Like Mr. Howell, Trump Says, "Make It Fit"

I'm returning briefly to one of my all time favorite shows, "Gilligan's Island." In the show, for those unaware, Mr. Howell, properly known as Thurston Howell III, played by Cleveland's own Jim Backus, is a wealthy business tycoon and one of the castaways who were shipwrecked during a storm. Like a dictator, Mr. Howell is accustomed to giving orders, and subordinates hop to it. By the way, he sees subordinates as everyone else on the planet. Like Donald Trump (played by Donald Trump), Mr. Howell's feathers get ruffled when anyone dares to point out his mistakes or dares to oppose his desires. Even with his great wealth, Howell is always scheming to get even more wealth, sometimes at the expense of his fellow castaways and even of his own wife. Can you imagine Mr. Howell as president, with access to the U.S. Treasury, especially after getting rid of anyone who could investigate any dipping into the till or other lawbreaking? In spite of his faults, Mr. Howell could eventually come to a reality check on his behavior and then try to make amends, although it might take some stomping and pouting first. 

Anyway, in one episode the shipwrecked little group finds separate pieces of an ancient stone tablet with drawings they believe might disclose a secret way off the island. Like putting together a jigsaw puzzle, each person tries to put a piece of the puzzle together. When Mr. Howell tries, the piece doesn't fit, so he says, "Break off a piece and make it fit!" Rigging the truth will make any message of the stone tablet wrong and of no benefit.

Photo of Jim Backus as Thurston Howell III from the Turner Home Entertainment/Warner Brothers Complete Gilligan's Island First Season DVD Set

WORD HISTORY:
Sub-This is not the shortened form for "submarine," but rather the widely used prefix. "Sub-" is distantly related to "up," "open," "oft" and "often," all words from the Germanic roots of English, and it is also related to a whole range of words with the prefix "sub-" (examples: "subordinate," "submerge"), and to many words beginning with "sus" (examples: "suspect," "sustain"). "Sub-" goes back to the Indo European root "upo," with the notion of "from under" or "from below," "to go over/above." This gave Italic "supo," seemingly a prefixed form from Indo European, and this gave Latin "sub," with generally the same or similar meanings to the Indo European form. This was not borrowed by English so much directly, but rather along with a number of words from Latin or from Latin-based languages, and it was then used by English as a word forming prefix, like for "subway," a word with the Latin prefix, but with a Germanic base and an original English word (way).        

Tarzan's New York Adventure

When I was a kid the Tarzan movies featuring Johnny Weissmuller were released for broadcast on television. They were a big hit, especially among the nation's kids, and it wasn't uncommon to hear a, "AhhhhhAhhhhAhhh" Tarzan call on the street every once and a while. Weissmuller played Tarzan in 12 movies; 6 for Metro Goldwyn Mayer Studios (MGM) in the 1930s and early 1940s, and 6 for RKO Pictures in the 1940s. The character of Tarzan was developed by American writer Edgar Rice Burroughs and he eventually made an agreement with MGM to allow them the use of the idea of the Tarzan character and of the general setting, but NOT the use of his actual Tarzan stories; thus, the differences between Burroughs Tarzan and the Tarzan portrayed by Johnny Weissmuller, which became THE image of what many people thought of as Tarzan. Burroughs' character of Tarzan became a school educated man, and Jane was from the United States, not from England, as Maureen O'Sullivan's Jane was (O'Sullivan herself was born in Ireland).* There was no chimpanzee named "Cheeta" (various spellings, like "Cheetah," but I settled for "Cheeta"), although some of Burroughs' stories had a small monkey named "Nkima." Anyway, this last Tarzan film of the MGM series has not always been treated kindly by film critics, but the public, including me, has held it close (the series shifted to RKO Pictures for another 6 films). There are some funny scenes where Tarzan and Cheeta meet modern civilization. In a number of episodes of the series Cheeta is identified as female, but most of the chimps used in the role were young males.

Main cast:

Johnny Weissmuller: Tarzan
Maureen O'Sullivan: Jane
Johnny Sheffield: Boy
Charles Bickford: Buck Rand (circus)
Cy Kendall: Colonel Sargent (circus)
Virginia Grey: Connie
Paul Kelly: Jimmy Shields (pilot)
Chill Wills: Manchester Mountford (circus animal trainer)
Russell Hicks: Judge
Howard Hickman: Tarzan's attorney
Charles Lane: Attorney for the circus

Three Americans, Buck Rand (a hunter and animal trapper), Manchester Mountford (an animal handler/trainer) and Jimmy Shields (pilot), with some African laborers, land by plane not far from the tree house home of Tarzan, Jane and Boy.** They want to trap lions for a circus in the United States. Boy is fascinated by the airplane, but Tarzan is mistrustful of any such intruders into his domain and he goes to the men and tells them to leave by next morning. Boy's curiosity is just too much for him to contain, and, without permission, he goes to the camp of the men. They see how he manages animals, and Buck wants to take him back to the US for the circus, something opposed by Jimmy Shields. With Boy still present, a local African tribe attacks as the men prepare to take off. Tarzan and Jane hear the attack and go off together to find Boy. While swinging on a vine together, one of the tribesmen cuts the vine, causing Tarzan and Jane to plunge down onto a ledge surrounded by tall grass. The Tribesmen set the grass afire, and Buck assumes Boy's parents are dead, which gives him the perfect excuse to take Boy along.

Cheeta comes to the rescue as Tarzan and Jane regain consciousness by giving then access to a heavy vine so they can climb out of danger. Then comes the bad news, as Cheeta talks to Tarzan, telling him that Boy has been taken away on the airplane. Tarzan vows to find Boy and get him back. Now the fun begins... Tarzan takes Jane and Cheeta to a city where he thinks the men may have taken Boy. Before they enter the city, Jane tells Tarzan that she's afraid, especially for Tarzan, because they are about to enter civilization, "a place where mens' minds are more twisted than the worst underbrush in the jungle," and "that everywhere we'll be met by lies and deceits... Your directness and honesty will only be handicaps..." She has Tarzan promise he will listen to her as she guides him through civilization. Inside the city, it turns out the men indeed were there and one of the officials has record of the plane, which is bound for New York City piloted by Jimmy Shields. The airport official tells them there is a mail plane that will be leaving to connect with a plane to New York City the next day and that arrangements can be made for them to book passage on the plane. Tarzan and Jane have brought gold nuggets to pay for anything they need, which now includes clothing from a Chinese tailor shop in the city. Tarzan's size poses a problem for the shop, which has to make a suit for him.

Tarzan, Jane and Cheeta fly to New York City. As the plane flies over the skyscrapers (Jane says, "a man made jungle") Jane tells Tarzan this is where people live, which prompts him to ask, "Why?" Jane tells him they live there to concentrate their efforts and to get things done in a hurry to save time. Tarzan wonders why they need to save time, which brings Jane to answer, "Oh darling, you're asking something all the sages haven't been able to answer." The plane lands and Tarzan and Jane must go to the custom's office. Cheeta causes a stir outside the office as she watches a man get a cup of water from a water cooler, then she takes about 10 paper cups and flings water around the waiting area, much to the laughter of the people there. The three leave this office and go outside to take a taxicab to the hotel where they've been told Jimmy Shields stays. Tarzan calls the taxi a "house on wheels," and he proceeds to rock the taxi back and forth, naturally to the great annoyance of the taxi driver, who then gets more perturbed when he meets Cheeta. In the taxi Cheeta is curious about the radio, which she switches on. The drums of a rumba type song come forth and Tarzan tells Jane this is a war dance song. Jane explains that the sound is coming from what is called a radio. Tarzan turns the radio dial and the station is changed to where the high pitched voice of a female opera singer blares out, prompting Tarzan to say, "Woman sick, cry for witch doctor." This brings the great reply from Jane, "You should be a critic, darling."   

In the hotel the front desk clerk is worried by Cheeta, who watches his every move, including when the clerk rings the desk bell to summon a bellhop. Cheeta mimics the clerk's action, but not with just one ring, but with about 10 rings, which brings the entire bellhop staff running to the front desk. Jane learns from their bellhop that Jimmy Shields goes to one of the nightclubs where his girlfriend is a singer. Jane calls the club, prompting Tarzan to ask why Jane is talking into this device. She explains that it's a telephone and she tells him the basics about its use. The custodian at the club tells Jane that the club doesn't really get busy until later in the evening, so Jane tells Tarzan they must wait. Of course all of this has not gone unnoticed by Cheeta who picks up the telephone after Tarzan and Jane go to unpack their suitcase. The hotel telephone operator thinks the number to the club hadn't been completed and puts a call through to the nightclub again. The custodian answers again and he and Cheeta have a funny scene on the telephone, after which, Cheeta gets into Jane's belongings like cold cream, lotion, perfume and nightgown. Left alone in the other room, Tarzan explores the bathroom, where he turns the water lever on the shower. Seeing the running water, Tarzan steps into the shower, clothes and all.

Jane and Tarzan leave for the nightclub, but leave Cheeta behind; at least they think they've left her behind. The clever chimp goes out the window and uses a pole to get to the canopy over the hotel's front door. When Jane and Tarzan get into a taxi right in front of the hotel, Cheeta jumps onto the taxi's roof. Off they go to the nightclub, where Cheeta gets onto the canopy covering the club's entrance, where she watches Jane and Tarzan go into the nightclub. They talk with Jimmy Shield's girlfriend, Connie, and she explains to them that a man from the circus, named Sargent, posted bond for Boy to enter the country,*** and that he has Boy at the circus, which is not very far away. A commotion is heard, along with Cheeta's laugh, and Tarzan and Jane find their chimp has gotten into the mens' hat check, tossing hats everywhere.

