Thursday, April 16, 2009
No Longer Sleeping
Looks like we've been made boys. I knew that flower delivery truck with all the antennas looked suspicious. Time to implement the standard evasion tactics and regroup at safe house Bravo. Make sure we bring all the combustibles this time and be prepared for tomorrow's recon op. Remember, the cell can split, but cannot die.
I Wonder Who's Watching Me Now
Generally, I'm not wont to get overly paranoid about supposed government schemes to invade our privacy and control our lives. But I have to admit that this paragraph in Holman Jenkins' column in yesterday's WSJ raised the hair on the back of neck a bit:
Britain has gone furthest in using cameras for comprehensive auto surveillance, and now says it's capable of monitoring every car trip in the U.K. and keeping a record for five years. Most traffic cameras are "on" all the time, and capable of being networked with plate- and even face-recognition software. In Britain, the data yielded will be incorporated in a database of all kinds of personal information and camera observations to enable "data mining" to let the government know who's doing what, when and where.
Cameras monitoring EVERY car trip in the U.K. and having it recorded for five years? As my wife noted when I mentioned it to her yesterday, that's a lot of nose picking captured for posterity.
Britain has gone furthest in using cameras for comprehensive auto surveillance, and now says it's capable of monitoring every car trip in the U.K. and keeping a record for five years. Most traffic cameras are "on" all the time, and capable of being networked with plate- and even face-recognition software. In Britain, the data yielded will be incorporated in a database of all kinds of personal information and camera observations to enable "data mining" to let the government know who's doing what, when and where.
Cameras monitoring EVERY car trip in the U.K. and having it recorded for five years? As my wife noted when I mentioned it to her yesterday, that's a lot of nose picking captured for posterity.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Tead Off?
Everyone knows that today is Tax Day. And unless you've been living under a rock (or getting your news solely from traditional media sources) you have probably heard about the many "Tea Parties" taking place today across the fruited plain. While I understand the motives behind those participating and hope they get an impressive turnout, I find myself ambivalent about the whole Tea Party movement (if it can yet be described that way).
Perhaps it's the natural conservative inclination to view protests in general with a skeptical eye, especially regarding their efficacy. In regard to the Tea Parties in particular, I'm still struggling to grasp what they're really about and what they really hope to achieve. I understand that people are mad as hell and they're not gonna take it anymore. However, it's not clear to me exactly what they're mad about and what they're not gonna take anymore. Is it bailouts? Spending? Tax increases? Expansion of government control? All of the above? None of the above? Some of the above?
The answer may be that this just the beginning and that as various groups and individuals continue to coalesce together, a more coherent and defined message about issues and aims will emerge. But right now I wonder how all this is going to play to the majority of Americans standing on the sidelines. Will they dismiss the Tea Party protesters as nothing more than a bunch of freaks in tricorne hats or will they consider that maybe there's a message there that they need to consider? Given the way the media is sure to cover the events, I expect far more of the former reaction.
Another problem with the Tea Parties is the name itself. Yes, I understand that they're trying to recapture the revolutionary spirit of the famous 1773 Boston Tea Party. But you gotta admit "Tea Party" is not a name that naturally conveys action or inspires interest. Dude, what are you doing tonight? Going down to the capitol to attend a Tea Party. Okay, well have fun with that.
And the original Tea Party was a direct act against British attempts to tax tea that the colonists felt violated their rights. Today, no one is proposing to increase taxes on tea (at least as far as I know) and even if they did, the reaction would likely be far more muted. While many Americans still drink tea at least occasionally (including yours truly), the beverage does not play nearly as prominent role in American life as it did during the colonial era.
But there are present attempts to tax other drinks. Drinks that Americans will likely get far more excited about showing up at a rally in their name. From an editorial in today's WSJ called This Tax Is for You:
Today is the dreaded April 15, but at least in Oregon it's even going to cost you more to drown in your tax sorrows. In their sober unwisdom, the state's pols plan to raise taxes by 1,900% on . . . beer. The tax would catapult to $52.21 from $2.60 a barrel. The money is intended to reduce Oregon's $3 billion budget deficit and, ostensibly, to pay for drug treatment.
