.
.
I figured it out. Beyond a couple of things that did strike me as, well, striking, what lead me to feel the need to rant was a memory. Well, memories to be precise. The last woman with whom I flirted with regarding marriage was a woman who held many contrary to logic (and each other) ideas. When I read "there", I saw her if in her more idealized place in life (a place she never attained). She had once had a husband who could have lead her to that place, but she could not handle that whole family thing, so she deserted a son and husband. I was probably the next closest she came to seeing the dreams of home ownership and some financial security fulfilled. She seemed to have no way of getting there herself and she seemed to destroy what chances she had at such for passion(s). The need for drama, the disbelief in men and economic realities, and such.
We did, of course, disagree on everything from politics to religion to science. And, actually, that is not as bad as some might think. In truth, it matters not a whit between a man and a woman. It does add to passion, and kissing and making up. Only if one wishes to cause a problem is it a problem. Or, that was my take on it. I think her take was similar, if she could not quite admit it.
In any case, once in a while she would simply ask me to explain myself, if I could, regarding some topic she either disagreed with me regarding or something she did not understand. I am sure she was comparing what I said with the likes of Ayres or his kindred, or some feminist or other. She read that crap all the time. So, I would take her up on her offer. I knew where and how it would end, but that was not the point. To get a little correct brain stimulation going is never a bad thing. And, I would add that I am not a professional talker, thinker, or such, but that I would give it a go. Here is one such conversation, give or take.
After a few weeks of particular drama, based on our disagreements, and then a week of relative peace and quiet, my lady friend (then fiancee) came to me on a slow day and started with the small talk. This is not her forte so I knew something was up. Rather than spoil it though, I just let her go. So, she asked me to explain why I believe the way I do regarding work, pay, business, and such. A golden opportunity! I am glad I was not in a foul mood that day, though I usually am not (within certain strictures). So, I agreed.
I discussed some of her beliefs, and asked if I had them correct before starting, so that I would be discussing only what is necessary. I asked if she believed we should (all) get about the same pay. The same for tilers, roofers, secretaries, bosses... everyone. And she pretty much agreed with that (though I could see she was already uncomfortable at the way I had expressed it). I then asked if she believed the government should control this, making sure everyone got so much and no more, eliminating overtime and moonlighting. She thought this might be a good way to go. Even the unemployable, the ill, everybody? Yes she thought.
Okay, that should be enough for the moment I suggested, so I began. I asked her who would pay for this. She said, well the rich. And I said, there will be no more rich people. Oh, well then everyone will share a little bit of what they get or the government will just keep some of what they make before payroll. Ah, I said. How, precisely, will the government make the money? Will they simply print it or will they take over manufacturing? A little of both she thought.
I asked her if she understood what making or producing something of value, with or even often without increasing the reason for the value does to it's worth? She did not understand. So, I said, if your pay does not increase and yet you write checks for more money, what will happen? Ah, well, I will go broke, probably get an overdraft. Correct, now you have it. So I asked her what the difference between her and the government was? I left that there.
I then went on to manufacturing. I asked her if she thought opening a plant and making things people want or need is risky, for rich people. She was not really sure. So I said, how many people around here have enough money to open a manufacturing plant? She thought a bit and said, probably more than a few. I then asked her why she thought they would not do so, then, if it was so easy to make money at it? Perhaps, she thought, it might carry some risk. Some I asked? Well, maybe a lot. So, just for a thinking point, of all the manufacturers and other companies that start up, there is probably a lot of loss, right? So, would they not need to recoup some of their losses in one plant at the gains of another? Yes, she thought, but not with the government as they would not be cost biased.
I asked her if she understood what she just said? Of course she said. I asked her if she understood that the lack of cost or price control was a two edged sword, that it cut both ways? What do you mean, she said? I mean, without cost constraints, how much they receive for their goods is not important to them, so things like quality control usually slip or simply fail (undercutting the need for the plant in the first place often, then requiring a mandate for people to buy the goods (either by offering no choice or by law)), next there is no need to run the plant efficiently, so costs such as energy, labor, and such get all out of whack. The former U.S.S.R., for example, were so out of whack with these things that their products were terrible, their workers lived on pennies, and they truly destroyed their environments. With the government as the owner, as well, there was no one to go after them.
At this point, she said, it all sounds like excuses and worst case scenarios. I do not think you are being fair. It is too logical and misses the point of the poor, underprivileged, and lacks heart. She did not want to talk about it anymore. I simply suggested that having heart is good, but it does not put food on anybodies table if they do not do the hard work that goes with it. That life itself is not fair, nor would I necessarily want it to be (who would want to wake up a rabbit tomorrow?). And that without thinking through things, one should not then pronounce judgment on those who are succeeding. That ended the conversation. That was one of the few that lasted any length of time, and ended without her screaming or denying she said what she said that started the whole thing (like once when she said there is no difference between right and wrong).
Still, with no yelling and screaming, sex was only so-so that night. (Hey, this was before I became an actual practicing Christian. I have been contrite sincerely, confessed my sins, and done what I could to not repeat out-of-wedlock affairs (successfully if painfully I might add), so hush it. Oh, and it is the truth.
Yep, it was through the touching of these memories through that blog that I felt the need to rant. Some women give me the heebee rant jeebees. I was pleased to have connected my dots as quickly as I did. That and not ranting at her, or on her blog. I do not know her well enough, or know if it was just an incidental similarity having no real basis in reality. But either way, it is my thing, I will tend it here.
Now have a great day!