Meanwhile at the circus, Colonel Sargent and Buck Rand receive a telegram from a circus offering them $100,000 for the rights to use Boy in their circus, but they must meet the buyers in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in a few days. In order to get the airfare to Rio, they plan to cheat the circus workers out of their pay. Just then Jane and Tarzan pull up in a taxicab. Buck goes to get Boy out of sight, while Sargent gets a pistol and prepares to stop the couple from looking around. After Jane tells Sargent they know about the bond he posted, Sargent pulls the gun on them. Tarzan lets out his famous yell, which is heard by Boy, but Buck puts his hand over Boy's mouth to prevent him from answering. The call brings Cheeta to an open window behind Sargent. Tarzan speaks to her in "Cheeta talk" (I don't know what else to call it), and she picks up a walking stick and smacks Sargent over the head with it. The circus workers have gathered around to defend Sargent (they are not aware of the plan to cheat them out of their pay). The police show up with Jimmy Shields and Connie and the situation quiets. Jimmy and the policeman tell Tarzan and Jane they need to use the law to get Boy back.

In court, Jane and Tarzan have an attorney who explains the situation to the judge. Sargent has applied to adopt Boy, and he and his lawyer contend that the jungle is not a proper place to raise a child. Tarzan testifies how he has taught Boy the basics of life: how to get food, water and how to be happy. That he wants nothing people have. Sargent's attorney asks Tarzan if he can read, and Tarzan answers that he can read the trail in the jungle and the clouds in the sky. Tarzan turns the tables when he asks the attorney if he's ever heard of "kinsinoopa" (my best spelling by the sound). The man naturally is confused, but Tarzan says it cures snake bite and that even babies in the jungle know that. Even the judge smiles. The attorney brings the matter back to the law versus a "jungle code," and also the idea that the jungle is wild and threatening to Boy's life. Tarzan's attorney objects, citing that 35,000 people had been killed in automobile accidents in the past year, and that the number is only for the United States. He asserts that the jungle should not be the issue, but that only proper guardianship for Boy should be considered. Jane takes the stand. While testifying, she slips up and says that Boy was not born in the jungle and that she and Tarzan raised Boy after his parents were killed in a plane crash. The attorney calls her a liar and turns and points to Tarzan, calling him a liar too. Tarzan's anger boils over and he grabs the attorney and tosses him. The judge adjourns the court until the next day, but Buck and Sargent have to head to Rio or they will not get the $100,000; so, they leave the court for the circus to get Boy and then get the plane for Rio.

Tarzan is despondent, and Jane tells him she now realizes she was wrong to have him trust the law, that she should have let him get Boy his own way. Now with Jane's approval, Tarzan smashes through a window and goes out onto the building's ledge, which is several stories above ground level. Through climbing, jumping and swinging on rope, Tarzan eludes the police and gets a taxi to cross the Brooklyn Bridge and get to the circus to find Boy. With the police in pursuit, Tarzan goes to the top of the famous bridge and dives into the water below. Jane, Connie and Jimmy have also been trailing and see Tarzan dive off of the bridge. Even though Jimmy thinks Tarzan couldn't "make that dive and live," Jane tells them to head for the circus, where Tarzan will be.

Meanwhile, Buck and Sargent have arrived at the circus and take all of the money and go to get Boy, but Manchester Mountford has followed them to the circus and uses a pistol to get the two crooks to let Boy go, before Buck grabs Mountford, and the gun goes off, wounding Mountford. Boy goes to the top of the high wire with some of the circus men chasing. Tarzan arrives and makes his call, and Boy responds. Tarzan goes to the high wire, but the circus men are able to capture him and lock him in an animal cage. Boy is then captured too, and Buck and Sargent take Boy to their car to head for the airport. Tarzan can't get out of the cage, but he calls on help from the circus elephants, which bend the bars of the cage allowing Tarzan to escape. He then leads the elephants to stop Buck and Sargent, who are hemmed in by the advancing elephants. Tarzan jumps from one of the elephants into the car, knocks out the two crooks, grabs Boy and they jump to safety as the car overturns into a ditch. Jane, Connie and Jimmy pull up and take Tarzan and Boy away. Tarzan says goodbye to the circus elephants, who trumpet their goodbye to him.

Tarzan goes back to court, and the judge sentences him to a couple of months in jail, but suspends the sentence due to the circumstances of the case. Tarzan and company return to Africa and we see Cheeta using a judge's gavel to "lay down the law" to the elephants.  (NOTE: For more information on the Tarzan series, this is the link to a previous article:   https://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2009/03/tarzan-escape-from-reality.html      

* Maureen O'Sullivan left the Tarzan film series after this movie, "Tarzan's New York Adventure," to spend more time with her husband (John Farrow) and children (she had 2 at that time, but 5 more were born, including Mia Farrow, known to many of my generation). Maureen O'Sullivan died in the late 1990s at the age of 87. After O'Sullivan's departure, MGM ended the series, but RKO Pictures took it for the last 6 films, but visually omitting Jane from the first 2 movies, saying she was off in England during the war (World War Two). They then hired Brenda Joyce to play Jane, and she was an American, although I don't believe that is ever mentioned in the 4 remaining movies she did with Weissmuller. She also played Jane in a later film with Lex Barker as Tarzan.

** "Boy" was added to the Tarzan series in 1939. The movie code of the those times, and likely many in the public, would never have permitted an unmarried Tarzan and Jane to have a child, so the child was found by chimps after a plane crash which killed the parents and the pilot. American Johnny Sheffield (his father was from England) was given the role to play "Boy." Johnny Sheffield died in 2010 at the age of 79.

*** They say the immigration bond was $5000, which was quite a sum of money in the early 1940s. I did a quick check, and while I got a couple of different results (not with a huge discrepancy), in 2019 value, it would be equivalent to more than $85,000!

Photo is from the 2005 Turner Entertainment/Warner Home Video DVD set release

WORD HISTORY:
Adventure-The ultimate origin of this word is uncertain, and while there are ideas about its overall source, I will leave this out, at this time. It goes back to Latin "advenire," which meant, "to arrive, to come to," the future participle of which was, "adventurus," meaning, "that which will arrive," and the feminine form of which, "adventura," used as a noun, meant, "something about to arrive;" thus also, "something about to happen." This passed into Latin-based Old French as "aventure," which meant, "a happening, an event, a happening by chance." English borrowed the word from French as "aventure" seemingly in the late 1100s or very early 1200s. Early on the word began to take on a more menacing meaning, "something that happens by chance, including death." This then led to "a dangerous or risky undertaking," but by the 1500s the meaning had softened to "an exciting happening in one's life." By about 1600, the "d" was inserted by influence of Latin, to make "adventure." Interestingly as to spelling, German borrowed the word from Old French initially as "aventiure," but the spelling then became "abentiur," but exactly why the "b" was used is not understood. Perhaps from a misunderstood pronunciation in a German dialect that then spread and prevailed? To this day, German spells the word with a "b:" "Abenteuer."

The Deal With the Ruthless, Greedy Internet Devils (Plural)

Likely most in the public didn't exactly understand the deal they were being asked to accept for the "right" to have free access to Facebook, Google and others. The almost voluminous agreements flashed onto our screens are all lengthy and complicated for a reason... SO YOU WON'T ACTUALLY READ THEM! Yes, we SHOULD read them, but few really do (I plead guilty), and the issuing companies know that. The info the technology companies have compiled on us, by various reports, is STAGGERING! We sold our souls and our very personas and the info they have on us will not stay contained; after all, this is about MONEY; therefore, NOTHING is off the table, because they will do ANYTHING for MONEY. Then there are the various Internet service providers to whom we PAY money for their service, and they track EVERY click we make on the Web. They know more about us than we can remember about ourselves! If you really believe these moneygrubbing exploiters won't use any of your medical or banking info, or info on your children or grandchildren, that they have pilfered or pillaged, you're being terribly naive. They want MONEY! Gazillions! Not a quarter of a gazillion, not a half a gazillion, not one gazillion, GAZILLIONS!

Last year, congressional Republicans and Trump repealed Obama rules on your browsing history that were set to go into effect to give individuals the right to approve the collection and sale of their private browsing history. The passage of the repeal by Congress and the signing of the measure by Donald Trump allows the internet service providers (separate from entities like Google and Facebook) to sell your collected browsing history without your consent. Let's start the bidding ... who will give us a bundle for a BUNDLE of info on these people? This is how the vote went in Congress:

Senate vote: 50 FOR, all Republicans, 48 AGAINST, all Democrats, 2 not voting, Republicans Johnny Isakson of Georgia and Rand Paul of Kentucky.

House vote: 215 FOR, all Republicans, 205 AGAINST (all voting Democrats and 15 Republicans*), 9 members not voting**, 5 vacancies***

* 15 Republicans against the measure: Brooks (MO), McClintock (CA), Coffman (CO), Yoder (KS), Graves (LA), Amash (MI), Zeldin (NY), Faso (NY), Stefanik (NY), Jones (NC), Davidson (OH), Sanford (SC), Duncan (TN), Herrara Beutler (WA), Reichert (WA)

** 9 members not voting: Sean Duffy (R-WI), James French Hill (R-AR), Tom Marino (R-PA), Robert Pittenger (R-NC), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Bobby Rush (D-IL), Michael Simpson (R-ID), Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Paul Tonko (D-NY)

*** One vacancy in each of these states: Montana, South Carolina, Georgia, Kansas, California

WORD HISTORY:
Plunder-In terms of this word's more distant history, this is a mystery word. It was borrowed by English from a sub-dialect of Bavarian German called "Hutterisch," spoken by "some" Protestant groups that grew out of the Reformation. The word "seems" to date to a noun form in the 1300s, at least, in German. In those times, the noun meant, "household goods," which also developed the extended meaning, "clothing." The noun spawned the verb "plundern," which later had an umlaut added to make, "plündern," meaning, "to carry off goods from a house." In those times, Low German and Dutch both had the similar verb "plunderen," while West Frisian had "plonderje," all with the same general meaning as the German verb, as well as, "to take over someone's possessions," with a growing emphasis on "taking possessions by force." German also developed "Plünderer," meaning, "one who plunders, one who takes possessions from others by force, a looter." Both the noun and the verb forms were borrowed by English during the first half of the 1600s. More or less as already noted, German has the verb "plündern," meaning, "to plunder, to loot," and the noun, "Plunder," which has now come to mean "junk, rubbish:" Dutch has the verb "plunderen," meaning, "to plunder, to ransack, to loot;" as well as the noun, "plundering," meaning, "the act of plundering, marauding."

Those "Poor" CEOs, The Private Sector and Government

I first published this on March 8, 2007, but the subject is still VERY relevant, and I've added a Word History, and made only minor changes to the text (December 3, 2014), but bear in mind, the article refers to the subjects under discussion in the spring of 2007. 

