By: Don Caldwell
How important are “Holidays”?
Numerous companies are expanding their shopping hours closer and closer into “Holiday” territory. No longer is it just “Black Friday”, but now even runs into Thanksgiving itself….
Excerpts italicized:
For Anthony Hardwick, Thanksgiving has special meaning. Last year, he proposed to his girlfriend, Denise, in front of her whole family during the holiday.
This year though, he will be working. A part-time employee at Target in Omaha, Neb., Hardwick said his manager requested he start his shift at 11 p.m. In order to make it through the night, he'll need to sleep on Thanksgiving Day.
This year marks Target'searliest opening ever. Target, Best Buy, Macy's and Kohl's are all opening at midnight on Thanksgiving eve. Wal-Mart recently announced plans to open its doors to the public at 10 p.m. then Toys R Us followed suit, announcing it would open most stores as early as 9 p.m. the day before Black Friday.
"We have heard from our guests that they want to shop following their Thanksgiving celebrations rather than only having the option of getting up in the middle of the night," Target said in a statement. "Target will offer holiday pay to all hourly team members who work on Thanksgiving Day."
Thanksgiving Day openings have been a boon to retailers during the economic downturn. The number of people who shop on Thanksgiving -- both online and in stores -- rose to 22.3 million in 2010, about double the amount just five years earlier, according to the National Retail Federation.
Last year, the number of people who began their Black Friday shopping at midnight was triple the amount in 2009.
It is easy to blame the companies for their continual push to make profit, but we (consumers) are the ones who have drastically increased the amount of time and money spent on shopping on Thanksgiving.
We can give many reasons as to why some choose to shop on one of our most important holidays (good deals, the crowds, time away from the family..lol), but what does this say about the value of this “family” holiday to each of us? Can we cherish of “family” time and yet give shopping of most precious resource….our time?
What would it take for this to stop?
And once retailers firmly practice the habit of being open on thanksgiving, what will happen to that holiday?
Will Christmas be next???
What is a “Holiday”…to you?
(ORIGINAL LINK)
Black Friday backlash: Early openings a mixed blessing - Yahoo! Finance
By: Don Caldwell
Are children more of a blessing or a curse?
lol…and who would not want to sit next to the baby in the pic above?
Excerpts italicized:
Babies on airplanes. It's enough to make parents—and all the passengers around them—cry.
Parents are complaining of airline seating policies that create "baby ghettos" in the back of planes. Even worse, families are increasingly split up, leaving small children in middle seats in the company of strangers unless passengers arrange seat swaps on board.
Michael Lyon booked seats together for his family for a trip from Washington, D.C., to Bangkok on United Airlines in July and checked his reservation frequently to make sure the seat assignments didn't change. But when he checked in, all three had been split up, and his 6-year-old son was moved to the back of the wide-body plane by himself for the 13-hour trip.
Several factors are at play. First, many seats on flights are reserved for elite-level frequent fliers or full-fare business travelers. Routinely full flights have less seat-assignment flexibility. Also, airlines are increasingly selling choice seat assignments for extra fees, an expensive option for families. And bulkhead rows at the front of coach cabins that used to be ideal for traveling with infants, offering more privacy for diaper changes and more space for restless toddlers, now have to be reserved for passengers with disabilities. As a result, families often end up separated or at the back of the plane.
"I feel like it's discrimination against families. For us, it is not an option to not be by my 2-year-old," she said.
Adding to the complexity: Several airlines, including American and United, don't let travelers add children flying free on a parent's lap to reservations online. Instead, they must call the airline or get an airport agent to add a lap child to their reservation. Southwest Airlines requires taking a lap child to a ticket counter with a birth certificate on the day of travel to verify the child is younger than 2 years old.
"Sometimes other passengers are willing to help you out. But others look at you like you are the devil for bringing a child on an airplane," said Alecia Hoobing, who works for a technology company from her home in Boise, Idaho. The evil eyes are more acute when families upgrade to first class, she and Ms. Hull agree. Malaysia Airlines decided this year to ban babies from first-class cabins of its Boeing 747 jets and next year in its new Airbus A380 super-jumbos because of passenger complaints of crying children in the expensive seats.
Ms. Hoobing thinks the hardest part of travel with kids is boarding. Airlines typically no longer let families with small children board first on flights. Instead, they often come after first class and top-tier frequent fliers. Kids and parents—lugging car seats, diaper bags, videogames and toys—clog the aisles and delay general boarding. Though airlines provide leniency, such as exempting diaper bags for carry-on bag limits and waiving checked-baggage fees for car seats and strollers, they have tightened restrictions.
“Families often end up separated or at the back of the plane”.
Since when have families become the people for “the back of the plane”???
A couple of weeks ago I was shopping at a local Wal-Mart and at the checkout counter in the electronics section the cashier started conversing with me. Friendly chit-chat ensued as her kind demeanor encouraged my talkative nature.
During the conversation a couple of kids walked by playing and teasing each other. The woman then commented as to how glad she was that they were not her children and that she did not have to deal with that. Diplomatically, I stated something to the effect that “at least they were not screaming and yelling…which would be a lot worse”. I thought that in some small way I was trying to convince her that they were not being all that bad, but I was also sad that I didn’t say something as I had felt.
I was saddened by all of this. How could someone be so bothered by a couple of little kids just being little kids? How has society grown less tolerant of children with each generation?
I have previously written about this kind of kind of issue back in July: Restaurant to Bans Kids under 6. A Good Thing or Bad? (TheWell)
So many can easily say how children our most precious thing. Commonly used by commercials and politicians. Most would probably agree, but our actions regarding children (as compared to our words) have seemed to become less tolerant.
Why do children seem to bother us so?
