New and … worsened

We recently got a new computer system at work.  After a couple of weeks, I’d say there are five or six things the new system does better than the old.  For example, in the old system if a certain situation came up, there was no way to fix it.  You basically had to void everything and start over.  But in the new system, there’s a button that will fix it.  Well, I think it would fix it.  This situation only happens every three or four months, and hasn’t happened yet with the new system.  But one night when I was fixing a related issue, this drop-down menu showed up, and as I read through the options, I realized that the solution they had for the related issue should also fix the problem that comes up every three or four months. 

Other situations are only “technically” better.  Like, this other issue that comes up four or five times a shift, in the old system we basically just had to go back a step and start over.  Easy to understand, but it took maybe an extra fifteen seconds.  In the new system, the problem can be fixed in like five seconds.  But the way to do it is … odd.  Basically, this one problem is a screw, while there is this other, related problem that is a nail.  There is a hammer subroutine that takes care of the nail problem, but instead of making a screwdriver subroutine for the screw problem, they just used the hammer.  Technically it works, but every time it happens, I can’t help but wonder if the system could have been designed better. 

It’s been a couple decades since I’ve done any programming, but I bet if I sat down with someone who knows how to code, we could come up with a very user-friendly system in like a day.  When I say user-friendly, I mean whenever an issue came up, there would be a clear, logical way to solve it.  Like, options would show up on the screen and you could pick which one best suited the situation.  Instead of having to remember that whenever Problem X happens, you follow Steps 9-12 in Appendix Q.  Admittedly, there were issues like that with the old system, but it was probably designed 20+ years ago when computers were far less capable.  You’d think better computers with more memory should make things run smoother.

All this got me wondering, Why do so many businesses find it difficult making good user interfaces?  Like, I remember years ago, there was an email service that made a big deal for their new layout.  And I looked around it, and was like, That’s nice you have a hundred bells and whistles I’ll never use, can I just check my email?  And after I checked my email, I went to sign out, but the Sign Out button was gone.  It used to be right at the top of the screen, but now, there was nothing.  It was almost by accident I discovered that when you clicked on the, I don’t know, Settings button, there was a drop-down menu with Sign Out as one option.  Why did they hide something so important?  I don’t know.  Maybe having this big button right out in the open threw off the aesthetics. 

The real problem, is I’m pretty sure the people who designed this system at work never used it.  Or if they did, it was for five minutes showing off the various capabilities to some corporate schmuck who also never had to use the system for a shift.  They’ve never had to use it in a real setting.  For example, in one of the ways the new system is worse, is selecting an operation.  Basically, about 49% of all interactions in a shift involve Operation A, 49% are Operation B, and the other 2% are for Operations C, D, E, F, etc.  The old system defaulted to A, but you only had to hit one button to get to B, C, D, etc.  In the new system, you have to hit a button for A, and two buttons for B because the first button calls up a drop-down menu that also has Operations C and D.  I know that doesn’t sound like much, but when you do hundreds of operations a shift it adds up.  Especially since for the old system the buttons were on a keyboard that was at a comfortable height and angle, whereas the new system is a higher, vertical touchscreen that has other stuff around it so it can’t be adjusted.  I’m wondering if lifting my arms to hit the screen so much is bothering my shoulders.  (I’ve also been splitting firewood, so it’s hard to say what’s causing issues.)

I know corporations are all about making short term profit, but surely somebody, somewhere up the corporate ladder has to understand that going with the lowest bidder can save you money upfront, but you may end up paying more in the long run.  Of course, such thinking is probably only for the people on the bottom who actually have to work for a living.

Slaying dragons

A month or so ago, I saw some article where some billionaire said something like, “You peasants can’t understand how tough it is to be rich.” I mean, that wasn’t what was actually said, but that seemed to be their real thoughts.  I read that, and I thought, You know, in days of yore, there would be brave knights who would come and slay the foul beasts that hoarded gold and laid waste to the land. 

I liked that image, and for a couple of days I tried to figure out some story I could write with it.  While I didn’t find a story idea, I did realize what I would do if I had a few million dollars I didn’t know what else to do with.  I would create an organization, The Knights of … some term that hasn’t already been taken by some other organization or metal band.  This organization would hire a bunch of investigative journalists, forensic accountants, and a ton of lawyers.  And the point of the organization would be to … metaphorically slay dragons.  Probably in a monthly, online newsletter.

Are you some company who doesn’t pay your employees overtime?  Do you use some accounting slight-of-hand to underreport your profits to the IRS?  Do you use your obscene wealth to basically buy a politician?  Our job would be to make sure everyone knows that. 

Now we wouldn’t just repeat baseless gossip.  The key point for the organization would be that everything we report would have been double and triple confirmed to the point it would hold up in a court of law.  And if the gossip was some company was doing something illegal but we couldn’t prove it, we would come out and say that we were unable to prove it.  I guess I should say we wouldn’t slay all the dragons, just the ones we could prove were committing crimes.  And I bet, most dragons would still be upset by that.  Curious.