Well, in watching CNBC for awhile today, they have been discussing the congressional hearings into CEO pay. The hearing started today. I LOVE how all of these free market worshipers are in a hand wringing (see Word History below) mode about the possibility that the government might actually do something to halt the absolute nonsense that's been going on in many corporate board rooms. They always say how private business can take care of itself, and that there already are crackdowns going on within the corporate community to correct the problem. Most of the hysteria centers around a proposal that would give shareholders in a company the right to express their dissatisfaction with CEO pay and termination compensation. This "right," however, would be non-binding, under the current proposal. The bigwigs even get nervous about non-binding proposals. One guy even had the nerve to say something to the effect, (this in NOT a direct quote, but I'm putting it in quotes anyhow) "So a CEO comes home one day, his wife says the kids are almost grown up, that he's missed so much of their lives. Are you being compensated for all of this time you put in?" she asked him.

I had to wipe away the tears.... of laughter!!! These folks NEVER stop!!! EVER!!! There is NO shame!!! I can imagine a company worker telling his boss that he feels that he deserves extra pay because he's giving up time with his family. I can just hear the reply, "If you didn't want the job, why did you take it? Hell no you won't get any extra money! This is a business, not a charity! Now get the hell out of here before I replace you with someone else I can exploit... I mean, I might help along the corporate ladder."

To me, everything needs some sort of oversight. It's just how human beings are. For my friends on the political left, that includes the government. It also needs to have its sails trimmed at times. Just look at this mess with the medical care for veterans.* On the other hand, this nonsense that only business can work efficiently is just that, NONSENSE! Just recently, my telephone line had very bad static. I called the telephone company (this was on a Tuesday). The lady told me that the problem would be fixed within 48 hours. The very next morning (Wednesday), I received a call from the telephone company telling me that someone would be out Thursday, between 8:30 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. On Wednesday afternoon, I picked up the phone to make a call, and the line was dead. I looked outside, and a telephone company van was there. I went out, and here a repairman was working on my telephone line, and he had disconnected the line to make the repair. Within 30 minutes, the problem was fixed. On Thursday morning, the phone rang, and a telephone company representative said that someone was due out to fix my telephone line that day. I told her that the problem had already been repaired on Wednesday. On Saturday there was a knock at the door. A telephone repairman said he was here to repair a problem with static on my phone line. I told him that it had been fixed on Wednesday afternoon. Now, if this is private business efficiency, then I have a bridge, any bridge; hell, it doesn't have to be in Brooklyn, that I'll sell to you.

Further, recently I had the natural gas service in the upstairs of my house put into my name, as the unit was vacant, and with cold weather I wanted to have some heat up there to prevent frozen pipes. When I rented the unit, the gas company sent me a final bill for an outrageous amount. When I looked, it was an estimated bill!!! How can you send someone a final billing that is an estimate? I called the gas company and the customer service rep said that they hadn't gotten a reading, and so she apologized (not that this is her fault, but she's apologizing for the company; I understand), and she said for me to call her back with a reading from the meter, which I did. Instead of the obscene amount of the estimate, she told me the bill would be only a quarter of the amount of the estimated billing. About three or four days later, a bill arrived that was double the amount that she had told me during our telephone conversation. I called the gas company again, and again an apology was issued, with the statement that the computer did an incorrect calculation, and that indeed, the amount quoted by the original customer service rep was correct, and that another final bill would be sent, which it was. I LOVE the efficiency of private enterprise!

Folks, we need the private sector AND we need government. There has to be some kind of balancing act, but we need both. Only government can protect us from the excesses of the business world, which can be absolutely ruthless. We, as private citizens and businesses, must protect ourselves from government run amok, which it certainly does. The idea that either of these entities can function without some checks on their power from the other, is NONSENSE!

* For some information on the VA situation in 2007, see this Washington Post article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/04/AR2007030401394.html

WORD HISTORY:
Wring-This word, related to "wrong," "worry," and "wrangle," goes back to Indo European "wrengh," with the notion of "bend, compress." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "wrenganan," with the meaning "to twist, to bend, to squeeze," which then gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "wringan," with the same meanings. This then became "wringen," before the modern version. Forms in the other Germanic languages are: German "ringen" (to wrestle, to struggle), Low German Saxon and Dutch "wringen" (squeeze/press out), and Saterland Frisian "wringe" (press out, wring).^ Apparently, West Frisian no longer uses a form of the word in this general context, nor do the languages of the North Germanic branch of Germanic; Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic and Swedish, but the meanings in the Germanic languages diverged long ago from variant forms in Indo European, although all stemming from the notions of "twist, bend, press, squeeze." This is why "wring" is also related to "wrong," which once simply meant "twisted," and to "worry," which once meant "strangle" (twist or wring someone's or something's neck).

^Saterland Frisian is a surviving form of East Frisian, spoken in a section of Lower Saxony (German: Niedersachsen) in northwestern Germany.   

The Lady On The Bus

First published October 2014

The other day I was on the bus when a highly inquisitive guy sitting across the aisle asked a lady a bunch of questions about her life. I mean who did this guy think he was, Google or Facebook? He appeared to have some "issues" and she was very patient with him. I mean he asked some personal questions, including if she was married, and she answered that she was divorced, only to have him ask why she got divorced! "Issues" or not, I think I would have told him that such questions are inappropriate. He asked her why she was on the bus and she told him she was coming from school. And if you guessed that he next asked her what she was taking in school, you are correct. She told him she was studying to become a social worker, to work with people with drug and alcohol problems. He said, "I hope you make a lot of money," to which she replied, "That won't happen, it doesn't pay that much, but I'm not doing it for the money, I just want to help people." Wow! All I could think of was, if Donald Trump and the Koch brothers had heard this lady, they would all have suffered cerebral hemorrhages. NOT be about money? Break out the "socialist' and "commie" monikers Rush Limbaugh.

This took me back to Mr. Milburn Drysdale, of "The Beverly Hillbillies" fame. For those unaware, "The Beverly Hillbillies" was a 1960s comedy about the Clampetts, a family from back in the hills ... I mean way, way back in the hills, who came into a bundle of money because oil was discovered on their property. They were so far back in the hills and so detached from modern life, they thought the oil company president was trying to trick them by paying them for the rights to the oil in a "new kind of dollars," because he offered them an amount in "million dollars," a term they had never heard before. And what was more, they didn't really know why oil was valuable to start with. Obviously the series was on before Dick Cheney became well known. The family wound up with many of "the new dollars," and they ended up moving to Beverly Hills, one of the wealthiest places in the country. There they met a banker, Milburn Drysdale, in whose bank their money had been deposited. During the series, which lasted for nine years, Drysdale got into all sorts of problems, because he was afraid the Clampetts would withdraw their money from his bank. Drysdale was an out and out moneygrubber. No other way to say it. When the Clampetts would try to help people by giving them some money, Drysdale would almost have one of those cerebral hemorrhages I mentioned above. He couldn't relate to people wanting to help others and then not receiving something more valuable in return. Of course the Hillbillies were looking to receive something more valuable in return, but it didn't have the kind of value Drysdale could understand.

Every day millions of people go to their jobs, some to two or three jobs. Most, and unfortunately a growing number, will not make enough in a year to be able to have much, if anything, left over, or to tide them over in case of an emergency. I was going to name some of the jobs, but that really would serve no purpose, because I would be bound to leave out too many jobs that involve the work of too many people. Some literally risk their lives to help others. Others risk their lives, not even because that's their job, but because that's what they are, people who care. Contrast that with some, a small percentage, who will make more money in ONE YEAR, than most of those I've mentioned will make in their ENTIRE LIVES, including when they took out the neighbors' trash or shoveled snow from sidewalks, or sold lemonade in front of their house as kids to earn a few bucks. The Drysdales, the Trumps, the Kochs, and others like them, can give themselves all the accolades about "job creators," "the investment class," "I built this," but in reality, they aren't the ones who make the country run, and while some thankfully give money to charities, often for tax deductions, they can never understand people like the lady on the bus.  

WORD HISTORY:
Tail-This word goes back to Indo European "dek," which had the notion of "long thin strips/strands, strips." This produced "dokls," which meant "hair of a a rear appendage." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "tagla," also meaning "hair of a tail." This meaning then broadened into "rear appendage, with or without hair," giving the meaning which we still use as the primary meaning today. This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "taegel/taegl," with the same meaning, and this later became "tayl/tail," as the "g" sound died out,^ and the "tail" spelling eventually won out. The verb was derived from the noun during the 1500s, with the meaning, "attach to or hang on to the tail," which later produced the American English meaning, "follow behind secretly," in the early 20th Century. The word has many associated slang meanings, including "rear end/behind," "male organ," "the end or back end of something." The other Germanic languages have: German "Zagel" (meaning "tail," but now a bit dated, although it still is used by some for "male organ"), Low German Saxon "Tagel," meaning "end piece of a rope," Swedish "tagel," meaning "horsehair," Icelandic "tagl," meaning "horsehair, horsetail, rope, ponytail (for human hair)," and Norwegian "tagl," meaning "horsehair" (also "horsetail?"). Dutch had a form of the word, but no longer uses it. I could not find a form in West Frisian, and Danish no longer uses a form, although there may be forms in dialect still in use.

^ The loss of the "g" sound has not been uncommon in English words over time, as for instance, both "day" and "may" (the verb as in, "May I help you?") were once spelled "daeg" and "maeg."

A Big Cheer For CVS

In a nation that has become absorbed by outrageous greed, it's not often we hear about anyone, let alone corporations with millionaire and billionaire investors wondering where their next million or billion will come from, giving up income, but that's just what we recently heard from the nation's second largest drugstore chain, "CVS." The company made the decision to stop selling tobacco products. Amazing! When corporations make decisions like this, they should be commended, and we should be happy to do so. I salute you, CVS!