If it passes, Oregon will overnight become the most taxing state for suds, one-third higher than the next highest beer tax state, Alaska. The state may do this even though Oregon is the second largest microbrewery producer in the U.S. The beer industry and its 96 breweries contribute 5,000 jobs and $2.25 billion to state GDP. Kurt Widmer of Widmer Brewing Co. says the tax would 'devastate our company and small breweries throughout the state.' Adds Joe Henchman, director of state projects at the Tax Foundation, 'This microbrewery industry has gravitated to Oregon in part due to low beer taxes.'
Get your grubby taxing paws off my Widmer Original Drifter Pale Ale! See, now that's how you get people mad as hell.
For Oregon to enact punitive taxes on its homegrown beer industry makes as much sense as Idaho slapping an excise tax on potatoes or for New York to tax stock trading. Even without the tax increase, taxes are the single most expensive ingredient in a glass of beer, according to the Oregon Brewers Guild.
But Democrats who run the legislature are desperate for the revenues to help pay for Oregon's 27.9% increase in the general fund budget last year. If they have their way, every time a worker steps up to the bar and orders a cold one, his tab will rise by an extra $1.25 to $1.50 a pint. Half of these taxes will be paid by Oregonians with an income below $45,000 a year. Voters might want to remember this the next time Democrats in Salem profess to be the party of Joe Six Pack.
How many Joe Six Packs are really going to show up for anything as fey sounding as a "Tea Party" anyway? But if you called it a "Beer Party" you'd have to keep people away with sticks. Sure, there might be a little confusion about what they really were getting into, but that confusion is just an opportunity for education. And, unlike the original Tea Party, there isn't a chance in hell that Americans are going to destroy something as precious as beer as a form of protest. But instead of throwing our beer into the harbor, what if we drank it instead? (chug, chug, chug) Just try taxing this now, Governor!
So go on and enjoy yourself at a local Tea Party today. But think about how much better it would be if we called it a Beer Party.
Perhaps it's the natural conservative inclination to view protests in general with a skeptical eye, especially regarding their efficacy. In regard to the Tea Parties in particular, I'm still struggling to grasp what they're really about and what they really hope to achieve. I understand that people are mad as hell and they're not gonna take it anymore. However, it's not clear to me exactly what they're mad about and what they're not gonna take anymore. Is it bailouts? Spending? Tax increases? Expansion of government control? All of the above? None of the above? Some of the above?
The answer may be that this just the beginning and that as various groups and individuals continue to coalesce together, a more coherent and defined message about issues and aims will emerge. But right now I wonder how all this is going to play to the majority of Americans standing on the sidelines. Will they dismiss the Tea Party protesters as nothing more than a bunch of freaks in tricorne hats or will they consider that maybe there's a message there that they need to consider? Given the way the media is sure to cover the events, I expect far more of the former reaction.
Another problem with the Tea Parties is the name itself. Yes, I understand that they're trying to recapture the revolutionary spirit of the famous 1773 Boston Tea Party. But you gotta admit "Tea Party" is not a name that naturally conveys action or inspires interest. Dude, what are you doing tonight? Going down to the capitol to attend a Tea Party. Okay, well have fun with that.
And the original Tea Party was a direct act against British attempts to tax tea that the colonists felt violated their rights. Today, no one is proposing to increase taxes on tea (at least as far as I know) and even if they did, the reaction would likely be far more muted. While many Americans still drink tea at least occasionally (including yours truly), the beverage does not play nearly as prominent role in American life as it did during the colonial era.
But there are present attempts to tax other drinks. Drinks that Americans will likely get far more excited about showing up at a rally in their name. From an editorial in today's WSJ called This Tax Is for You:
Today is the dreaded April 15, but at least in Oregon it's even going to cost you more to drown in your tax sorrows. In their sober unwisdom, the state's pols plan to raise taxes by 1,900% on . . . beer. The tax would catapult to $52.21 from $2.60 a barrel. The money is intended to reduce Oregon's $3 billion budget deficit and, ostensibly, to pay for drug treatment.
