kissing reality on worse(r) days

to look and see the good, is better, still
for how can Real exist in life without bold complication?

love in looking outward to next unbroken dream,
for each silence i have parceled is a wider truth, invited.

better yet confuse the course, to want what no one else has even
managed lifts, forebear

to know how calm can ever be
content …with knowing

what good will always hold itself.
a freedom little known to hate,

therefore i look, and see, and reason
no mind better suited for what life Thought occupies!

please complicate … and

sleep now, wafting treasure–touching skies in purity
between each rain and sunshine, seen where man was daft and spool

, delivered ever wound–
warmed by wishes not yet wished-for within our barest absolute of wonder,

barest strength so lost where strength is hidden!
what brave have you yet harmed today,

oh, it’s nothing. (warm and measured to and to)

so much of nothing
laid bare more adequately than truth.


Open townhall meeting for ideas to help UTA transit system

Today the citizens of Utah are being asked to contribute ideas for the improvement of the UTA public transit system.

1) Ok, where do I begin? Number one, the biggest deterrent to use of public transportation is the time schedules. They vary and you have to go online or have some way to know how long you might be standing at a bus stop. How logical is that?

Am saying it would make a little more sense to go with smaller buses that arrive at bus stops at equal intervals. Ten minutes or fifteen minutes, or even 20 minutes if funds are tight. The biggest deterrent is the wait, and the fact that if a bus is missed, it could be up to an hour wait or more for the next bus. But you don’t even KNOW that unless have access to a schedule.

So far every transit system has been treated like electricity, and the need to cover ‘peak’ times. But the peak times could be covered by then running a larger bus at peak times, not by changing schedules.

The entire “trip planner” thing has got to go. You need to put planning into the system itself, so that extensive planning is not required by a citizen to go from point A to point B. The way that things are now set up with bus schedules, it’s as if they are designed to discourage public transit. Think about that, and what it takes to encourage more people to buy more cars. And then think about the pollution situation in Salt Lake Valley, in large part caused by the skyrocketing number of vehicles on Utah roads.

You invest money on widening streets…and leave the bad UTA situation as it is for the sake of helping the big boy oil companies, that are the wealthiest corporations in the world already? Now I understand that kind of pandering, but the point of a government is to ensure the best choices for all of its citizens, not just the ones already swimming in money. After all, I’m really moved by the ad for Larry H. Miller and her expression of a family business that is so important to THEM. But give us a break, you’ve had your day in the sun. Salt Lake City needs better options. Blocking the sale of electric cars is just another flower on everyone’s grave. And not investing in mass transit for a better future, is digging those graves.

2) So let’s try to do the right thing. It’s not that hard to figure out better solutions. Better schedules is just one that stands out to me more than anything. That is the biggest deterrent for bus use. They are not predictable. But how about the fact that it’s a little nuts to have buses outfitted for wheelchair accessibility, but to have so few ways for wheelchairs to even arrive at a bus stop?

Got any idea how that panics poor people? Who know that they might have to be in a wheelchair someday and that means they can’t get around? As it stands now, losing your legs in Salt Lake City means you’ll have to be a shutin, either that or raise the money to support a private vehicle. And I don’t think that’s fair.

When I was a teenager in California, they built ramps into every single sidewalk. In Salt Lake City, you are lucky if you even have a sidewalk? It’s insanity, but that is what happens when car dealerships and oil companies come first. And I’m very serious about that. It’s all very impressive that you are in bed with the big boys, but let’s start thinking about what’s good for the people, ok?

3) No cloth bus seats or train seats…exclamation mark, period! Knowing a bright cheerful pattern is covering up the baby throw-up on the seat you have to use, is not very comforting for those of us who have an idea just how much is ‘hidden.’ Plastic seats that get hosed down once a day, please!

4) Reflector poles that a transit user must push up and down to get a bus driver’s attention is pretty much on the insane side. How about a fluorescent orange flag attached to the pole that can be pushed up to indicate that someone is waiting for the bus? Or better yet, push a button that signals on the bus itself that someone is waiting at the stop? IF that is needed. What is the incident rate of transit users missing a bus because the driver does not see them? I imagine it’s fairly small and that UTA implemented a line budget item for one squeaky wheel.

5) Another interesting thing is in regards to the sponsoring of bus stop seating by advertisers. So the places where the most seating for a wait are available, is on busy roads where buses are more frequent and the wait time is less. How insane is that? I mean, really? Anybody using their noggin’ there? It’s very disheartening. I don’t know the “fix” to that, but it’s very hard to see that without giving a large sigh for society in general.