WORD HISTORY:
Cheer-This word goes back to Indo European "ker/kher," which meant "head." This gave Greek "kara," with the same meaning, and this then was borrowed by Latin as "cara,"  but with the more specific meaning "face." This gave Old French, a heavily Latin-based language, "chiere" ("face"), which was carried to England by the Normans, where it altered to "chere." This was borrowed into English as "cheer" in the late 1100s or early 1200s, but with the added meaning "mood, state of mind as determined by facial expression," which was not specific to being either good or bad, but by the 15th Century it had come to mean a positive mood. This then produced the verb form, "to cheer." The meaning, "a shout of approval or encouragement" (or the verb "to shout" such) didn't take place until around the first quarter of the 1700s.      

Burger King and Warren Buffett, More Greed At The Nation's Expense

Unless you've been visiting either another planet or a relative who lives under a rock, you have likely heard that "Burger King" recently announced that it is buying the "Tim Hortons" coffee and doughnut chain of Canada and moving its corporate headquarters to Canada, at least partially to save on taxes, although officials of the corporation have tried some fancy language to "dance around the subject," and to claim there won't be much tax savings. The deal is being partially financed by Warren Buffett through his "Berkshire Hathaway'' holding company. If you think any tax savings will be passed on to workers, in the form of higher wages, or to the public, in the form of lower prices, you ARE visiting another planet. The benefits will end up going to stockholders, and who owns most of the stock? VERY WEALTHY investors, including majority owner 3G Capital, a company headquartered in Brazil, led by one of the world's richest men, Jorge Lemann, a banker.

This is the second such deal announced in recent times, as Walgreen's, the drug store giant, had announced it "might" move its headquarters to Switzerland to save on taxes. After a huge American public outcry, Walgreen's announced it would keep its headquarters in the U.S. What will happen with the Burger King deal? Will many Americans choose from a whole bunch of other fast food outlets to punish Burger King, thus turning the deal into a "whopper" of a fiasco? Or will we take it and let them get away with the move? The Walgreen's pullback shows that corporate executives understand and fear lots of public pressure. If we let corporations, including Burger King, get away with these deals without penalty, they're going to keep doing it. This isn't like body management, "no pain, no gain." If they don't feel pain, they'll just do what they want, at anyone's expense. We do have power folks, but we've been lax about using it. That must change, for the good of the country and its citizens. If we go after the Burger King deal, trust me, neither Lemann nor Buffett will have to worry about where they'll get their next meal; after all, there's always a Whopper and fries.

This is all just another blatant example of how sheer greed is driving the world's egomaniacs to no longer pledge allegiance to their own respective country's flag, but to the flag flying the symbol of "$$$." Guess who will have to make up lost tax revenue? For the answer, go look in the mirror. While Warren Buffett has spoken out in favor of higher tax rates on super wealthy Americans, these kinds of Burger King shenanigans just show how extreme wealth disconnects people from the rest of society. Buffett deserves criticism for the deal, as an ''enlightened" money-grubber, is still a money-grubber. He's in his mid 80s, but he can't stop the quest for "mo' money, mo' money, mo' money!" If your child helps an elderly lady across the street, then kicks the dog on the other side, the good deed doesn't offset the bad act. I live just a few hundred feet from a Burger King, a place I'll no longer enter.

WORD HISTORY:
Seven-This word for the numerical value between 6 and 8 goes back to Indo European "septm," which meant "seven" This gave its Old Germanic offspring "sebun/seban," which gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "seofan," which later became "seven," where it has remained for centuries. The other Germanic languages have: German "sieben," Low German "seven" (there are dialectal variations), Dutch "zeven," West Frisian "san" (notice the lost consonant sound), Danish and Norwegian "syv," Swedish "sju," and Icelandic "sjö." Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic and Swedish are all from the North Germanic branch of the Germanic languages and they have all lost the ending with "n," which has been retained by all of the languages from the West Germanic branch, which includes English.

"What If I Can't Make A Gazillion," Is Not The Important Question

"What if I can't make a gazillion," is not the important question. The far more important question for most people is, "What if I can't make enough to support myself or my family?" Let's stop worrying about trying to soothe the insatiable egos of millionaires and billionaires and focus on the rest of society. The super wealthy won't miss one meal or be forced to sleep under a bridge or in an alley or in substandard housing, or forgo medicine or medical treatment, or plastic surgery, or hair implants, or a trip to Paris to sample the latest French wine. They'll be just fine, except for their insatiable egos, which will be just as insatiable, even if they make a gazillion ... or two ... or ten. They are NOT a poor, oppressed minority.

WORD HISTORY:
Corn-English has a couple of words "corn," but this is the noun meaning "grain." It is related to "kernel," and it goes back to the Indo European root "ger," which had the notion, "wear down;" thus also, "to mature," which produced "gerhanom," which meant "grain;" that is, "a larger grown object 'worn down by maturity.' " This gave Old Germanic "kurnan/kurnam," meaning "a small seed from a plant." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "corn," where it has remained for centuries and centuries, and which meant "grain." The discovery of the New World and the native plant "maize," a term picked up by Spanish from the Caribbean Islands, came to be applied to the plant itself, from the idea of the kernels being "corn;" that is, "grains," but that more exclusive, specific meaning remains largely North American English, although this is certainly understood and used in other English speaking areas, including in England itself, where the dual meanings exist. The other Germanic languages have: German "Korn" (grain),^ Low German "Koorn" (grain, see German note below), Dutch "koren" (grain, maize^^), Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic and Swedish all have "korn" (grain), with varying degrees as to the frequency of usage. Frisian no longer uses a form of the word, although it had "korn."

^ The German noun "Korn," meaning "grain," is grammatically neuter; thus "das Korn," but German also has the grammatically masculine form, "der Korn," which is a type of schnapps made from grain, which in the Low German of the northern part of Germany is "Koorn."

^^ The Dutch were once involved in the New World for a time. Whether they picked up the maize=corn meaning then, or borrowed it from English, I'm not sure.

Greed For The Moment

Throughout our lives we hear about the need to think ahead, but I'm not sure we can really do that, most of us anyway, at least not enough of us or far enough into the future. When I was in school in the 1960s, there was talk of computers being the way of the future and that students needed to choose training for that future. Some heeded that advice from those with the foresight into the developing computer advances, but too few, in my opinion, including myself, took the advice. It's a tough sell telling people, especially when we're young, that we need to do such and such for the future. For young people the future is the next school dance, the next school sporting event or the next legal holiday when school will be closed. With the wealthiest of Americans, some people ask, "Can't they see where their greed is leading?" So will greed for the moment threaten to later bring down dog-eat-dog capitalism? No question about it, the money is going to the top of the income ladder, but is there a point where that top rung of the ladder collapses from the weight of all the wealth up there?

Technology and the sending of sectors of the economy out the country for cheap labor and ways to get around workplace and environmental regulation can only go so far, as the resulting consequences of stagnant or declining wages for so many Americans come home to roost. It's a vicious cycle, with lower wages requiring cheaper goods for lower paid workers to be able to afford to buy them, but with the increased profits going to the top, where few seemingly can see, or want to see, from that lofty perch, that the Titanic is heading for an iceberg.

The growing income gap is not just about technology and the decline in manufacturing, but also about the  financial sector, which has expanded as a part of the economy for the last several decades. As finance expanded, it began to need more income to sustain the big and increasing salaries in the industry, as well as its growing workforce. The financial sector makes money a number of ways, two of which obviously are through fees for various services and commissions on transactions. How do you collect more commissions? By selling more stocks and bonds. How do you get people to invest more in stocks and bonds? You show them profits. How do you show them more profits? By selling more of something and by cutting costs to increase margins. As you can see, it's not a big leap to "cutting wages and benefits by shipping jobs and production to places where costs are low, thus increasing profits." If true wealth is measured by tangible items; that is, things we can actually touch and which usually have some endurance, what does the financial sector produce for Americans? Not a hell of a lot, although it can be involved in helping produce wealth and it IS important. We've seen a similar situation with the growth in lawyers, as a number of Americans poured into law schools to be trained in legal matters, a profession that typically pays well above average income. What happened? Lawsuits went wild, as the expanding legal profession needed more business to pay for all of the added lawyers and incomes. The action of the financial and legal sectors is not a terribly tough one to figure out folks, as at its heart, it is about self interest.  

Hm, I don't know about you, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the need for more income brought about risky ventures in the financial sector, especially after protections against nonsense were removed in the 1999/2000 era.  If such risky ventures pay off, those involved can make big money, but when they fail or are so misguided, as was the mortgage fiasco, LOOK OUT, but it was greed for the moment, "we want money NOW!" Few, if any, at the top paid no real penalty and they certainly did not spend any time in prison, although their schemes almost brought down the entire world economy. In the end, to halt a potential collapse of world finance, governments, including the U.S., first under George W. Bush and then under Barack Obama, stepped in with money; that is, taxpayer money, to bolster the teetering financial system. So the rewards up to that point went to millionaires and billionaires, but the losses were covered by that dreaded entity ... GOVERNMENT; that is, society. Amazingly, many in the upper class speak against socialism, but I guess that only counts when they aren't the ones getting "socialized." (In fairness here, a good deal of the "bailout money" has been paid back.)

Most Americans can't save the necessary amount, if anything, for retirement. It's easy for the wealthy to talk about people needing to save money for retirement, they have money ANY TIME.* There is a high proportion of Americans living essentially paycheck to paycheck, a very dangerous situation (some say 3/4 of all Americans, but even if that's a bit high, and it's "only" 2/3, that's still not great either). Lack of savings makes Social Security mandatory, as it's the only thing to keep many older Americans from being totally destitute, and Medicare and Medicaid, both targets of the superegos and their right wing allies, provides needed medial care to the elderly, the poor and the disabled. Many Americans fiddle while their own personal Rome burns, oblivious to the scheming of the rightists and fascists who can't stand the fact that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are shared national programs. They want control and their cut of the action. Don't be fooled by "privatization" talk, meant only to open the door to the treasure chest for the wealthy interests. They always seek to make matters about money with the euphemism "free markets," because then they can control it; "free markets"=control by the wealthy, not anything else, there's no other definition. To the wealthy, Social Security just can't be right because it is in part financed by lower interest rate securities. To wealthy and financial people who love to talk about "yields" on stocks and bonds, that's almost criminal, because their own personal sense of business, driven by human greed (we all have it to some extent) just can't accept that. They lack the ability to grasp anything that isn't solely about making money.** They have to be regulated by us, because they can't self regulate; many lack the perspective necessary to do so. It often tends to be "greed for the moment." In one episode of "Gilligan's Island," the castaways are threatened by an active volcano. When the Professor needs a timing device for a bomb to act as a counter to the volcano, super millionaire Mr. Thurston Howell III SELLS him a clock. Even in the face of danger or death, he just couldn't give up that business idea of making a profit on something. It may only have been a television comedy, but there's an underlying truth there. All well and good to talk about the future, but people live in the present.