If it passes, Oregon will overnight become the most taxing state for suds, one-third higher than the next highest beer tax state, Alaska. The state may do this even though Oregon is the second largest microbrewery producer in the U.S. The beer industry and its 96 breweries contribute 5,000 jobs and $2.25 billion to state GDP. Kurt Widmer of Widmer Brewing Co. says the tax would 'devastate our company and small breweries throughout the state.' Adds Joe Henchman, director of state projects at the Tax Foundation, 'This microbrewery industry has gravitated to Oregon in part due to low beer taxes.'
Get your grubby taxing paws off my Widmer Original Drifter Pale Ale! See, now that's how you get people mad as hell.
For Oregon to enact punitive taxes on its homegrown beer industry makes as much sense as Idaho slapping an excise tax on potatoes or for New York to tax stock trading. Even without the tax increase, taxes are the single most expensive ingredient in a glass of beer, according to the Oregon Brewers Guild.
But Democrats who run the legislature are desperate for the revenues to help pay for Oregon's 27.9% increase in the general fund budget last year. If they have their way, every time a worker steps up to the bar and orders a cold one, his tab will rise by an extra $1.25 to $1.50 a pint. Half of these taxes will be paid by Oregonians with an income below $45,000 a year. Voters might want to remember this the next time Democrats in Salem profess to be the party of Joe Six Pack.
How many Joe Six Packs are really going to show up for anything as fey sounding as a "Tea Party" anyway? But if you called it a "Beer Party" you'd have to keep people away with sticks. Sure, there might be a little confusion about what they really were getting into, but that confusion is just an opportunity for education. And, unlike the original Tea Party, there isn't a chance in hell that Americans are going to destroy something as precious as beer as a form of protest. But instead of throwing our beer into the harbor, what if we drank it instead? (chug, chug, chug) Just try taxing this now, Governor!
So go on and enjoy yourself at a local Tea Party today. But think about how much better it would be if we called it a Beer Party.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Dreams of the Green Fairy
Last summer, we had a birthday/house warming party at our abode. Our realtor kindly presented us with a bottle of Lucid Absinthe Supérieure as a gift. I placed the bottle on the top shelf behind the basement bar for future consumption and it remained there undisturbed until last week. That's when our eldest son happened to notice the bottle, in particular the rather creepy green eyes. My wife explained to him that it was just a bottle and there was nothing to fear (at least until he gets much older and is actually able to drink absinthe). But when a child of that age gets fixated on something it's hard to get them to let go. Rather than risk further toddler terror or have to answer further questions, she took the bottle down and placed it underneath the bar, eyes facing away.
While celebrating Easter on Sunday I was behind the bar mixing up a few cocktails for guests. In the course of that activity I must have moved the bottle and turned it around. Because today when my wife had the kids in the basement, eldest son once again managed to make eye contact with the bottle's creepy peepers and was once again a bit freaked by their look.
So now the bottle of Lucid--which from I understand is a pretty high quality absinthe--has been relegated to the laundry room. Sharing shelf space with Tide, Woolite, and Bounce seems like an undeserved fate for a spirit of that reputation, but the warm blanket of childhood security should be preserved when possible. Besides I would hate for him to grow up with an unfounded fear of liquor bottles.
There are some very legitimate reasons to tread lightly with a bottle of absinthe. The menacing glow of green eyes is not one of them.
A Penny For Your Thoughts
Tim from Colorado e-mails with a "where are they now?" update for an actor from Riptide:
You were speaking about Riptide, and then I received this video via a newsletter from a gunschool I'm going to.
Nice to see that Joe has moved on from his Hollywood view of firearms for me, but not for thee.
You were speaking about Riptide, and then I received this video via a newsletter from a gunschool I'm going to.
