Devil and the Deep Blue Sea

I am incredibly frustrated by practically everyone's response to the pandemic.

Even places with previous existing mask mandates- including here! - largely failed to enforce them.  Now that it's nothing more than a weakly worded suggestion, you can bet your bottom dollar that the unmasked are, disproportionately, also the unvaccinated.

The right wing response?  No more masks ever! The left wing response?  You, personally, should wear a mask everywhere indoors forever, or else you're a bad person!

Is there, perhaps, a response that is not both stupid and ineffective?  Immune compromised people remain at high risk. Great!  Maybe some entity- and I'm just spitballing here, but perhaps the federal government might be in charge of this here thing? - could make sure they're provided with adequate and effective medication options?  They could use their emergency powers to do something... effective?

Nah, just kidding!  You should wear a mask or you're a bad person!  Who cares that 98% of the other people at the hardware store aren't wearing one?  You, personally, will increase others' risk by an insignificant amount (compared to what's already going on), so you, personally, are responsible for mitigating this huge societal and governmental failure!  Nobody's going to do anything to mitigate the risk for the highest-risk people; nobody's going to increase hospital staffing or make high-quality masks actually widely available or send out enough rapid tests to make one iota of difference (although looking at UK data one might reasonably wonder how much that helped).  

Right now, I get a covid-cases notice from our schools every single day.  Usually it's about 2.5% of the total students per week. The best that can be said for requiring masks in schools - which is no longer permitted here! - is that it could be worse, but it's already pretty bad.  And don't even get me started on 'mask breaks' and the ineffective wearing of masks.  (To be fair, our district did also do a lot with air quality and filtering.) 

I'm not saying, don't wear a mask to protect yourself.  Do whatever suits you best!  I am saying, this is ineffective health policy, it has done nothing to prevent an actual million deaths, and it will continue to do nothing to prevent more deaths, because the overall risk from leaving your house is so high that reducing exposure by the 2% of people actually wearing masks is stupid and ineffective.  

I think that most people are unwilling to maintain the level of precautions that would be necessary to never get covid.  (If you are, good for you.) I'm not going to call specific people out, but think of everyone you personally know who was 'just so careful' and got covid anyways at some point.  I think that if, on the whole, our society is not willing to do anything effective at a level which would be effective, why are we still pretending that individual masking at the grocery is what's going to turn the tide?  I think I want interventions to be either effective and intrusive, or neither.  I think my university 'requiring' masks of everyone is working really great as I walk by ten undergrads sitting in the hallway pretending to drink coffee.  I think this is all stupid and I would like to get off this ride, and possibly move to a desert island.

Honesty

Recently an acquaintance posted a referral credit deal - and didn't mention that she would benefit.  Annoying!  Disingenuous!  Also pretty close to dishonest. 

My friend C, whose spouse got kicked out of grad school, hid their savings so they would qualify for public assistance and Medicaid for the children.  (The university offers excellent, affordable health insurance for students' families.)  Leaving aside how advisable it is to take Medicaid when you have other options (hint: NOT AT ALL) -I'm still unclear on why any of this seemed like a good idea.

I bet neither of these people would lie or steal to someone's face.  I'm not sure why they think it's better to hide the truth about money, rather than flat out lying.  I'm especially not sure why they think that 'sneaky dishonesty is ethically acceptable as long as nobody catches you' is a good lesson to teach their children.

In Which I Wish To Exchange The Spouse

My dear spouse is, as I've mentioned, interviewing for academic jobs. Personally, I think it's all a giant Ponzi scheme, liable to collapse at any moment amidst cries of woe, but who asked me?

Anyhow.  Despite the fact that we both have fancy PhDs, marketable skills in biology, marketable skills outside biology, and the collective willpower of a bulldozer, he is becoming panicky. 

Before he started turning in applications, we discussed the terms of our Marital Agreement Re: Where We Go Next: near my family, no temporary or visiting positions, if no TT job this year, then end of game, thank you for playing.

Do you know where he's flying this Sunday?  To interview for a one-year visiting position, on the off chance that a) he will receive no other job offers; b) this job might have some miniscule chance of a permanent hire; c) I will not then murder him for being gone all but 56 hours of the next two weeks; d) my response to having to move twice in two years will not be divorce.

Sadly, I am reliably informed that he is out of warranty.