6) And we are down to the bus routes, themselves. We have the technology to have every single person that is thinking of using public transportation, to weigh in via computer. WE DO. There is the capability to have a type of polling for data on where bus service is needed the most–a determined probability of users that need to get to work daily, or for planned outings. Yet the UTA buses are using route maps designed, I assume–according to who with power was living where, when they were first structured. And the kids are long gone, new families in the houses, even. Yet the bus stops deviate off of main roads to go in this complicated pattern that only makes sense if you chalk it up to preferential treatment from way back when. This was done in California, too–so don’t feel bad. I just believe it’s time to do a reevaluation with the technology that we have available. So take a poll, see who actually needs bus service on a grid, and determine better routes.

There can be a periodic revue of that. Why not? It will give you a line-item budget feature to replace things like reflective flashers and printing bus schedules (since if buses arrived at regular intervals, users would only need access to route map information, not constantly changing times).

And I guess that’s it, for now. If I think of something else, will see about adding it. I know some are major changes, but you asked.

Life is too short. Let’s clean up the air in Salt Lake Valley, get more people on the buses and trains, and find a future that is good for all PEOPLE, not just those supporting automobiles and in turn supporting our friends the big oil companies. It’s time the government did it’s job. Let UTA champion that.

the right to die with eyes open

When it comes to the gun issue. I imagine everyone has heard that statistically, if you own a gun you are more likely to be injured by a gun. When I researched the numbers myself, what surprised me was that this isn’t mostly an anti-gun issue, it’s an anti-suicide issue.

Over half of the gun deaths in the USA are the gun owners turning the weapon on themselves. It puts new light to entire thing, where the right to bear arms is actually a right to commit suicide.

Maybe the real issue is assisted suicide. Maybe anyone thinking about the need for a gun in their house, should think about how they want to go on living or do not want to go on living.

We have this image, of the 2nd amendment and the right to bear arms as this noble thing of courageous americans wielding weapons. But most will use those weapons on themselves.

That’s not very courageous. So maybe the NRA – the national rifle association – should be the NSA … national suicide association. Oops, that one is taken. Ok, so NASA … national assisted suicide association ….. Oops, that one’s taken, too. How about freedom to eat bullets association?

Not to be cold and heartless … but for heaven sakes, the biggest danger from all of these guns is the danger to those owning them.

It’d be funny if it wasn’t so insanely tragic.

We need to admit there is a problem with that — if you have an army and armed citizens that are shooting themselves more than they are shooting other people, then something is not right about the whole thing. Imagine if we sent soldiers to war, and for every 100 enemy soldiers killed, we lost 120 soldiers that SHOT THEMSELVES …. that is beyond losing the war. That is called pack up your bags, go home and seek therapy.

Right to bear arms IN THE UNITED STATES — is now the right to commit suicide.

That is not something you sweep under the rug. That is something that you go “oops” and think about plan B.


I wish this could be set right but wishes are for fools

The term subjective is used incorrectly all the time.  People think it means something is too personal for objectivity.  But for something to be subjective, the person stating the theory must be inside the subject group to which the theory is applied.

Otherwise, it is objective, not subjective.  So just because it is your opinion that all boys are stupid, it is not a subjective conclusion unless you yourself are a boy.  It is an objective conclusion if you are a girl or outside that set. 

If a girl says boys are dumb, you can’t tell her “well that’s subjective because its your opinion.”  That is incorrect.  She is making an objective observation, because she is outside of the set and any subset of that which is being observed.

OK?  I’m so tired of seeing “subjective” missused.  And that is an OBJECTIVE statement because I myself am not in the set of those who missuse the term subjective.  Just because it is my opinion alone does not make it subjective.

And of course, used that way is simply displaying an ignorance.  So if can’t use it correctly, don’t use it at all.   Something is dismissed as subjective, if the observer is a part of the same set for which they are drawing conclusions.  An objective conclusion is better, when outside of that set for which conclusions or theories are being made.  Objective is NOT the opposite of subjective, just because one is correct while the other is not.  And subjective is when you are part of the set.

Please remember that.  Divorce your brain from applying right and wrong to science.  If you do not, you will only be able to factor by 2.  No more intelligence than a silicone chip.

“So all explicit knowledge is imperfect?” I asked.  “Tell Master Grandeur geometry is subjective.  I’d love to watch that discussion.”
So in that quote, is “subjective” used correctly or not?  It’s used to indicate “a singular opinion” rather than an observation occurring inside its own set.  What would it take for geometry to BE subjective?  The geometry itself would have to be the creator of geometry….?  
So that’s an incorrect use, though it is a COMMON use and I don’t doubt the dictionary even has that as the correct usage.  But it is not correct.  Objective and subjective are scientific terms indicating the vantage point of gathering data.
If you are accused of having a subjective view, you are inside the set for which you are making conclusions.  Also there can be an exception, if a conclusion is overtly beneficial to you or the set you do belong-to.  That also can fall into an accusation that an subjective conclusion is being made.  But just because a conclusion is being made by one person, does NOT make it subjective.  One opinion is just as easily an objective conclusion.  You are wanting to call any singular conclusion as WRONG…. And so since a subjective conclusion is considered incorrect, are calling any singular conclusion a subjective and incorrect viewpoint.