Nice to see that Joe has moved on from his Hollywood view of firearms for me, but not for thee.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Facing Old Enemies With New Allies
One of things that makes Thomas P.M. Barnett such an interesting strategic thinker is his ability to look past the alliances of yesterday and today and imagine future relationships based on actual shared strategic interests that are stripped of previous political and cultural biases. While I don't always agree with Barnett about whether some of his proposed alliances are actually beneficial to US interests or even possible to achieve, when you look at the world the way he does it does open up intriguing ideas.
For example, when faced with the problem of pirates threatening the sea lanes and imperiling global trade, the United States would normally consider options such as:
1. Work with traditional allies like NATO to provide security
2. Try to work with the United Nations to assemble some sort of international coalition
3. Go it alone as the world's sole superpower
But if you start thinking about who really could be the most impacted by the threat of piracy and who can actually do something about, maybe it would be better if the United States looked to China and India instead. The two emerging Asian economic powers require a lot of imported materials and exported goods to keep their economies humming. They should have as much interest as we do in seeing that the threat from Somali pirates is eliminated.
Given their location and the fact that they have the world's fifth largest navy, it seems like the Indians could definitely make a meaningful contribution. And they already have been involved in anti-piracy operations off Somalia. The Chinese Navy has also been escorting Chinese ships in the Gulf of Aden and could bring additional resources to bear. More importantly, they might be willing to pony up some dough to help an expanded multinational force provide security to patrol the shipping lanes.
To throw Europe a bone and recognize their place in history, we could also add the Royal Navy to the mix. Then we would have a scenario where American forces were working alongside forces from their oldest ally Great Britain, their most recent emerging ally India, and their current rival but possible future ally China. It's definitely an interesting exercise in unlimited strategic thinking.
For example, when faced with the problem of pirates threatening the sea lanes and imperiling global trade, the United States would normally consider options such as:
1. Work with traditional allies like NATO to provide security
2. Try to work with the United Nations to assemble some sort of international coalition
3. Go it alone as the world's sole superpower
But if you start thinking about who really could be the most impacted by the threat of piracy and who can actually do something about, maybe it would be better if the United States looked to China and India instead. The two emerging Asian economic powers require a lot of imported materials and exported goods to keep their economies humming. They should have as much interest as we do in seeing that the threat from Somali pirates is eliminated.
Given their location and the fact that they have the world's fifth largest navy, it seems like the Indians could definitely make a meaningful contribution. And they already have been involved in anti-piracy operations off Somalia. The Chinese Navy has also been escorting Chinese ships in the Gulf of Aden and could bring additional resources to bear. More importantly, they might be willing to pony up some dough to help an expanded multinational force provide security to patrol the shipping lanes.
To throw Europe a bone and recognize their place in history, we could also add the Royal Navy to the mix. Then we would have a scenario where American forces were working alongside forces from their oldest ally Great Britain, their most recent emerging ally India, and their current rival but possible future ally China. It's definitely an interesting exercise in unlimited strategic thinking.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Been There
A brief excerpt that appeared in the opinion pages of today's Wall Street Journal:
Doris Kearns Goodwin on Lyndon Baines Johnson and the Great Society, in "Lyndon Johnson and the American Dream":
In his determination to get Congress and America moving again, Johnson demanded support for the Great Society and confidence in the capacity of government to improve all the conditions of society as matters of faith. . . . The intensity of his own belief strengthened his formidable persuasive powers. . . . In so expansive an era, filled with such benevolent intentions, the boundaries between fact and fiction, between the present and the future, no longer held. . . .
And so it went in message after message. The subjects might change, but the essentials remained the same: in the opening, an expression of dire need; in the middle, a vague proposal; in the end, a buoyant description of the anticipated results -- all contained in an analysis presented in a manner that often failed to distinguish between expectations and established realities. . . .
[T]he need for haste often resulted in a failure to define the precise nature and requirements of social objectives. Legislative solutions were often devised and rushed into law before the problems were understood . . . Pass the bill now, worry about its effects and implementation later -- this was the White House strategy.