* America really took off as a "consumer" driven nation in the 1920s. Mass production of various goods needed a market to sell those goods, which brought investment in mass marketing to "encourage" Americans to buy products. Consumer credit (often called "charge accounts" back then) expanded tremendously to allow Americans to buy products on credit and pay for them in installments. The increasing spread of electricity and the invention of several electrical devices, like refrigerators, radios and mixers, saw sales skyrocket, and profits for companies soared too, but wages did not soar so much. After an intense run-up, the whole thing took a major nosedive in a little event termed the Great Depression. So when I say Americans cannot always save for retirement, what I mean is, many people make bad choices, buying things to "keep up with the Joneses," but then again, there are pulls and tugs at us going on all of the time. Self esteem is certainly in play, as some folks try hard to be seen as "cool" and part of "what's happnin'." On the other hand, those preaching for Americans to save are trying to have it both ways; that is, they want us to spend, spend, spend to buy their products and services, but then they preach about too much credit and too little savings. What the right balance is, I don't know, but I believe I'm safe in saying, "we aren't in balance, nor have we been, for quite some time."

** To add some balance, the opposites can't understand about human greed, let alone big money greed, and they seem to think things get financed from thin air. There is balance here somewhere, folks, but finding it is often difficult, especially in the last several decades of  the "greed is good" mentality.  

WORD HISTORY:
Wight-This ultimate origin of this now generally archaic word is unknown, and "apparently," besides forms in the Germanic languages, it has some connection with Slavic (Russian "vesc" and Old Church Slavonic "vesti," both meaning "thing, matter"), but it is related to English "whit," (small object, particle).^ Old Germanic had "wihktiz," which seems to have meant "substance, matter." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "wiht," with the meaning "person, being, creature." Other forms in Germanic are: German "Wicht" (small child, rascal, imp, little creature); Low German "Wicht" (young girl); Dutch "wicht" (child, small creature); Swedish "vätte" (imp, gnome). I did not find a form in Frisian, but sources on this close relative of English are not exactly abundant, so such a form may well exist, or like English, it could now be archaic. Further I could not find forms in Danish, Icelandic or Norwegian.  

^ Now more commonly used in an expression like, "I don't even care one whit about it."   

^^ For the use of "wight" as part of the word that became modern "not," see:  http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2013/08/success-not-excess.html

"We Need Success, Not Excess"

Being in business isn't easy; some people make it, many do not survive for very long. Most Americans want business people to succeed. We aren't rooting for their failure, we want them to do well, and we realize they have invested money, work and time in these ventures. But we've seen an alarming concentration of wealth in the last three + decades, and not among our local grocery stores, service stations, or hardware stores, rather this concentration of wealth has been led by members of the "investment class," a highfalutin sounding expression, the real meaning of which is, "wealthy people." Now, I'm not really against wealthy people per se, but I am against out and out, ruthless, exploitative greed. Greed that knows no bounds or decency towards the many others who also populate this country. The accumulation of wealth has been obscene and counterproductive to the country's stability, a problem I don't need to explain to an increasing number of Americans. They're hurting! 

In response to the concentration of wealth, we've seen conservatives tout tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, as if they need more money, while other parts of their "program" demand cuts to our most economically vulnerable citizens. They've counted on selfishness "trumping" (pun intended) shared responsibility, something that has often sadly proven to be true. While no one knows what Americans will think tomorrow, there are signs the tide "may" be turning. You can only squeeze a disconnected public so far before some people actually begin to feel the pain and they begin to reconnect to others in similar circumstances. As long as Americans pay attention, the conservatives will fail. It doesn't take a genius to figure out, big business and wealthy interests haven't been pouring money into political campaigns and turning common sense on its head so they can pay you more in wages and benefits. Nope, they want the opposite, but unfortunately many Americans have been complicit in their own economic decline by supporting the nonsense. Meanwhile the wealthiest of Americans have been gaining more and more of the economic pie for themselves.

We need watch dogs to keep tabs on business at every level. They're always trying to figure out new gimmicks to separate you from your money, which can then go into their bank accounts. Remember a year or so ago when some banks wanted to charge a fee for some accounts, but many Americans finally stood up and said, "No!" The banks backed down. We need a "Success, not Excess" type of campaign in the country. There has been no shared sacrifice by the upper incomes, but now we've got to make sure they share in sacrifices more than ever, since they've benefited so much in recent times. No more, "we'll raise prices, if we have to increase the minimum wage or provide health care." Let the executives and wealthy stockholders  pay first, not reap the benefits of low wages and benefits. That's the ONLY way to get this country back onto anywhere near an even keel. Call their hands, get in their faces every time they make a move to benefit themselves and not the rest of America. Tell them, "You've had your way and now YOU will pay." Tell lawmakers to quit this tax cut crap for the wealthiest of the wealthy.

Concentration of wealth and power have seen terrible consequences in times past. Tsar Nicholas II of Russia tried for too long to hold onto an outdated system of wealth, privilege and repression. After agreeing to mild "change" in 1905, Nicholas then tried to retract much of that minimal "change." When people then took matters into their own hands in 1917, it wasn't pretty. Nicholas was swept away and he and his entire family were eventually killed, as were others of the Russian nobility. Pay back can be absolute hell.

WORD HISTORY:
Not/Naught/Naughty/Nought-Modern "not" actually stems from a former compound. It goes back to Indo European "ne," which meant "no, not." This gave its Old Germanic offspring the same form, "ne," which then gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "ne/na," which then was coupled with "wiht," which meant "creature, being, thing,"^ to give Old English "nawiht," which meant, "nothing," which shortly thereafter  became "noht," and later, "naught" (nothing, zero), a variant spelling of which was "nought" ("zero"). The form "noht" later became "not." Besides meaning "nothing, zero," "naught" also took on the added meaning "not good, sinful, wrong," which then gave us "naughty." All of these various forms have relatives in the other Germanic languages: German has "nicht" (not) and "nichts" (nothing), but German dialects have several variants from the standard form, including: net, nich, nit; Low German has "nich" (not) and "nix" (nothing); Dutch has "niet" (not) and "niets" (nothing); West Frisian has "net" (not) and "neat" (nothing). Apparently the North Germanic languages (Norwegian, Danish, Swedish, Icelandic) do not use forms, although Icelandic has the related "né" (meaning "nor," as in "neither this nor that"). 
 
^ This is still around in modern English as "wight," although it certainly is little used in American English, but just because I've had to use it here, I'll do its history soon. Its German cousin is "Wicht." And by the way, it has nothing to do with the form used in the Isle of Wight.  

NASA Revenue Stream From The Wealthy

This was first published in August 2013, but like food and water, this article never goes out of style.

There's not enough money on this planet for some of the wealthiest of the wealthy, who are also the greediest of the greedy, and often the most ruthless of the ruthless. NASA could fund some of its operations by selling spaceship rides, because the greediest of the greedy are going to want to see if there's gold or some other valuable substance out there in the great somewhere. Since they don't need money, a better thing would be if they devoted their lives to helping others far less fortunate than themselves, but whether they could EVER do ANYTHING without wanting financial reward to try to satisfy their insatiable egos, is a question to which I'm afraid I already know the answer. Don't fall for their patriotism acts either, as the only insignia they support is this one, "$$$." As to any religious claims, their lives are devoted to their true religious book; that is, to their bank book.

We all know that at times there are true shortages of various products. In the last couple of years, abnormally heavy rainfall in some parts of the country damaged some crops, like the peanut crop, for instance, which drove up the price of these American favorites and the derived peanut butter, although it appears prices have now been declining. Then there was tremendous drought in parts of the country, which affected a number of crops, which in turn affected meat prices.* We may complain, but I think most people understand some of this. The thing I've noticed, as I'm sure you have, is that we're paying more, or the same amount, but for smaller quantities. I just bought a jar of seasoned salt. It was the same brand I've been using, but when I picked it up, I thought, "Why does this seem to be different?" Well, when I got home, I looked at the almost empty jar I still had, and at the new jar, and it was the same price, but for about an ounce less.** I look at eggs, and they're all so old, I'm beginning to wonder if you can get fresh eggs anymore, without some connection to a local farm. So you get old eggs, but they don't want those prices to come down to try to move them faster, until they've virtually hit the expiration date, which is sometimes two months after the eggs were packed! So help me, some eggs are so old, I cracked one and a chicken flew out. 

Anyway folks, something is going to have to give eventually. Widening income disparity is going to bring about another crisis, as the wealthy interests can't keep charging us higher prices when incomes for the poor and middle class are stagnating, or actually declining in many cases. Some of the wealthy reactionaries want to take the country way back in time to keep control of it, as they did up until the 1930s, although of course, they don't want to go back to when many executives made 20 or 30 or 40 times what their workers made, instead of today's executives who make hundreds of times more than the average worker. Remember too, the larger the percentage of income that goes to the wealthy, the less money that goes into Social Security and Medicare. Why? Because contributions to these two programs stop at about $110,000. Income above that amount is not subject to paying into Social Security or Medicare. You see, there are lots of problems that stem from income disparity, but they aren't going to tell you that. Selling NASA space trips sounds better and better, especially since the greed of some of these folks is out of this world.

