGLY with this Tumblr post. People should be ABLE to work at the grocery store and make enough to support a family. That is how a functional society works. Grocery store workers (and other people in the service sector) are absolutely essential members of our society, and should not be disrespected and told that their jobs are only suitable for children.
(U) I used an AI assistant to generate alt text and a caption there. It did a good job. Interesting.
I used Google Drive’s Optical Character Recognition to OCR the text, so here’s that, too:
User “youthincare”:
people should be allowed to have low ambition, and also be able to feed a family on the salary of a cashier at a convenience store.
User “kidsomeday”:
My very first job was at Taco Bell, and most of us working there were horrible young adults with horrible young adult problems, but one of my coworkers was a woman in (I think) her 50s.
And us horrid young adults would ask her why she still worked at Taco Bell, because it was starter job and who would want to stay there forever? Her response?
“I make enough money to make sure I always have roses in my bedroom.”
This answer changed me as a person. It changed the way I thought about what makes someone successful, and made me step back and realize that I was so caught up in what I thought success and
happiness should mean that I didn’t know what I wanted them to mean.
Which is to say that sometimes ambition is making enough money to keep fresh roses in your bedroom, and you should be able to do that working at Taco Bell.
I like that.
And yes, low ambition means this person will never have a 7-bedroom house. That is OKAY. It is okay that not everyone will always be able to have the nicest and biggest things. But people should be able to have basic things on a basic salary: an apartment, health care, enough food to eat, access to information and education. It is a problem when people cannot have those things.
(And I know nobody argues with me anymore now that I’ve moved to this blog instead of Facebook; but if you want to go toe to toe on “frivolous” expenses, bring a real life budget and let’s dissect.)
“The categories were made for man, not man for the categories”
Many years ago, my friend shared this Slate Star Codex essay with me. It really crystallized a lot of my feelings around the concepts of trans rights and how ultimately, we should be able to be good friends and neighbors to trans people even if we don’t understand them on a deep fundamental level.
It may not be the full-throated “how dare anyone believe anything else” defense of trans rights that many might prefer; but I actually find it more compelling for that very reason. (And it’s okay if your mileage varies on that. It’s not personal for me in the way it is for many of you.)
Give it a read.
Tithes
Today on the Internet I saw a post that said this:
Leave your church today.
Tithe by helping someone in need
God is not in a building
I replied:
Even when I was religious, I considered any charitable donation part of my tithe.
I have a still-religious friend who considers the portion of his taxes that go towards social welfare programs to be part of his.
There are many ways to be the Body of Christ in the world.
And I stand by that.
I should do that calculation myself, sometime. The back-of-the-envelope that I just did (62% of federal spending, 15% effective federal tax rate) gives me about 9% of my salary Helping People via taxes. That’s not too bad.
Incrementalism
A few weeks ago, a friend of mine described herself as “incrementalist.” I think that’s a very good word.
Today, I saw this skeet. I’m going to copy the text here in case it gets deleted.
The way I’ve heard it explained is that there are people who are
1) actively against you
2) passively against you
3) don’t care
4) passively support you
5) actively support you
You’ll never get from 1 to 5 in one jump, so you want to move each person 1 notch more supportive. 1→2, 3→4, 4→5, etc
And that’s a very good explanation of how I view political discussions.
Your son might work bagging groceries for the rest of his life.
Saw this Substack post today.
https://substack.com/@carriecariello/note/c-166796284?r=2ng1ln
“Your son might work in a grocery store bagging groceries for the rest of his life.”
And? So what? That’s an important job. Grocery stores are fundamental in keeping our society running.
The people who work in our grocery stores are an important part of our community.
And they should be able to afford to live in any community in this country.
This is why I support subsidized housing in my neighborhood. Because people like Jack deserve to live among people like me.
Don’t be an ableist, classist shitheel. Support integrated subsidized housing.
Keep Marching
A couple things today.
First is this Instagram video of the song “Keep Marching.” Even if the work is not completed during your lifetime, keep fighting for everyone’s rights.
Second is this essay someone sent me called Cathedral Thinking. It’s about the same sort of thing: that we have to think bigger than just the span of our own lives.
https://www.mr-sustainability.com/stories/2021/cathedral-thinking
Third is this quote that gets cited in the first item here, but it’s worth revisiting:
The Talmud states, “Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly now, love mercy now, walk humbly now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Fourth and finally is the song “Hope Eyrie.” Even though space flight is not much in vogue in my circles right now, I find this a powerful reminder of what humans CAN accomplish if we work together. Even if we don’t have the resources to do this specific thing right now, we can still do great things, together.
Hang in there, everyone.
Cost of living increases and housing
When I got my first job and moved into my own apartment, in 2006, I rented a “one bedroom with den” for $1000. It was about 1000 square feet.
At the time, I was making about $45,000 a year. By the 30% rule, my monthly max for housing costs should have been $1125, so I was doing okay there. (And it definitely helped that I had no student loan debt or car payment. I have a lot of class privilege.)
For grins, I went back and looked at that same apartment complex today. At first, I was impressed: the one-bedrooms are still being rented for $1000! But then I looked closer. The $1000 unit is 450 square feet. There is no “one bedroom with den” option.
Turns out, that’s now listed as the “two bedroom deluxe” unit, and it rents for $1750. (The “den” did have a window, so I don’t know why it wasn’t listed as a Bedroom in 2006. I don’t know what year the complex made this change.)
For comparison, someone at my same entry-level job today would be making $60,000. By the 30% rule, their maximum on rent should be $1500. So they probably shouldn’t live in the “deluxe 2 bedroom” apartment, but they’d still be okay in the 1-bedroom; and they’d be able to spend the “extra” $500 (girl math!) on, I don’t know, student loans or something.
I honestly think more places should be renting out efficiency apartments like that. It’s one part of a solution that’s going to have to be many-faceted (because one single solution can’t fix everything).
For reference, with the Maryland minimum wage of $15, the annual salary would be $31,200, so about half of what this Entry Level person today would be making. So to live in a 450 square foot one-bedroom efficiency, where I live, you’d need to have a roommate. Two people could swing it for the two-bedroom, if they were thrifty, but it would be tight. They could get a roommate for the second bedroom, which would make it a bit easier; 3 adults in 1000 square feet is not the most fun thing, but it’s workable.
In my ideal world, a single person earning minimum wage would be able to rent the aforementioned 450-foot efficiency apartment for 0.3 of their monthly gross wage, period. This should be our societal standard for “can someone afford to live on the baseline level, y/n?”
Anyway. Small soapbox over. Just ran those numbers today and thought it was interesting. (And if you’re local and you want to know the name of the complex, let me know. I’m not posting it here though because they’re not paying me and I didn’t love them THAT much.)
Negative amortization should be illegal
That’s it, that’s the post. Negative amortization should be illegal.
If an account is in a position (like with student loan deferments or forbearance or what have you) where someone needs to make a lowered payment, and is approved for that lowered payment, then the interest accrual should be paused for that period.
I wonder if any bills are being proposed that do this?
Emilybook 