Sound familiar?
Doris Kearns Goodwin on Lyndon Baines Johnson and the Great Society, in "Lyndon Johnson and the American Dream":
In his determination to get Congress and America moving again, Johnson demanded support for the Great Society and confidence in the capacity of government to improve all the conditions of society as matters of faith. . . . The intensity of his own belief strengthened his formidable persuasive powers. . . . In so expansive an era, filled with such benevolent intentions, the boundaries between fact and fiction, between the present and the future, no longer held. . . .
And so it went in message after message. The subjects might change, but the essentials remained the same: in the opening, an expression of dire need; in the middle, a vague proposal; in the end, a buoyant description of the anticipated results -- all contained in an analysis presented in a manner that often failed to distinguish between expectations and established realities. . . .
[T]he need for haste often resulted in a failure to define the precise nature and requirements of social objectives. Legislative solutions were often devised and rushed into law before the problems were understood . . . Pass the bill now, worry about its effects and implementation later -- this was the White House strategy.
Sound familiar?
Friday, April 10, 2009
Cheese Tonight
My wife just e-mailed to report our eldest son's (he turns four in July) most recent reworking of songs.
To the tune of "Mary Had a Little Lamb":
Mary has a minivan, minivan, minivan
Mary has a minivan
Jesus lets us go
And to the tune of MLK by U2:
Cheese, cheese tonight and...(I couldn't understand the rest)
To the tune of "Mary Had a Little Lamb":
Mary has a minivan, minivan, minivan
Mary has a minivan
Jesus lets us go
And to the tune of MLK by U2:
Cheese, cheese tonight and...(I couldn't understand the rest)
Truth In Beer
Paul e-mail to note that next Thursday there will be a live nationwide simulcast screening of the documentary Beer Wars:
Director Anat Baron takes you on a no holds barred exploration of the U.S. beer industry that ultimately reveals the truth behind the label of your favorite beer. Told from an insider's perspective, the film goes behind the scenes of the daily battles and all out wars that dominate one of America's favorite industries.
More on the screening for Beer Wars:
Fathom and Ducks In A Row Entertainment present Beer Wars LIVE with Ben Stein, a one night event taking you inside the boardrooms and back rooms of the American beer industry. The event will feature the exclusive never-before-seen documentary Beer Wars, followed by a riveting live discussion led by Ben Stein with America's leading independent brewers and experts.
Playing in movie theaters nationwide on Thursday, April 16th at 8pm ET / 7pm CT / 6pm MT / 8pm PT (tape delay), beer industry insiders will take you behind-the-scenes of their quest for the American Dream. Don't miss out on this entertaining journey that will reveal the truth behind the label of your favorite beer!
Beer and Ben Stein? How can you not like that?
Here's a handy list of where you can catch the screening at a theater near you.
Director Anat Baron takes you on a no holds barred exploration of the U.S. beer industry that ultimately reveals the truth behind the label of your favorite beer. Told from an insider's perspective, the film goes behind the scenes of the daily battles and all out wars that dominate one of America's favorite industries.
More on the screening for Beer Wars:
Fathom and Ducks In A Row Entertainment present Beer Wars LIVE with Ben Stein, a one night event taking you inside the boardrooms and back rooms of the American beer industry. The event will feature the exclusive never-before-seen documentary Beer Wars, followed by a riveting live discussion led by Ben Stein with America's leading independent brewers and experts.
Playing in movie theaters nationwide on Thursday, April 16th at 8pm ET / 7pm CT / 6pm MT / 8pm PT (tape delay), beer industry insiders will take you behind-the-scenes of their quest for the American Dream. Don't miss out on this entertaining journey that will reveal the truth behind the label of your favorite beer!
Beer and Ben Stein? How can you not like that?
Here's a handy list of where you can catch the screening at a theater near you.
