Take Time for Living

Anyone out there really LIKE their utility company? Can’t blame guy for check

Perhaps you’ve already read or heard the story of the guy in New York state who was angry over a disputed water bill? He finally agreed to pay it and offered payment with a check written on 2-ply toilet paper. But city officials refused to accept his $2,509.66 check and had him escorted out of the building. He’s disputing their refusal in small claims court.

I’ll let you read the details. But I can’t help but notice this: Very, very few people really LIKE their utility company, whether it’s a private company or a municipally owned company (like where I live).

In my case, we recently got a natural gas rate hike — based partially on a decline in usage because of good customer conservation habits. Yes, that’s right. Our City Utilities people actually 1) commended our efforts to conserve natural gas usage, and, 2) in the same press conference announced they would have to raise rates for natural gas based partially on less usage.

Now explain that one to me: “Congratulations, good customers, you’re cutting back on natural gas usage and your conservation efforts are succeeding. We are happy to announce that as a reward, we’re going to raise your rates.”

(No, they didn’t issue that statement; that was my paraphrase or interpretation of their message.)

Ah, well. I see I already mentioned my particular city’s situation in an earlier post a couple of weeks ago, so forgive me my rant.

But I would be very interested in hearing something POSITIVE from those of you out there who have had good experiences to share and feel really good about your utility company and/or utility bills. Anyone care to comment? Anyone??

I didn’t really think so. LOL!

Technorati Tags: toilet paper check, utility bills, take time for living

Old airplanes never die, they just — what? Fall out of the air??

The older I get the more aware I become of this one reality: Everyone and everything starts to “run down” or wear out. I think Sir Isaac Newton formulated a law of physics to that effect. (Anyone out there remember the specifics about that? I never did well in science classes.)

So why should the nation’s fleet of commercial aircraft be any different? (I won’t even get into discussing military aircraft here.)

The fact is, according to the airline people, older planes aren’t less safe. They simply require much more time and effort to keep them flying well and flying safely. I suppose I’ll accept that explanation for the recent canceled flights by Delta and American Airlines. They were simply trying to make absolutely sure their aircraft were running properly. As one of their spokespeople put it in a story I read online a few minutes ago:

“This isn’t a safety issue .. But reliability is becoming a concern due to the age of the fleet.”

Okay, I don’t want to sound alarmist here, or to be negative in my thinking in any way — but is “reliability” very closely linked to “safety” when we’re talking about airliners?? I find it hard to imagine getting on a commercial flight and finding out that the pilot, onboard crew, and groundcrew are “pretty sure” or “almost certain” it will “sort of fly right” to get me where I’m going.

That wouldn’t equal my feelings if I were to hear the brain surgeon say, “Oops!,” but it would be very similar.

What are the answers to this dilemma? I don’t know. I’m sure the airlines aren’t making bundles of money, given the costs of fuel, wages, and all the rest. I would hope they’re making enough to replace an aging fleet before flying planes that “probably will get you there,” wouldn’t you??

Technorati Tags: aging airliners, airline performance, airline safety, take time for living

Anyone want to join my ‘anti-politician presidential crusade’?

I mentioned in one of my other blogs that I have really lost all patience with mainstream politicians. In fact, in that blog post I said I probably will vote for Ralph Nader or even not vote at all in the upcoming presidential election.

As I pointed out there, I’m a faithful voter. I have voted in every presidential election since 1968, when I first became legally able to vote. (Don’t guess. Don’t worry about doing the math. I’ll tell you straight out — I’m 60 years old. LOL!) I have literally voted in all but four very insignificant local elections since I moved to our present city in 1978.

So, please, no lectures about the importance of voting. Also, I was among those who whined that Al Gore lost the 2000 election because Ralph Nader drained off Gore’s votes in Florida. I have since thought about Nader’s comments on that issue: 1) if Gore had carried his home state of Tennessee in 2000, Florida never would have been an issue, and, 2) in America no votes “belong” to any candidate. We’re free to vote as we choose.

But what I clearly have decided is this: EVERY politician who truly believes he/she is capable of winning a given election will ALWAYS say and do exactly what they believe voters want them to say and do to get elected. And when we’re talking about something as high-level and coveted as the presidency of the United States — you can just about triple the likelihood of that being true.

Now you know if you didn’t before — I’m almost a total cynic about American politics and politicians.

So what’s the answer? I don’t have an answer. I suppose we can only try to see what a politician has done/is doing rather than just “saying” and vote the best we can based on actual record rather than rhetoric.

But as for me — I really do think I’ll vote for Nader from principle or simply not vote at all. For a huge number of reasons based on what I believe their actions and rhetoric have shown me, I cannot in good conscience support McCain, Clinton, or Obama, really.

Technorati Tags: presidential politics, political cynicism, take time for living