* As most people know, grains of various types, including corn, are often used to feed animals. When the cost of grain rises, the farmers/ranchers have to pay more to feed their livestock and poultry. Put simply, this increases the price of the meat from these animals, or for products from animals, like eggs or dairy products. Most of these meat/agricultural products are on commodity markets, where the overall prices are set, but many of these products are also subsidized by the government, usually by what are called "price supports." Subsides for such products goes back about a hundred years to a time when there were literally millions of American farms and something like a quarter to a third of Americans either lived on farms or were directly tied to agriculture in some way. The terrible state of American agriculture in the 1920s was one of the causes of the Great Depression, as so many Americans were linked to agriculture, including banks, which collapsed in record numbers in agricultural communities. Today, as with many other businesses, there are far, far fewer farms (see note), and the percentage of Americans living on or tied directly to agriculture now "appears" to be in the single digits. The thing is, with prices determined on commodity markets, that means, like it, not like it, the wealthy are setting prices. Surprise, surprise! (Note: It's a bit difficult to find a reliable number for farms in the U.S., although I didn't exactly wear myself out trying to find such a number, either, but as compared to the millions from the days of the 1920s and 1930s, the number "appears" to be in the hundreds of thousands now, but that likely counts consolidation; that is, big farms bought up smaller neighboring farms.)

** In my younger days, there was a little quip about the rock salt companies raising their prices like ten cents a bag (a dime was worth far more back then than today's dime), because the salt mines raised salt thirty cents a ton. Get it? If not, the point was, salt went up thirty cents a ton (2000 lbs.), but the price of a bag of rock salt went up a dime on a 5 lb. bag! You do the math.

WORD HISTORY:
Stream-This noun goes back to Indo European "sreu," which had the idea of "flow." This gave Old Germanic "straumaz," which meant "flow, flowing water, current of water." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "stream" (pronounced stree-am), meaning "flowing water, a current;" thus, "stream." This then became "streem," before the modern version. The verb developed from the noun in the 1200s. The other Germanic languages have: German "Strom" (also used for electrical current), Low German Saxon "Stroom," Dutch "stroom," Frisian "stream" and "streamke," Danish and Norwegian "strøm," Icelandic "straumi" and "straumur," and Swedish  "ström." 

Putting It Bluntly About Greed

If old Randy came to you and said, "Wow, I used to be a multimillionaire, but these damned workers' wages and benefits and the tax system have taken me down to a half million, if this keeps up I'll go bankrupt," you might well look at me and think, "He's not exactly starving, but I get the drift of his point." But here's what's really been happening: "I used to have a half million, but now I have 50 million. I'm telling you, we've got to get rid of these unions and we've got to cut Social Security and Medicare and programs for the poor. These things are just ruining the country." Does this make sense to you? That's what's happened folks. There's been NO sacrifice by the wealthiest Americans, only by middle class and poor Americans, all to the BENEFIT of the wealthy. All the while the wealthy have taken, and continue to take, more and more of the national income. Not only have many of the wealthiest of the wealthy shipped jobs and whole plants and facilities overseas to make MORE money (don't be fooled, they were making money in THIS country, but they wanted MORE), they have gotten politicians to lower their tax rates significantly in the last three decades, but they now want to cut income and safety protections for you and others again in this country. They've transferred some of the little wealth some Americans had to themselves. THINK PEOPLE! This is not as complicated as they and their minions want you to believe.

WORD HISTORY
Mean (2)-There are three words "mean" in English. This is the verb for "intend, make intentions known," which is the most common usage of the three different words "mean." Examples: "When I say I'm hungry, I mean it." "I mean to go to the store today," although it may be more common in the past tense, "I meant to go to the store today." "I did not mean to hurt you." It goes back to Indo European "men," which had the notion of "think, reason." This gave its Old Germanic offspring a form which carried forward only in its West Germanic branch (English is part of West Germanic) as "mainijanan," with the meaning "to think, to make a thought known." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "maenan," which meant "to mean, to intend." This then became "menen," before the modern version. German has "meinen," which means "to mean, to think, to hold as an opinion;" Low German Saxon has "menen;" West Frisian has "miene;" and Dutch has "menen." All have the same general meanings of the English word.

Asking A Republican A Few Questions

This was first published in May 2013

"Hello folks! This is Dan Ratherbe, in Philadelphia. Today I have a Republican here who promises to speak out on the issues confronting the nation and his Republican Party, no holds barred. His name is George Owen Pappenstiel* and he's a strong supporter of the Tea Party. Welcome Mr. Pappenstiel.

GOP-Thank you Mr. Couldbe, or is it Mr. Shouldbe?

DR-It's Ratherbe, but my name isn't important here, you are. So here's the first question, and remember, no holds barred. Is The Republican Party still the "party of Lincoln?"

GOP-Oh no, that was just temporary insanity on the part o' people who weren't no real Republicans. Ol' John Wilkes Booth was just too late gettin' at that guy. See, that's why Americuns need guns, to stop this stuff. 'Sides, I'm not sure Lincoln could ever convince Donald Trump that he wuz a 'gitimate president with a valid birth certificate to prove it. Just like that Bomma guy, a Mooslim if ever there was one. From over there in one of them Africa places nobody knows the name of.

DR- Kenya?

GOP- Cun I what?

DR- The President's name is Obama, not Bomma.

GOP- See, can't even say his name right, 'cuz it ain't no Americun name.

DR-Who is your favorite president?

GOP-Jeff Davis!

DR- Sir, Jefferson Davis was not president of the United States.

GOP- Shows jist how dumb you liberals are. Ya never had a proper edjeecation. Jeff Davis is my answer and that's final. I'll bet Donald Trump wouldn't have no trouble with ol' Jeff. He wuz a real Americun like Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin. They don't go 'round hatin America like that Bomma guy. They don't see no bad things 'bout this great ol' country and they only tell people the plain and simple facts and the communists and socialists don't like the truth or facts, so theyz agin them.  Michele and Sarah, they just plain and simple, that's what they are.

DR- Okay, who besides Jefferson Davis?

GOP- You sure ere trying to make this tough. Let's see ... ah ... Strom Thurmond? Oh wait, he only ran and he didn't win; got cheated I believe. George Wallace almost made it, but they cheated him too. Well, I guess Ronald Reagan.

DR-Do you believe Ebenezer Scrooge gets a bum rap?

GOP-You better believe it. The liberal media has done made him a scapegoat and felt sorry for that lazy moocher who worked for him. I can't remember his name, but he had that good for nothing son who sang like a woman and had the long hair to go with it. Played a banjo or some such thing too. Maybe a ukelele.  What was his name? Hm ... Tiny Tim or some such crap. Used a crutch to make people feel sorry for him. Not me, I don't fall for that stuff; I don't feel sorry for nobody, exceptin' maybe ol' Ebenezer. He was just a honest business guy tryin' to make a livin'. He was a job creator too. That moochin' worker of his wouldn't o' had a job if'n it weren't for ol' Ebenezer.

DR-Do you think some Republicans secretly celebrate Hitler's and Mussolini's birthdays?

GOP-Oh that Muss-ah-lini was such a wimp, nobody'd be celebratin' his birthday. I dunno 'bout Hitler tho.

DR-You mean you don't know of anyone in your party who celebrates Hitler's birthday on April 12th?

GOP-No, no, not April 12th, 'cause his birthday is April 20th. A cuzin o' mine has an old armband, give to him by his pa from the war time in Germany. He likes to wear it 'round the house sometimes, but I'm not sure it's just on Hitler's birthday. 'Sides, he got a nice white sheet he like to wear too sometimes. Keeps it good 'n clean and has a good Christian cross with it.     

DR-What do you think of the growing Hispanic population in the U.S.

GOP- I think we should use the Army to secure the border and shoot first an' ask questions later, like that there guy done there in Florida. What's his name, Zimmerman? We gotta stop this stuff or soon we'll all be eatin' tacos and refried beans fer breakfast, lunch and dinner. They can't even speak good English like you an' me duz. An' those Pertoo Ricans, why you'd think they wuz real Americuns, the ways they act.

DR- Puerto Ricans are American citizens, sir.

GOP- Now quit joshin' me. Ain't no real Americuns if'n they don't look like you an' me. An' don't fergit my cuzin neither. Then too, real Americuns don't got names like Peedro or Jose. That Jose name only any good fer the national anthem, you know, 'Jose ... can you see, by the dawn's early light?' Jist thought I'd be throwin' in a little humor, but you ain't laughin'. Guess you don't git it.
 
DR- Do you think the Tea Party is at least partially in response to political correctness? If so, do you think they're really racist, or that they just think segregation wasn't a bad thing at all, and that in fact, slavery helped take care of slaves?

 GOP- Now ya got that last part right, an' no truer words was ever spoke. Let me tell ya, a little slavery never hurt nobody, at least not no white person, or Egyptian. Just think, no slavery, no pyramids. No slavery, no cotton industry. No child slavery, no Walmart. Hey, this ain't tough to figur out.

DR-  Why do you think many Americans believe the GOP, especially the Tea Party, is bigoted, if not outright racist?

GOP- I got no idea. I never met a Tea Party patriot who didn't believe colored people, or I guess I should say, Negroes, haven't performed a valuable service to this country; as I said, no slavery, no cotton. If people like John Brown and that bunch hadn't been messin' in, we'd still have a thrivin' cotton business and big plantations all over the South. An' see, I said Negroes. You probly thought I didn't know no better.

DR- What do you think of unions?

GOP- Oh that bunch of Commies. They just wanna keep stoppin' American business from growin'; after all, what's good fer business, is good fer America.

DR- So if unions were destroyed, the country AND workers would be better off? How would workers benefit?

GOP- The country's businesses would be better off, no question 'bout it, and they are the nation's job creators. They need more money to 'spand and invest so they can provide more jobs to Americans. We don't need no unions stickin' their Commie noses in to where they ain't wanted ner needed. Let one company outbid the others over workers with pay and any benefits.

DR- What do you think of Medicare?

GOP- Oh that sozialyzed med'cine started by Lyndon Johnson. Called hizself a Texan too. Baloney! He weren't no real Texan like George W. Bush and Rick Perry. Now thems Texans.

DR- Has your family always been Republican?

GOP- Oh no, no. My pappy and my grand pappy and his pappy were all Democrats, but that was 'fore the Democrats started stirrin' up the colored people tellin' 'em they was equal to us white folks. Can you imagine that? Then it all got worse, 'cause they done tole women they was equal too. Now they's sayin' men cun marry men and women cun marry women and that we should let more feruners become citizens. I'm tellin ya, Lady Liberty is ashamed o' this stuff and pretty soon we white, educated, sane people gonna be a minority in our own country.    