Beer Of The Week (Vol III)
Volume Three in the recently expanded beer tasting series. Once again, today's post is made possible by the fine folks at Glen Lake Wine and Spirits. That establishment has generously agreed to provide beer for weekly reviews and every brew featured here is available at Glen Lake Wine and Spirits. These reviews will be an expansion of the beer rating that I've been doing for years and will be more in-depth look at particular beers using the same rating criteria. And in addition to the just the beer itself, I'll be examining the whole aesthetic package; the bottle, the label, the name.
Before we begin, let me state for the record that I am not a big fan of Belgian beers. I've had some very good brews from Belgium when I've been in the Netherlands, but, with a few notable exception, most of my experiences with American breweries and Belgian style beers have not been overly pleasurable There's just something about the overriding taste that isn't my cup of tea.
So you can take my review of New Belgium Brewing's Trippel Belgian Style Ale with an appropriate grain of malt. Despite the name, my previous tastings of beers from New Belgium have been positive. While I've yet to personal rate their ubiquitous (and generally overrated) Fat Tire, I have enjoyed their Mothership Wit and Springboard Ale (which I believe is no longer available) offerings.
Their Trippel comes in a brown bottle with a decorative, attractive label that's become familiar with all New Belgium brands.
COLOR (0-2): Light and clear. 1
AROMA (0-2): Nice fruity punch. 2
HEAD (0-2): Good foam. 2
TASTE (0-5): Has a biting, almost sour flavor that I just don't appreciate. 2
AFTERTASTE (0-2): Decent. 1
OVERALL (0-6): Looks good, but like other Belgians this does not tickle my taste buds at all. 3
TOTAL SCORE (0-19): 11
Next up is Kingfisher Premium Lager. Kingfisher is the number one selling Indian beer in the world. In the United States, it's brewed and bottled in Saratoga Springs, New York by Olde Saratoga Brewing Company.
I haven't had much of a chance to enjoy Indian beers in the past. The only one that comes to mind is Taj Mahal Premium Lager, which I've had at restaurants a couple of times. Kingfisher thus becomes the first Indian beer to be added to the ratings list.
The bottle is green with a bright, colorful label featuring the namesake bird. It's got a classy, put together look.
COLOR (0-2): Light and a bit cloudy. 1
AROMA (0-2): Lacks depth. 1
HEAD (0-2): Not enough volume. 1
TASTE (0-5): Decent flavor, very similar to other Asian lagers. 3
AFTERTASTE (0-2): Gone in a wisp. 0
OVERALL (0-6): For a simple lager, this is pretty good. I can see why it would be appealing to knock a few back on a sweltering day in Mumbai or Minneapolis for that matter. 3
TOTAL SCORE (0-19): 9
If you gave up beer for Lent this year (something everyone should do once), I wouldn't recommend either of this week's beers for your Easter Day celebration. After forty days and forty nights without, you want to break your fast with a top notch brew not a middle of the road offering.
Before we begin, let me state for the record that I am not a big fan of Belgian beers. I've had some very good brews from Belgium when I've been in the Netherlands, but, with a few notable exception, most of my experiences with American breweries and Belgian style beers have not been overly pleasurable There's just something about the overriding taste that isn't my cup of tea.
So you can take my review of New Belgium Brewing's Trippel Belgian Style Ale with an appropriate grain of malt. Despite the name, my previous tastings of beers from New Belgium have been positive. While I've yet to personal rate their ubiquitous (and generally overrated) Fat Tire, I have enjoyed their Mothership Wit and Springboard Ale (which I believe is no longer available) offerings.
Their Trippel comes in a brown bottle with a decorative, attractive label that's become familiar with all New Belgium brands.
COLOR (0-2): Light and clear. 1
AROMA (0-2): Nice fruity punch. 2
HEAD (0-2): Good foam. 2
TASTE (0-5): Has a biting, almost sour flavor that I just don't appreciate. 2
AFTERTASTE (0-2): Decent. 1
OVERALL (0-6): Looks good, but like other Belgians this does not tickle my taste buds at all. 3
TOTAL SCORE (0-19): 11
Next up is Kingfisher Premium Lager. Kingfisher is the number one selling Indian beer in the world. In the United States, it's brewed and bottled in Saratoga Springs, New York by Olde Saratoga Brewing Company.