And if we truly treasured children as much as we think we do, then why do we continue to have fewer and fewer children with each passing year?
….as a bonus….would sitting next to this bother you??
(ORIGINAL LINK)
Flying With Little Children? Go to the Back of the Plane - Yahoo! Finance
By: Don Caldwell
Is pregnancy that bad?
Excerpts italicized:
Pregnancy is a miraculous thing, but most moms would agree that the last month of it isn't a lot of fun.
You're uncomfortable, to say the least. You can't sleep, thanks to the tiny bundle of wonder practicing his or her best kicks at night. And then there's the heartburn, swelling, around-the-clock trips to the bathroom, and more.
Is it any wonder that so many women wish they could avoid as much of that last month as possible? Given that elective inductions and Cesarean sections have been on the rise for years, it seems as though many new moms are doing just that.
"I have seen women induced or have a scheduled C-section because they have family scheduled to be in town, because they want the baby to be born on an anniversary or someone else's birthday, because they want the baby born prior to Jan. 1 for tax purposes, or because they are simply sick and tired of being pregnant," Dr. Elaine St. John, associate professor of pediatrics in the Division of Neonatology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, told ABC News in 2009.
Cesarean sections account for 32 percent of all births in the United States, and is the most common operation performed in U.S. hospitals. According to the National Institutes of Health, a "normal" pregnancy can last from 38 to 42 weeks, but recent studies confirm that babies born before 39 weeks gestation haves an increased risk for a host of medical problems, including breathing issues, hypoglycemia, infection, developmental delays, feeding complications, and jaundice
First of all, I am a man….not a woman…so anything I say needs to be taken in that context. (I would also like to avoid the obvious “you are not a woman” comments ...lol). I cannot comment, with any authority, as to what pregnancy is like. But I would imagine it to be a uniquely beautiful time between mother and child. One that should be appreciated….
The Article highlights how many hospitals are trying to buck the trend of C-Sections for various reasons, but I think the bigger story is how C-Sections have become so common place.
Why has a potentially dangerous surgery become so common in light of the potential dangers to both mother and child (granted labor and delivery are not without its own dangers.)? Has this need for convenience taken precedence over the wellbeing of the child itself? If so, what does that say about that relationship?
If love could be defined as caring about another more than your own self, then could this really be based on true love of a child? Or are we as a society moving towards “shades of love” while gradually putting ourselves first and foremost?
What does a baby mean to you?
(ORIGINAL LINK)
More Hospitals Banning Elective C Sections | Parenting - Yahoo! Shine
By: Don Caldwell
How much is your life worth?
Excerpts italicized:
Orthopedic surgeons have received hundreds of millions of dollars from joint implant manufacturers in recent years, according to a recent report.
In 2007, five device makers said they had paid surgeons more than $198 million, with 43 payments exceeding $1 million.
While the number of payments appears to have dropped since 2007, the average dollar amount has gone up, based on data from the three manufacturers that disclosed physician payments made in the last several years.
Those financial ties represent anything from consulting fees to royalties to research support. Some argue they are necessary to drive medical innovations, but others fear they could end up harming patients as well.
Doctors getting industry money could be quicker to use implants from the companies paying them, for instance, or downplay the side effects of those products in their research.
The new results come as the U.S. Senate investigates whether surgeons paid by Medtronic, a medical device maker not included in the current study, failed to report sterility and other complications stemming from the company's bone-growth implant Infuse.
We all can reason our way through almost anything given the proper desire / motivation, but can we also recognize how our perceptions can be biased due to personal gain?
The financial incentives surrounding the decisions our healthcare providers make at best cloud their decision making abilities. Giving our doctors the benefit of the doubt and assuming that most are unaffected by this, we must recognize that a sizable minority have their decisions influenced by these financial incentives.
It can be difficult to take a side in this issue, but I imagine no one would want to be on the receiving end of decision clouded by this….
Should Your Treatment Be Dictated By How much money you will make your Doctor?
(ORIGINAL LINK)
Million-Dollar Payments To Surgeons Raise Questions | Fox News
By: Don Caldwell
How much should US citizenship cost?
Excerpts italicized:
The reeling housing market has come to this: To shore it up, two Senators are preparing to introduce a bipartisan bill Thursday that would give residence visas to foreigners who spend at least $500,000 to buy houses in the U.S.
The provision is part of a larger package of immigration measures, co-authored by Sens. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.) and Mike Lee (R., Utah), designed to spur more foreign investment in the U.S.
Foreigners have accounted for a growing share of home purchases in South Florida, Southern California, Arizona and other hard-hit markets. Chinese and Canadian buyers, among others, are taking advantage not only of big declines in U.S. home prices and reduced competition from Americans but also of favorable foreign exchange rates.
To fuel this demand, the proposed measure would offer visas to any foreigner making cash investment of at least $500,000 on residential real-estate
The measure would complement existing visa programs that allow foreigners to enter the U.S. if they invest in new businesses that create jobs
This bill (with support from both parties) highlights (perhaps) how cheap we have turned the process of citizenship into.
Should citizenship be made available with those who have more money ahead of those who do not? An ordinary foreigner must go thought a long and perhaps expensive lottery process of trying to become a citizen of the United States. What does it say about a government who hands out visas to the highest bidder? Is it any worse if an immigration official helps someone get citizenship if they get an “under the table” bribe? Is such a practice less immoral if it becomes the policy of a nation?
Granted, the intent of this program is to spur the American economy, but isn’t it always? Are there not similarities between this and “grease payments” (aka bribes)?
Would it be okay for the United States to accept bribes?
Can we really call this the land of opportunity or the land of the connected?
(ORIGINAL LINK)
Bill Would Give U.S. Visas to Foreign Home Buyers - WSJ.com