DR- Thanks for your time, sir. You've really answered the questions, no holds barred, just like you said you would. Only thing is, I'm feeling a bit sick to my stomach now.

GOP- I done tole you, you liberals don't like hearin' the truth.  

* Pappenstiel is used in the German expression "etwas für einen Pappenstiel kriegen;" that is, "get something cheaply/get something for chicken feed." It is pretty much pronounced like "poppin-steel."

WORD HISTORY:
Thwart-This word goes back to Indo European "twork/terkw," which had the notion of "turn, twist." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "t(h)werkhaz," which seems to have meant "crosswise, crooked," from the original notion of "twist, turn." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "thweorh," which likewise meant "crooked, bent," and from those ideas, also the figurative meaning "perverse" (the basic idea of such is still around today, as we say things like "the criminal had a twisted mind"), and also "angry." Along came Old Norse speakers to England, usually referred to as "Danes" back then, although not all came from what is now Denmark. Old Norse was the North Germanic offshoot of Old Germanic; thus making it a close relative of English. English is classified as West Germanic, along with its closest relatives: Frisian, Low German, Dutch, and standard German," but English has a number of influences from North Germanic, because of these "Danish" settlements in England, which were mainly in the northern and eastern parts of the England. Old Norse brought the word "thwert" to England, which had much the same basic meaning as the its Old English relative "thweorh;" that is, "across, crosswise." This form gradually worked its way into English by the 13th Century, seemingly blending with the original English word. Apparently from the notion of "crosswise sticks or logs" used to block an entrance/exit, came the idea in the mid 1200s of a verb form meaning "block, obstruct, hinder," which is still with us today. Originally both the English and Old Norse forms were adverbs/adjectives. Other forms in the Germanic languages: German has "quer" (originally spelled with a "tw" and a "dw," instead of a "q"), which means "across, crosswise; diagonally," Low German and Dutch "dwars," West Frisian "dwers," Swedish "tvär," Danish "tvaer," Norwegian "tvers," and Icelandic "thwert."

Unpatriotic-Their Allegiance Is To Wealth

This was first published in June 2012, but now, in 2017, Trump and Republicans will begin a drive to give big cut taxes to billionaires, with likely consequences for average and poor folks when the budget cuts come.


In case you missed this story, there is a growing number of wealthy "Americans" giving up their American citizenship, often to avoid paying taxes. Since the administration of George W. Bush U.S. tax officials have made an effort to locate Americans living overseas who make or hold large sums to collect taxes on their incomes.* Last year nearly 1800 of these very wealthy folks gave up their American citizenship in Switzerland.** Many have become "stateless," as they are not citizens of ANY country. And some people dare to call Occupy Wall Street protesters "unpatriotic." Reports suggest there are more than 4500 of these stateless super wealthy folks worldwide, worth nearly 6.5 trillion; that's with a "t." Understand, there are many Americans living overseas for a wide variety of reasons: military service, a spouse and children of military personnel serving overseas, government positions, business positions, education, etc. Do not confuse these people with the super wealthy, unpatriotic former Americans.

* It is complicated, but hey, this is about taxes! From what I can come up with, Americans overseas earning over about $100,000 are those who get hit, but even then, there are credits deducted for paying taxes to other countries. In other words, if you live in another country, make a half million, for example, you may pay little or no American tax because you paid tax in country XYZ, or to several countries, as some of the super wealthy have homes in numerous countries.

** You don't think they went to Switzerland because of secret Swiss bank accounts, do you? Ah c'mon now! You mean they'd try to hide money? Haha Laws passed in the 2000s have pried open some of these "secret" accounts, however. 

WORD HISTORY:
Patriot-This word traces back to Indo European “phater/phter/phaeter/pater,” which meant "father." This then gave its Greek offspring "pater," which then spawned "patris," "fatherland," which then produced "patriotes," meaning "from the same country." Latin borrowed the word as "patriota," "a countryman." This gave French "compatriot" and the shorter "patriote," both with the meaning "fellow countryman." English borrowed the word from French in the late 1500s, when the word was already developing the additional sense "loyal supporter of one's country."

A Recommendation: "The Greedy Bastards"

Folks, it's not often that I recommend things here, but I hope you will check this out. The title alone should get your attention, and if you're a regular reader here, you know I've used the term, or similar, many times over the years. Whether you like to hear it or not (please, please don't be in denial), the country has essentially been taken over by a very powerful, well financed group. They aren't "job creators," as they and their minions like to say, but they are interested in one thing....THEMSELVES! Any jobs they create, and they are not many, in my opinion, are incidental. No matter what your political affiliation, I hope you can put the COUNTRY first, and not let the superegos and "greedy bastards" continue to take us on the path of national destruction we have been on for decades now. Dylan Radigan has seen "Wall Street" first hand and his commitment to change the country for the better, for the vast majority, and not just the few, is somethng he sincerely believes.

http://greedybastards.com/


WORD HISTORY:
Meal (2)-English has two words "meal;" this is the one "food served at a particular time" ("Meal," meaning "ground grain" was covered previously). This word goes back to Indo European "me," which meant "to measure." This gave its Old Germanic offspring "maelan," which meant "(measured) time and hour, but also in certain contexts it seems to have had notions of "fixed time to eat." This gave Old English (Anglo-Saxon) "mael," with essentially the same meanings. This then became "mel(e)," before the modern version, but the meaning condensed to only "fixed time to eat, meal, feast." Very common in the other Germanic languages: German and Low German Saxon have "mal" (time(s), in math & in 'occasion' sense) & "Mahl" (meal), Dutch has "maal," West Frisian has "miel," Icelandic, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish all have "mál."

The World In Protest, Revolution or Civil War? Part Four

This was first published in late 2011, with some editing/additions 3/11/2016.


"Have We Lost Our Idealism?"

The "Great Depression" brought Americans together; unfortunately, it was often in a soup kitchen line, but it also made middle class Americans relate to those below them, rather than to those above them. Just a few years before, as Americans chased money and class status, they had related more to those above, as they too desired to get rich, and quickly. The economic collapse not only thwarted the hopes of many of achieving great wealth, it often reversed any economic gains made by some Americans. It also showed how ruthless and greedy some Americans really were. Many of the "haves" didn't reach some pinnacle, stop, and see who they could help. No, they kept going, crushing anyone standing in their way of accumulating even more money they couldn't spend in a hundred lifetimes or more.* By the late 1930s along came a movie that seemed to capture the essence of the times, "Mr Smith Goes To Washington." Instead of a pompous Donald Trump sitting as king, and issuing statements of  "You're fired," the movie appealed to the great idealism of Americans for fairness and the offering of help to others. It strongly condemned selfishness and greed, and the accompanying corruption. If you haven't seen this movie, or if you haven't seen it in a while, please watch it. It may just restore some of your faith in what this country can be. The movie uses the young to help bring down corruption, and today's Occupy Wall Street movements have many young people involved. They aren't perfect, but the task they face against entrenched interests and corruption is every bit as daunting as the interests and corrupt individuals who tried to trample Jimmy Stewart's character in the movie. Not all Americans have lost their idealism to make this a country and a world of more fairness. Similar movements are also present in many other parts of the world, and indeed, international cooperation will be needed to bring about the necessary changes to move the world forward, and not to let it slide back into the Dark Ages and feudalism, with the likes of Donald Trump living in a castle, with the rest of us groveling as his serfs. If that image scares you, it should!

* My progressive brethren don't always like to hear this, but Herbert Hoover was not one of those who spent his life trying to accumulate more wealth. Unlike many who "claim" religion, Hoover actually took his religious beliefs (he was a Quaker) seriously. His religion espoused that if you were successful, you were obligated to "give back" to society. Besides donating money to causes, Hoover entered public service, first in the Wilson administration, then in administering food programs in Europe to help prevent mass starvation of Europeans during and after World War One. While a firm opponent of communism, Hoover tried to keep people in the then developing Soviet Union from starving. I don't recall his exact words, but when asked about helping people in a Bolshevik country, he answered something to the effect that he didn't ask their political beliefs; they were human beings. There are not many of us who would say something like that, certainly not the likes of a Ted Cruz. Hoover then served as Secretary of Commerce in the Harding and Coolidge administrations before becoming president. This high achievement proved to be his undoing in terms of public admiration, as the Great Depression severely damaged his reputation. Of course, he made some unwise policy choices and he was too ideological on some issues, like opposing direct aid to states to help the unemployed and needy,* and even when he reversed course, his reputation had been so sullied, he got no credit for it. Later it was found that Hoover had given away much of his money during his presidency, and he did mobilize Americans to give record amounts to charities during those desperate times. He did NOT accept his salary as president. I may not agree with everything he did, but I give credit where I feel it is due. It's not good to "beat up on" those who may have opposed your ideas, but who then come to embrace those ideas. Welcome those who join you, for in that case, you have won the argument.

* Hoover's ideology certainly clung at times to "the old ways," and in the case with aid to the needy, his ideas were far too optimistic and idealistic, as the problem of hunger during the Great Depression was so huge, the traditional aid by the individual states and charities was overwhelmed. His refusal to admit to that fact seriously damaged his image, and indeed, gave the public a new image of the former humanitarian Hoover, as a man who would let people starve. It was an image that lasted for the rest of his life with many Americans, although at least a few softened their stance against him, over time. Hoover did finally admit to himself the need for direct federal aid to the needy, and signed it into law, but the damage to his reputation had been done.

WORD HISTORY:
Heat-Closely related to "hot," this word's ultimate origins are uncertain, but it could be a Germanic invention, or borrowing from a non-Indo European source, or, as some believe, a variation of Indo European. Old Germanic had "haitijo/haitija," which meant "heat." This gave Anglo-Saxon (Old English) "haetu/hait," which also meant "heat." By Middle English it had become "hete," before the modern spelling. Note: Old English also had "haetha," which meant "hot weather." The verb form, meaning "to heat, to make hot, to become hot," traces back to Old Germanic "haitijan(an)." This gave Anglo-Saxon "haetan," with the same meanings. German has the noun "Hitze," and the verb "heizen" (the "z" is pronounced as "ts," as in the ending of the word "hits"); some Low German dialects have the noun "Hett," and the verb "hette;" Dutch has the noun "hitte," and the verb "(ver)hitten," which is used in the figurative sense, "stir emotions" (Dutch and Frisian now use forms of "warm" to mean "to heat something"); Frisian has "hjittens," Icelandic has "hita," Danish has "hede" (often in compounds), Norwegian has "het/hete," and Swedish has the noun "hetta."

