Straws

It looks like a border wall has become more of a symbolic issue than a real issue.

It is clear to almost everyone that it will have little or no impact on the so called issues brought up about the border.

It may deter some casual crossers, if any exist, but you have to remember that the border is already protected by natural barriers that aren't crossed casually now.

It is such a long border that the people, the coyotes, who currently arrange crossings and profit handsomely will find ways under or over it for profit.

It will not deter terrorists or drug traffickers who already use other mean to enter the country.

Still it has become a rallying cry for people even as it has no real value.

It is likely to stay with us until the current occupant of the white house is replaced

Its easier than espousing real solutions that are probably too complex for many.

It may or may not inspire certain anti-immigration groups to get out and vote.

It may not work.

Its simply one of the straws they are grasping.

Is it working?

When the Democrats won control of the House, many people thought this is going to make congress even more dysfunctional. 

It would make sense, one party controlling the House, the Senate and the Presidency, versus two.

However early results indicate mote seems to be getting done rather than less.

Yes we did have a long Government shutdown, but the agreement was actually negotiated in the time allotted and we are likely to avoid another.

I noticed that an environmental bill and land management bill passed with near unanimity when they could come close last session.

It is of course too early to be certain, but it makes sense when you think about it.

When the Republicans controlled both houses, they didn't feel the need to include Democrats in the early process, only presenting them with a take it or leave it proposition.  They generally didn't take it and because of Senate rules you had to get at least some of them on-board.

Now, they have joined the process and by inputting into the process actually help create a negotiated agreement.

Even in cases where that agreement is about the same as the one that a single party would have developed, it is more likely to pass since they participated.  

Its how the process is supposed to work.

Nature

I was watching a show about packs of painted wolves in Africa and how they interact and hunt.

What wasn't clear near until nearly the end that everything that was happening was happening in a nature preserve surrounded by human habitation.

Yes in most ways they live as they always have, the animals, but they have limited range and are endangered.

Its very hard to find areas on this planet not being taken over by humans or at least not changed by us.

The oceans, as vast as they seem, now have huge islands of plastic garbage from us.  We have been devising ways to clean them up but of course it would have been easier not to create them in the first place.

Polar bears have recently infested a remote area in Siberia where humans live because the melting ice is destroying their habitat.  I don't imagine this will end well for the bears.

This isn't totally new, humans have been altering the environment since very early on, we just have now achieved worldwide capabilities.

In many cases its too late, a lot of species are simply gone and not coming back.

Nature is not kind.  It really operates on a survival of the fittest concept where the ability of a species to exploit another is generally limited to its own survival.  If you eliminate your food source you starve so over time the natural order ended up in a state of equilibrium.

Humans have gone outside of nature and converted habitats for our use.

We have sort of gotten away with it so far, although a fair number of modern ailments may be the result of our activity.

We can't get away with it forever, or can we?

Domestic Security

Negotiations are under way to avoid another Government shutdown and right now things aren't looking too good, at least according to some of the participants.

The only real issue comes down to funding for the wall that was a campaign promise of sorts.

Of course that promise included a promise that we wouldn't have to pay for it, which has apparently been forgotten.

Is a wall a good thing?

In certain areas we already have barriers and in other areas we rely more or less on the terrain to deter border crossings.

We are talking about thousands of mile of border, much of it quite inhospitable.

Certainly, people can be transported to the border in those areas and can cross, usually with the hope of being apprehended and applying for asylum.

The vase majority of these immigrants simply want an opportunity to plead their cases.

The other ones, the drug dealers and possibly terrorists, have better ways to cross, they can afford it.

You are really talking about two different worlds, that of the desperate immigrant looking for a better life and that of a criminal looking to make more money.

There have been many ways that drugs have gotten into this country and I can guarantee that long treks across inhospitable stretches of desert is not very popular, there are many easier ways.

Similarly, most terrorists simply fly into this country using various visas.  That's for terrorists that come from outside the country, we have always had our home grown ones.

Domestic security is important, but generally it is not tied into events on our southern border specifically.

Those people aren't the threat.

Brick and Mortar

What is the future of Brick and Mortar stores?

Clearly Internet shopping has hurt them and will continue to do so, but are they in fact doomed or will they simply evolve?

The answer is obviously dependent on a number of things, but it seems that they are starting to evolve.

They are already in many cases serving as a local pick up option for on-line buying.

The one advantage they have, or one of the advantages is the ability to get an item instantly.

You go, you see, you buy, you have it.

Even with some incredible technology on-line requires a certain waiting period.

Even if you are ordering on-line, the ability to pick up the item at a brick and mortar location can be persuasive.

They may have to improve this option, I have used it in the past at a number of locations and they weren't particularly well run.

Sears in particular seemed onerous when I used them, and once you get an e-mail saying it is ready for pick up, you shouldn't have to wait once you arrive.

Sears is going to be saved in some reduced version and whether they can be a going concern may provide the answer to the question about brick and mortar stores, or maybe they are just beyond salvation.

I will say that other stores were generally better than them although they all have some issues.

It would seem that to capitalize on the fact that you have the customer in the store, you might want to have them in the store instead of some remote pick-up location.

I digress.  One area the brick and mortar stores offer is the sense of a place to gather.  You don't really do a lot of on-line shopping in a group.  Malls are already further evolving into a place with more amenities and a more pleasant environment.  Food courts are not the only option anymore.

I think at least some brick and mortar establishments survive and even thrive.  On-line shopping is here to stay, but as a place for social interaction, instant gratification and on-line distribution, they are filling functions that can't be replicated easily.

Immigration

I find it a bit strange who many people who romanticize the shiploads of immigrants that used to come by ship to Ellis Island, act like a van load of immigrants on the border is a crisis.

They may cross the border illegally, but it is perfectly legal to request asylum.

They aren't terrorists or criminals, at least not more than any other random group, and most statistics indicate less.

Of course they are the clear cut leaders in immigration law violations.

The fervor over immigration is simply misguided.

We should have a way for people who want to come here, to come here legally, we need immigrants to fill jobs and help with our demographics.

Our current system is simply bad for everyone, costly, punitive, and in some cases cruel.

Its also pretty unfair in how its applied.

There will be additional border security of some sort based on the current negotiations.

Wouldn't be a problem if we opened up a broader path to letting hard working people immigrate.

Screen out the undesirables, we have always done that.

Speaking a different language doesn't make you undesirable, it makes you interesting.

Green New Deal

The sweeping reach of the proposal called the Green New Deal is probably going to make it problematic.

Of course the future is going to be green, it just depends on how we get there.

Tying the conversion to renewable energy to many other progressive issues may not be the best way to get there, unless of course the public accepts it.

The comparison to the new deal is also a bit problematic.

The new deal was enacted because of the Great Depression that created a true crisis in America and it did introduce some lasting programs.

Many of its initiatives were also found unconstitutional and subsequently reversed.

The adoption of affordable renewable energy is something we should be pursuing both because it is an industry of the future and good for the environment and our health.

Guaranteed health care for all is also a worthwhile goal as are the other initiatives, but lumping them all together gives too many failure points.

Its a bit unclear if the proposals by the Democrats include all the points outlined here,https://www.gp.org/gnd_full but by using the same language as the Green Party the assumption is it does.

We need renewable energy and it should be a goal we invest in to save the planet and future generations.

It shouldn't be encumbered by all the other items, which are by themselves quite controversial.