Is it Friday already? Why, yes, yes it is.
So, on with the show. Our first “Gee, I told you so” of the day comes from the fast food chain, Wendys:
Self-service kiosks will be made available to the more than 6,000 Wendy’s franchises in the United States, the company announced on Thursday. Individual restaurant managers will decide whether to install them as an alternative to having human beings take customers’ orders.
According to Investors Business Daily, which reported the news, Wendy’s executives said the decision was driven by a tight labor market and higher minimum wages in many states.
After all, a computer kiosk doesn’t need to be paid $15 an hour to take orders.
Wendy’s President Todd Penegor told IBD that franchise locations have been raising prices to offset wage hikes and said the company is wary about both wage hikes and a possible recovery in commodity prices and is “working so hard to find efficiencies.”
McDonald’s is also experimenting with self-service kiosks. Wendy’s might also introduce mobile ordering and payment systems next year, according to IBD.
A kiosk also needs no days off, sick leave, paternity leave, benefits or wage hikes. And note the last line – Mickey D is also in the kiosk business (I’ve seen a few there myself).
Of course to anyone with common sense and a basic understanding of economics (you know, like labor is a “cost” to business) this comes as no surprise. To the “feel the Bern” crowd, and many on the left who lack both of those qualities, this is an “outrage”!
Meh. It’s kind of like ObamaCare insurance – you may have it, but if doctors won’t accept it, it’s not much use to you is it? Same with $15 an hour times zero hours.
Meanwhile in academia, the stronghold of bureaucratic authoritarians, it seems they look for any opportunity to ban an action unilaterally for no other reason than they fear someone’s feelings (other than those effected by the ban, of course) will possibly be hurt:
Face painting at an Illinois college has been banned because it’s “cultural appropriation,” dontchya know? There’s just one problem: Which culture?
Because it’s the latest thing to be offended by, officials at Millikin University in Decatur have told a fraternity that they can’t wear face or body paint, or wigs because they might “depict an ethnicity or culture.”
The fraternity, Tau Kappa Epsilon, traditionally puts on body and face paint during an annual recruitment for new members, CampusReform is reporting.
Yup, my blue-faced, bare assed Scots ancestors would surely be offended. Oh, wait, they’re white aren’t they? Never mind:
“Millikin University is committed to fostering a community of inclusiveness that respects difference amongst all students,” Nicki Rowlett, assistant director of the Office of Inclusion and Student Engagement, writes in a letter on the issue. “It is my hope that the men of [Tau Kappa Epsilon] utilize this as an educational opportunity to explore the concept of intent vs. impact with regard to cultural appropriation.”
“Members [of the fraternity] are prohibited from wearing black and red paint, wigs and/or clothing items that mimic or depict an ethnicity or culture,” she writes. “Failure to comply with the expectation will result in immediate removal from the event and additional student conduct sanctions.”
Her words are quite “inclusive” and just ooze “student engagement” don’t they – in a petty, dictatorial way. “Off with the face paint. The mighty Nichole has spoken!”
What a farce.
Apparently it is no longer about the “country” in politics, but instead, the party:
In 1960, 5% of Republicans and 4% of Democrats said that they would feel “displeased” if their son or daughter married outside their political party. By 2010, those numbers skyrocketed: to 49% and 33%, respectively. We’re probably not yet at the point where Republicans would be more upset if their child married a Democrat than someone of the same sex — but we are heading in that direction.
I’m sure you’ve all noticed how party politics seems to eclipse what is really important about where we’re headed. It’s all about winning now and it’s all about the party winning. I’ve been asking for years, “where did all the statesmen go”. We’ll we drove them off with the anal exams and the insistence that the party deliver certain things whether or not they were good for the country or not.
That has gotten decidedly worse over the intervening decades to the point that we’re now governed by the worst political class I’ve ever seen in my lifetime and we’re stuck with the inevitable candidates that system was bound to finally produce.
Speaking of our political class (or lack thereof), there’s a book coming out supposedly written anonymously by a sitting member of Congress (purportedly a Democrat) who uses that anonymity to tell the “truth” about what happens there, like:
- “Most of my colleagues are dishonest career politicians who revel in the power and special-interest money that’s lavished upon them.”
- “My main job is to keep my job, to get reelected. It takes precedence over everything.”
- “Fundraising is so time consuming I seldom read any bills I vote on. Like many of my colleagues, I don’t know how the legislation will be implemented, or what it’ll cost.”
Those three quotes might shock someone but it was simply an affirmation for me. We’ve seen this for years and years and have done absolutely nothing but re-elect these crooks. And they know they’ll bet re-elected because they haven’t underestimated their esteemed constituents/voters one bit:
- “The average man on the street actually thinks he influences how I vote. Unless it’s a hot-button issue, his thoughts are generally meaningless. I’ll politely listen, but I follow the money.”
- “Voters are incredibly ignorant and know little about our form of government and how it works.”
- “It’s far easier than you think to manipulate a nation of naive, self-absorbed sheep who crave instant gratification.”
Yes, he (or she) is saying exactly what many of us have known for years – this government and those who run it are a product of the voting public – one which has no use for freedom and no time to monitor and overwatch those they put in positions of power. Result? A huge but visibly declining banana republic.
Finally, the transgender nonsense the government seems bound and determined to cram down everyone’s throats. Is it a real “civil rights” dilemma or is it a mental health issue?
Frankly, I go with the latter. Here’s why:
There are several reasons for this absence of coherence in our mental health system. Important among them is the fact that both the state and federal governments are actively seeking to block any treatments that can be construed as challenging the assumptions and choices of transgendered youngsters. “As part of our dedication to protecting America’s youth, this administration supports efforts to ban the use of conversion therapy for minors,” said Valerie Jarrett, a senior advisor to President Obama.
In two states, a doctor who would look into the psychological history of a transgendered boy or girl in search of a resolvable conflict could lose his or her license to practice medicine. By contrast, such a physician would not be penalized if he or she started such a patient on hormones that would block puberty and might stunt growth.
What is needed now is public clamor for coherent science—biological and therapeutic science—examining the real effects of these efforts to “support” transgendering. Although much is made of a rare “intersex” individual, no evidence supports the claim that people such as Bruce Jenner have a biological source for their transgender assumptions. Plenty of evidence demonstrates that with him and most others, transgendering is a psychological rather than a biological matter.
In fact, gender dysphoria—the official psychiatric term for feeling oneself to be of the opposite sex—belongs in the family of similarly disordered assumptions about the body, such as anorexia nervosa and body dysmorphic disorder. Its treatment should not be directed at the body as with surgery and hormones any more than one treats obesity-fearing anorexic patients with liposuction. The treatment should strive to correct the false, problematic nature of the assumption and to resolve the psychosocial conflicts provoking it. With youngsters, this is best done in family therapy.
Dr. Paul McHugh wrote that. He also wrote this:
For forty years as the University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Medical School—twenty-six of which were also spent as Psychiatrist in Chief of Johns Hopkins Hospital—I’ve been studying people who claim to be transgender. Over that time, I’ve watched the phenomenon change and expand in remarkable ways.
Transgendered men do not become women, nor do transgendered women become men. All (including Bruce Jenner) become feminized men or masculinized women, counterfeits or impersonators of the sex with which they “identify.” In that lies their problematic future.
That’s the root of the problem. It has now become politicized and is a political football for a radical agenda and the government is attempting to satisfy this radical minority (and I don’t necessarily mean the “transgendered”) by imposing that agenda by force.
Me? I’ll go with McHugh and science.
Have a good weekend!