See more at the history of "hot:" http://pontificating-randy.blogspot.com/2011/12/allied-leaders-of-world-war.html

The Sermon Unheard

I first published this on November 27, 2006, and then again in October 2011, but with a "Word History," which did not accompany the original article. Unfortunately, this article hasn't really gone out of style, although Pope Francis has brought a refreshing change in tone and emphasis to religion, but much more is needed from others. Updated November 18, 2014.

"Please be seated, my brethren. I won't waste time with any preliminaries.

It seems we hear so much about religious people making statements concerning many of the hot button social issues of today's world. I see the clips on the television news or read about them in the paper. Whether or not I agree with some, all, or perhaps even none of these statements, is not what I'm here to talk about today. Maybe it's the fault of the news media, but I seldom, if ever, hear a word on the news from the religious community about a blight that's going on around us each day in our cities, towns and rural areas. I spell it with capital letters: G-R-E-E-D.

This is a condition from which all of us suffer to some extent, but when it comes down to it, it has never seen such heights in modern times as that which is emanating from the board rooms, money managers' offices, and the dens of the very wealthy in our society. The behavior we are witnessing is just plain ruthless, and unfortunately, it is extensive. We have very wealthy individuals hoping for hurricanes to disrupt oil and natural gas supplies. We have very wealthy individuals hoping for conflict in the Middle East for the same sick reason. Those who wish for any catastrophe for the sake of money!!! How despicable!!! No thoughts for their fellow man, only thoughts of more money and their chest-thumping ego trips!!! Let me tell you my brethren, there's not enough money in this world to satisfy these greedy, money-grubbing, ruthless individuals! They have a total disconnect with humanity. They have turned out the lights in their minds that lead to some pang of conscience.

And where are the ministers, priests, and rabbis to out and out condemn this behavior? My brethren, I'm afraid some, but not all, have fallen under the spell of the same curse. The wealthy contribute to the churches, and the very people who should be giving some moral guidance fall silent on this terrible affliction. Do they stand up and say that in a country like America, that people need medical care without the prospect of going bankrupt? No! Do they stand up and tell the board room class that they are ruthlessly cutting people from their employment rolls to save on medical insurance? No! Do they even ask their wealthy members to support some kind of national health insurance plan? No! Do they tell their wealthy members that after doing all sorts of rotten things to their fellow man, that making a donation to the church or hospital doesn't wipe the slate clean? No!

It is time for the religious community to stand up and point an accusing finger at the people who have so callously culled the ranks of working people from getting proper medical care! Further, I heard an interview with the President (then George W. Bush) recently. He was asked about the tremendous sums being paid to corporate executives, and what he felt should be done about it. He first noted that executive salaries should not be controlled by the government, but that corporate board members should be more diligent in watching pay levels. To me it sounds a bit like "Heal Thy self," or "the foxes put in charge of guarding the chicken coop." There's no doubt in my mind that workers deserve at least some of the huge sums being paid to the big wigs. I remember an episode from "Gilligan's Island," the 1960s sitcom. In this episode, if memory serves me right, an impostor is back on the mainland spending multimillionaire Mr. Howell's money. Mr. Howell, played by Jim Backus, blurts out, "Little does he know how hard other people worked to make me that money." That one line makes a great point.

So my brethren, I now will cool my rhetoric and offer a softer tone toward the people I want to reach. Please, please think about your actions! Turn on the light of conscience! Think of others, not just of yourselves! You will still have plenty! Think of how much you have and how little others have. Just think of the money you spent on yourself in the last few days. That amount alone could help save the life of someone without proper medical care. Or, that amount could save someone's home from foreclosure. Or that amount could save the emotional stability of someone struggling with financial problems due to layoff or a cutback in hours. Or that amount could feed a number of families who lack the wherewithal to keep food on the table. I could go on and on, but these are the things that should make you feel good, not just acquiring more wealth on top of more wealth, or watching your stocks rise because of some catastrophe, or gloating over some shrewd deal where you made a bundle, because you gave the other person "the business." Think! Think! Think! You can help cure, at least in part, this terrible affliction I spell G-R-E-E-D!!!

Do I hear an Amen?"

WORD HISTORY:
Wish-This verb goes back to Indo European "wen/wun," with the general meaning "to desire, to wish for." This gave its Old Germanic offshoot "wunsk(i)janan," with the same meaning. This gave Old English "wyscan" (notice the "n" sound is lacking), again with the same meaning. This then became "wisshen" (notice the "k" sound had become softened), before the modern form. The noun was derived from the verb by the late 1200s. The other Germanic languages have forms of the word (usually both a verb and a noun), and all with the same meaning as their English relative: (notice how in some of the other Germanic languages, the "k" sound softened, as in English, but the "n" persists, except in English and Icelandic) Old High German had "wunsken," but as happened in English, the "k" sound softened in the modern form, "wünschen"("Wunsch," is the noun form); Low German Saxon has the same forms as standard German; some Low German dialects have "wensche" ("Wensch," noun form); Frisian has only a noun form, "winsk" (here the hard "k" is retained); Dutch has "wensen" ("wens" is the noun); Danish and Norwegian have "ønske" (same form for the noun); Swedish has "önska" ("önskan"/noun); Icelandic has only the noun form, "Óska."

Greed Has Damaged The Country

Let's face some facts folks. We all have a certain amount of greed. The problem is, when the "haves" get almost total control of a political and economic system, they leave little but the crumbs for the remainder of society. Capitalism in its pure form is not about helping others, it's not about saving the sick or injured, it's not about helping to educate children, or to retrain workers, it's not about clean water, clean air or any other environmental concern. No, capitalism is about three things: MONEY, MONEY, and MONEY. This philosophy has now taken over America. It's been in the works since the days of the New Deal, when legislation put regulations on businesses, and later expanded even more, all with tremendous whining and foot stomping by many of the business interests and wealthy investors, even though these wealthy American remained, well, wealthy Americans. The way some of them whined, you'd have thought they wouldn't be able to buy their next meal. In the last three decades we've seen a roll back in protections for Americans, some made in the name of "competitiveness," but do any of you REALLY believe America can compete against countries where workers make a few bucks a day (if they're lucky), without cutting down American workers to that same level? Do you believe the country has benefited from these policies over the last few decades? If so, where? The gap in income disparity has grown to pre-Depression levels, as the wealthy have done VERY well, thank you, while most other Americans have seen declines or stagnation in income. All the while so called "commodity" prices have soared, even on basic food products, only damaging "unrich" Americans, and preventing any major economic recovery from taking hold. Remember folks, with these people, money trumps patriotism EVERY time.

I've heard it said several times on news programs lately, and no one has yet contradicted it; thus giving it credence, that the largest American companies have put more money into foreign countries than into their own country for the last thirty years. You want a job? Hey, go to some country where American business people have set up shop and agree to work for a pittance; you might have a chance. you might virtually starve to death, but to these people, hey so what?

We now have a major American political party, guess which one, orchestrating cuts to all sorts of government programs and to wages and benefits for America's dwindling middle class. Don't be fooled by the television and radio ads, folks. That's what this is about, cuts to middle class Americans, and the destruction of ANYONE daring to mention taxes on the wealthiest Americans. Folks, they don't call it "conservatism" because they want to empower middle and working class Americans again. They want to take the country back alright....way back! Pick any previous century. Now, a counter-balance has emerged, THANKFULLY! The recent demonstrations dubbed "Occupy Wall Street" has grown from the streets of New York City to many other places across the country, and it is expanding every day. President Obama came to the presidency with the slogan "change you can believe in." Ah, 'scuse me, where is it? The president missed the boat, and no matter how many times the Republicans virtually spit in his face, he went back for more! My mother used to say, "Don't be a glutton for punishment." The President needs to heed that advice, and he may well be heading in that direction, as he wants our votes again. The country needs leadership; leadership against the tremendous greed that is overwhelming us. The question is, is Obama up to the task?

WORD HISTORY:
Wall-This noun has an uncertain origin, although there are some theories connecting it to some Indo European roots, but I'll stick to what is essentially agreed upon. It goes back to Latin^ "vallus," which meant "stake, post." This then gave Latin "vallum;" that is, "a line of stakes forming a barrier, a wall, rampart." It seems to have been borrowed into West Germanic, an offspring of Old Germanic,^^ as "wallaz," with the same basic meaning, which then expanded to include "earthwork of stakes with dirt mounded against it as reinforcement;" thus a form of dam or dike. Old English had "weall," with the same meanings, but then expanded further to "inside and outside walls of a building." The noun later gave off a verb form, "weallian," meaning "to wall off something, to put a wall around." Both the noun and verb forms then became "wall," and have remained so ever since. Common in the other Germanic languages, but more so with the original "rampart, fortification, dike" meaning: German has "Wall" (for those learning German, it is "der" Wall), Low German Saxon has "Wäll/Wall," North Frisian, now almost extinct, has "wal," and Dutch too has "wal." The other Frisian dialects do not seem to use a form of the word any longer. Some West Germanic dialects passed along forms of the word to some North Germanic languages, and Swedish has "vall" and Norwegian has "voll." Danish has "val," which means "battlefield." Whether this comes from the same word, I don't know, but it could be tied to the "fortifications' meaning of the word.

^ Latin is an Indo European language related to English, but further down the family tree, although many English words trace back to Latin directly, or indirectly, mainly via French. Latin has also had major influences on many other European languages not direct offshoots of Latin itself. While Latin still lives on in religious circles, its usage is much diminished. It hasn't so much died out as evolved into Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French, and others.

^^ Old Germanic gave birth to three offspring: North Germanic, the ancestor of modern Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Faroese, and Icelandic; East Germanic, which once included Gothic, Burgundian, and Vandalic (the language of the Vandals), but all East Germanic languages have died out; and West Germanic, the ancestor of English, German, Low German, Dutch (including Flemish), Frisian, Afrikaans, and Yiddish.