In Which I Complain About My In-Laws

My in-laws are retired with no pets, small children, or elderly persons for whom they are responsible. My FIL is mild and inoffensive but does not prevent the Crazy.  My MIL has spent her entire life in two small towns as a teacher, but cannot admit that Dr. S or I know anything, or have had any different experiences.  (Her: "All employers are like that about parental leave."  Dr. S:  "One, you quit your job when I was born, and two, J's [large, industry] employer emailed her once while on leave, to ask what day she'd be back.")

Anyhow.

At first they said they wouldn't visit when Little Bit was born.  In October.  You know, because it might snow.  (Unlike in OHIO where it never snows, or RURAL WEST VIRGINIA, where they were last week.)  Okay, fine, whatever.

Then they called on Wednesday and said "Hey, we're coming on Friday!"  And I had a fit.  One, my mom, who is not retired, had arranged, four months in advance, to take three weeks of vacation and come.  Two, Friday was his bris.  Three, two days' notice???

Dr. S said "Er... another day?"  Friday, they said. "Monday?"  Friday.  I had another fit and said, any day but Friday, or a divorce, darling.  He called them back and said, "I'll be on leave starting Tuesday!  How about you come then?"  A doctor's appointment, they said.  (This could have been prevented by planning in advance, I said.)  "After that!"  It might snow, they said.  So they're not coming.  And we are not going there (twelve hours in a car with two small children; think Sartre).  And it's just sad. 

They're like two-year-olds: if thwarted, they must throw a tantrum.  Their way or not at all.  But we're adults, it's our family, and they can live with it or... live with it.

P.S.  It still has not snowed here.

Crankiness of Trouserage

Our household is suffering from an excess of cranky, cranky pants.

Dr. S is cranky because his boss is a manipulative, petty tyrant; because he is going to a meeting he does not want to attend ("Why did you agree to go?" I asked); because the academic job market sucks and is depressing; and because someone keeps scheduling consecutive 36-hour runs on the MS. Which is a jerk thing to do.

Bug is cranky because he is two. Every time I tell him no, he makes a noise like a fire siren. Yesterday he drove his toy bus into the street, and then screamed his head off when I removed him. Sometimes he is cranky because the sun is shining.

I am cranky because I fucking hate being pregnant. No matter how grateful one is for the child, please don't try to tell me (MOTHER-IN-LAW) that it's then required to love being nauseous, hypoglycemic, exhausted, hormonal, and sleepless. And in constant pain. Also I am cranky because I am about to have a week all alone with my surly toddler. If I had any money, I'd go visit someone. But I don't, so I'm screwed. And, did I mention, CRANKY?

Added Functionality

Dear Universe,

Kindly direct your programmers to add the following features to:

1) Facebook: Ability to filter out everything my sister types that involves the words "Israel", "Holy Land", or "American Jews".

2) Phone: Ability to tune out and hear bad elevator music when talking to my sister (see above) yet still be presented with a choice of appropriate replies ("Really?", "Oh", "I see").

3) Life: Ability to not be annoyed by sister's a) constant, unquestioning, blind devotion to Israel's divine right to do whatever it wants, regardless of legality, morality, or international treaty; b) belief that anyone who questions Israel hates Jews and therefore wants her babies to die in terrorist attacks; c) perpetual view that all my problems in life would be ALL BETTER if only I would move to Israel. Because nothing is ever wrong there! And America sucks! (Literally: Over my dead body.)

Seriously, sometimes... actually, every time I talk to her, I want to never talk to her again.

I Have Five Minutes For My Righteous Indignation

1) All those rat weasel Republicans (also, Rat Weasel Lieberman) who keep harping on about how Obama's saddling the country with debt. Where were they when Bush was selling our children's futures for his dirty little fought-with-mercenaries armed conflict on two fronts? How about for an encore we invade Russia in the winter?

2) WARS are declared by Congress. See also: Constitution.

3) Heard a piece on NPR today about median-income families in America. Story about a family (mom, two kids) who make about the median. They are "struggling to get by" and can "barely make it". We make a great deal less and (though we are insanely frugal) have a comfortable surplus. Where the hell are they spending all their money? Cellphone bills? Car insurance? I am honestly curious. Surely there is more to the story.

To clarify: This family makes 110% of what we do, and lives in the semi-rural Northeast. The cost of living there is about 20% higher than here. Approximately 36% of our income goes to savings each month. So... their money is going somewhere other than cost-of-living.

I calculated it and if I scale up our expenses 20%, these people could theoretically have somewhere between $400 and $900 per month left over (depending how frugal they are), assuming a 25% tax rate. This is why I wonder.