Short story – “The Gift of Vomit”

“The Gift of Vomit”

I turn off my phone and set it back on the dresser.  Just as I snuggle back under the covers, I hear my upstairs neighbor’s alarm going off.  The muffled blare goes on for several seconds before blissfully stopping.  For a minute or so I hear the vague sounds of him moving around before quiet returns.

I take a deep breath, and hope to go back to the dream I was having about my ex-girlfriend’s sister. 

My poor neighbor will be trudging through the rain on his morning commute, while under my warm blankets things are so peaceful.  I’ll have a nice relaxing day, all because I told my boss I threw up breakfast.

***

This was originally published in 2014 on a now defunct website.  Of course, back then if you did call in sick it probably wasn’t that big of a deal.  Now you’d probably get bombarded with an endless stream of “Nobody wants to work anymore” BS. 

***

I started reposting these stories on the third Thursday, and that the day this goes up happens to be St. Patrick’s Day is a complete coincidence.  The story isn’t titled “The Gift of Green Vomit” after all.

I think it’s time for a Twenty-First Century economic theory

Roughly speaking, there are two big economic theories in the world today: capitalism and socialism.  A lot of people spend a lot of time talking about the successes and failures of each.  Nobody really cares about my opinion, but it is that both are failing ideologies. 

Now some will be screaming “How has capitalism failed?” Well, let me ask a question.  Let’s say there is a company named WidgetCo that makes widgets.  These widgets are so wondrous that everyone wants one, and WidgetCo makes a lot of money selling them.  But they make their widgets so well that they almost never breakdown, and soon everyone who wants a widget has one, and WidgetCo goes out of business, leaving room for DoohickeyCo to enter the market with their groundbreaking doohickey.  Now, in the ideal of Capital C Capitalism, is WidgetCo a success?  I’d say yes.  They made a healthy profit off their widgets, how is that a failure?  But is that how things work in the real world?  In the real world, WidgetCo would make less quality widgets that breakdown, and then they’d stop making parts, or stop giving tech support, all to force people into buying the – basically the same but with some cosmetic changes – Widget2.  Then, since they have all the money, they corner the market on thingumabobs to prevent DoohickeyCo from making their doohickeys.  Is that the ideal of capitalism?  I’d say that’s more Capital G Capitalism (for greed).  An argument I’ve had for why the current system isn’t the greatest is that I never realized the point of capitalism was to create a plutocracy. 

Now, since I’ve had some valid criticism of capitalism as practiced, some will just yell, “That’s just because you’re a dirty socialist.” Wouldn’t those people be surprised to learn that I think socialism is failing as well.  I think Capital S Socialism is pretty good.  The problem comes with the implementation.  Say you start with the radical socialist idea that nobody should starve.  So you start with all the numbers from 2015, of where the people are, where the food is grown, how it’s transported and distributed, etc.  You crunch all the numbers and run simulations, and by 2017 you have the perfect system … on paper.  You then need to actually put it into place, which miraculously only takes until 2019.  But the end result is that in 2019 you have the perfect system in place to feed everyone … in 2015.  And then 2020 happens.  I think a lot of the horror stories told of socialism are a result, not of Capital S Socialism, but Capital B Socialism, for bureaucracy.  Just as with power WidgetCo can turn monopolistic, any socialist system can turn bureaucratic and then be unable – or unwilling – to change when the situation changes.

Here’s an idea for a better world.  Everyone gets 1000 Credits a month.  One bedroom apartments are capped at 500 Credits a month, and a month’s worth of groceries can be 100 Credits, if you get the generic cereal, for example.  Basic and emergency medical care is covered, but a lot of elective stuff isn’t.  To pay for all of this free stuff, all able people have to do X hours of community service each year.  You could either work for a few hours a week, or eight hours a day for a couple of weeks in January and be good for the year.  If you want a bigger apartment, or a car, or whatever, you need to get a job to earn extra money.  Some will cry that people need to contribute to society and they’ll point to some kid playing video games and just call them a slacker.  I wonder what those people think of these assholes who play golf all the time while the money their parents made makes more money.  Are they contributing to society?

I think my better world idea would be great.  I have no idea how such a system would be implemented, and know it would probably only work for a decade or two before technological advance would crack it apart.  It’s only a matter of time before autonomous vehicles will drive around checking for potholes.  When a pothole is detected, another autonomous vehicle will show up, block off traffic, and fix it.  And these autonomous vehicles will be built in automated factories, which will be supplied from automated mines.  In this system, does someone need to own all these vehicles?  Would we still need to pay taxes to pay for this system?  And this won’t just be for roads.  There will be robots building solar power stations, houses, picking food, transporting it all, etc. 