When singular viewpoints can easily and also be objective and thought out.  Calling any singular discovery a subjective or incorrect thing and not possible to even be objective, of course puts a damper on any invention and any conclusions that might be different or singular.  

It’s subjective of me to conclude all women who are tall hate short people.  Because I am both female and tall.  But if I say men can fly like birds if they jump off a roof and flap their arms.  That is not a subjective statement just because it is only my belief or a wrong belief.  What it is, is an incorrect objective conclusion.  My believing that alone and by myself does not make it subjective.  I would have to be a member of the set that is both a man and jumping from roofs.  But even in the case of being in those sets, to be subjective in that situation would require having a disadvantage that hindered objective observation, such as the gravity where you tried jumping from the roof was non-existent and therefore your conclusions are subjective according to the variables of your experimental environment.

But if you have a subjective opinion, and everybody agrees that it is right, that does not change it to an objective opinion.  If you have brown hair, and decide that everyone with brown hair are better cooks….. That is a subjective decision, because your data set includes an observation of yourself.
It is not subjective because its your opinion alone.  If you have brown hair and concluded that all blonde haired people are better cooks.  Then that would be an objective conclusion, because you are not mixing your data set with a preference corrupting any evidence.

To make a subjective conclusion is always to make a questionable conclusion.  But a conclusion that you alone make, can be either subjective or objective.  It does not automatically become subjective because you alone are making that conclusion.  It’s only subjective if you are in your own data set.  
Because objective and subjective are not opposites, but are dependent on each other… changing the meaning of subjective to a singular or personal conclusion, is going to change objective to mean a group decision or an already accepted conclusion.  
But having an objective opinion is still seen as gathering data objectively or outside of the thing observed.  It’s link to subjective had been damaged, though.  And many that use the term subjective do not even know that it has its counterpoint objective.  

you are changing the meaning of objective observation or conclusions, to mean accepted conclusions.
Therefore in new data sets, what are you going to do?  You are going to base all observation on that which is already observed.  Hence limiting the degree of understanding for any new or diverse pattern of earth, reality, or whatever you want to call it.
And that’s why the pattern we envision for outer systems like the solar system, is on a plane in the same manner a plane is observed with non curvature because lines are seen as having no degrees of bend.  
It’s a limitation to imagination…. One common definition of one word is not what does that, but it does put a lock on the door you are shutting.
If I alone make a conclusion that all the people on earth are pretty stupid, that is not a subjective observation.  You can’t say, well that’s your subjective opinion.  No, it’s not…. It’s objective because I am making the conclusion objectively, based on impartial meters of my own intelligence as compared and contrasted to others.
And so the STATE of an observation or opinion is not what makes it subjective or objective.  It is the state of the data gathering and the method that makes it subjective or objective.
Get it straight or stop using the word subjective.  You all are driving me crazy.  And that’s a subjective observation, naturally.

But not because it’s only me that sees it.  No no no no!  It’s subjective because I myself am in the set or subset on which I am drawing conclusions.   If I decide that making you listen to me is driving you crazy….. That is not a subjective decision or conclusion.  That has to be an objective conclusion because there is no way for me to be in the set of you.  The set of you, is not me.  

If you say that is your subjective conclusion, you are accusing me of basing conclusions on my own reactions, not on your reactions.  And that’s possible…. but that’s not how people are using the term.  They are using it based on the word subject, and decided the subject is the main character in a sentence, and therefore subject in subjective means the I or self.  And so you are subjective if some thought appears self made rather than accepted or neutral.

And the term is connected to objective to define it’s use.  If you accuse anything of being subjective, then you are saying it is not objective.
And since they are now calling any singular belief or anything that is belief at all, as subjective…. Are saying that no singular belief is objectively arrived or determined.  
Eh….. Trying to find the right way to say this is very very hard.  And that is a subjective statement, because it might be very hard for me and not very hard for someone else.

But I objectively consider that my conclusions could be wrong, simply because diction and language itself is a group conclusion.  Therefore if most agree that a certain word means a certain thing, then that is what it means, and majority rules.
But this word definitely got twisted to mean something different than its original use.  And people just love saying you are being subjective, in which they are saying that is YOUR opinion, not mine.
And I don’t know how to fix that or how to explain that determining if something is subjective or objective is quite a bit more involved than just deciding someone is alone in their belief.  

But apparently you all needed a word for that.  And you picked the wrong one.