I haven't had much of a chance to enjoy Indian beers in the past. The only one that comes to mind is Taj Mahal Premium Lager, which I've had at restaurants a couple of times. Kingfisher thus becomes the first Indian beer to be added to the ratings list.
The bottle is green with a bright, colorful label featuring the namesake bird. It's got a classy, put together look.
COLOR (0-2): Light and a bit cloudy. 1
AROMA (0-2): Lacks depth. 1
HEAD (0-2): Not enough volume. 1
TASTE (0-5): Decent flavor, very similar to other Asian lagers. 3
AFTERTASTE (0-2): Gone in a wisp. 0
OVERALL (0-6): For a simple lager, this is pretty good. I can see why it would be appealing to knock a few back on a sweltering day in Mumbai or Minneapolis for that matter. 3
TOTAL SCORE (0-19): 9
If you gave up beer for Lent this year (something everyone should do once), I wouldn't recommend either of this week's beers for your Easter Day celebration. After forty days and forty nights without, you want to break your fast with a top notch brew not a middle of the road offering.
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Small Comfort
Sometimes all you can do is laugh. Like when you read this story, headlined "Secret to marital bliss? Don't Have Kids":
Parents all know that children make it harder to do some of the most enjoyable adult things. Bluntly put, kids can get between you.
Now scientists have attached some numbers to the situation.
An eight-year study of 218 couples found 90 percent experienced a decrease in marital satisfaction once the first child was born.
"Couples who do not have children also show diminished marital quality over time," says Scott Stanley, research professor of psychology at University of Denver. "However, having a baby accelerates the deterioration, especially seen during periods of adjustment right after the birth of a child."
This really isn't news as past studies have also shown a diminished marital satisfaction levels among couples who have kids. However, it seems like a quite a leap to go from that to concluding that being childless is the key to marital bliss as the headline implies.
The story did provide some solace to those of us who have elected to help keep this civilization thing going:
Children don't ruin everything, Stanley points out.
Whew. It's good to know that there are actually some--very few I imagine--positive things about having children.
At First Things, Ryan Sayre Patrico agrees that having a baby "accelerates the deterioration" of "marital quality over time":
Sure. If by "marital quality" one means selfishness, self-centeredness, or egoism.
Just the other day, our priest remarked that he believed that those who chose not have children were often incapable of ever fully maturing as adults. It might come as a surprise to some people--like the MSNBC headline writer--to learn that bliss and personal satisfaction are not the most important things in life.
Parents all know that children make it harder to do some of the most enjoyable adult things. Bluntly put, kids can get between you.
Now scientists have attached some numbers to the situation.
An eight-year study of 218 couples found 90 percent experienced a decrease in marital satisfaction once the first child was born.
"Couples who do not have children also show diminished marital quality over time," says Scott Stanley, research professor of psychology at University of Denver. "However, having a baby accelerates the deterioration, especially seen during periods of adjustment right after the birth of a child."
This really isn't news as past studies have also shown a diminished marital satisfaction levels among couples who have kids. However, it seems like a quite a leap to go from that to concluding that being childless is the key to marital bliss as the headline implies.
The story did provide some solace to those of us who have elected to help keep this civilization thing going:
Children don't ruin everything, Stanley points out.
Whew. It's good to know that there are actually some--very few I imagine--positive things about having children.
At First Things, Ryan Sayre Patrico agrees that having a baby "accelerates the deterioration" of "marital quality over time":
Sure. If by "marital quality" one means selfishness, self-centeredness, or egoism.
Just the other day, our priest remarked that he believed that those who chose not have children were often incapable of ever fully maturing as adults. It might come as a surprise to some people--like the MSNBC headline writer--to learn that bliss and personal satisfaction are not the most important things in life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)