Adam Smith, the father of capitalism, died in 1790.  Karl Marx, often seen as the socialist poster boy, died in 1883.  Even if you think their ideas were perfect – they weren’t – they were Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century ideas.  We live in the Twenty-first.  Shouldn’t there be a new economic system that takes automation and bitcoin into account?  It doesn’t even have to be completely new.  I’d say this new system should be about 40% Capital S Socialism, 30% Capital C Capitalism, and 30% something new.  What do you think?

Looking to make a little extra money?

Over the years, I’ve tried a few sites where you answer surveys or whatever and earn some type of token.  Earn enough tokens and you can cash them in for gift cards or even a direct deposit into your bank account.  Several of these sites have gone belly-up, but there are two that I still use.  These are InstaGC and Swagbucks.  To be perfectly clear, those links are my referral links, meaning if you click on them and sign up, I get a bit of a bonus.  But before you sign up, be sure to read all the terms and everything.

How much money you can make depends on how much time you can put into them.  Back when I was unemployed, I probably put an hour or so a day into them.  Now that I have a “real” job, I only spend a few minutes per week on them, and therefore only earn about a $1 a month.  Which is not much, but I look at it as after a year on these sites, I can easily pay for a month of Netflix. 

Some self-checkout thoughts

Several years ago, I moved back home to help my parents out around the house and farm.  And to have time to write.  That’s great and all, but I can’t really use a short story or the afternoon I helped my dad bale hay to pay for my car insurance.  So a couple of years ago I got a crappy part time job to pay the bills.  When I say crappy, I mean that for a while even though I worked thirty-nine hours – often over six days – a week, I was still “part time” and didn’t get benefits.  But for the last year or so I’ve cut back so now I only worked two, or three days a week which means I actually have time to unwind and maybe get something done.

The store I work in is busy.  As in we had three registers and there were times when even with three cashiers ringing people out we still had customers waiting in line.  But a couple of months ago the Corporation, in their “wisdom,” took out one of the registers to put in a self-checkout.  I say “wisdom” because apparently the software of the self-checkout doesn’t work with our old software, and even though they knew the problem existed because it happened in all the stores they put self-checkouts in, they still went ahead and took out a register we used on a daily basis and put in a glorified counter. 

All this means is that for the last couple of months I’ve gotten to hear many people’s thoughts on self-checkout.  To me it seems that younger people are … not excited, but at least cool with the idea, whereas older people are often anti-self-checkout.  They often proudly claim that they will never use one because “it takes away jobs.” I wrote up some of my thoughts on self-checkouts a couple of years ago, but now that I have direct experience with them, I thought I should expand on the issue because things are not black-or-white. 

In a store, there are various jobs that need done.  When stuff is delivered it either needs to go out on a shelf or in the back as overstock, old overstock needs worked to make room for new, sale signs have to be put up and taken down, items need to be returned to their proper locations (you would not believe how often stuff like cans of soup will be left with the bleach), the store needs to be cleaned, oh, and customers need to be checked out.  Let’s call all the worker hours needed to do all of this work each day X.  But the thing is, X is not constant.  A random Monday in May will not be as busy as the last Saturday before Christmas.  Now the Corporation has records of how busy the store has been in years past, so they can have a rough idea of how busy the store will be, but it’s not an exact science.  The number of worker hours the Corporation gives the manager we’ll call Y.  In an ideal world, Y would equal X, but that never happens.  In reality, the Corporation only has two choices, Y>X, or Y<X.  In the Y>X scenario, everything would be put away, the customers would all be helped, and employees would be standing around doing nothing and getting paid for it.  So the Corporation – whose goal is to make money – will opt for the Y<X scenario.

But that means the store won’t be perfect, and customers will have to wait in line.  Yeah.  The Corporation can lose money in one of two ways, they could spend hundreds of dollars each week by having more employees on the floor, or a customer could walk out without buying a $2 thing of deodorant because it wasn’t on the shelf because there wasn’t an employee to put it out.  The Corporation will gladly accept a less than perfect store because the extra money they’d make from a perfect store won’t cover the cost to get to a perfect store.  Basically, the law of diminishing returns. 

Now let’s talk about self-checkout.  I don’t know how many thousands of dollars our self-checkout system cost, but – if the damned thing worked – it may only take a few months for it to pay for itself and it will be cheaper than having an employee standing at a register all day.  And the gap between X and Y will be smaller.  (You can see this as either the paid employee workload X being smaller, or Y being higher, all because the Corporation has some unpaid customer/employees.)

Of course, the Corporation is perfectly fine with current size of the X-Y gap, so it is possible that with a lower X they’ll just lower Y.  And that’s why some people claim self-checkout is costing jobs.  But is the point of a corporation to cut as many corners as they can to make the most profit, or to create some utopic store where all the employees and customers are perfectly content?  It’s not a one to one correlation, but I do wonder how many of the people who won’t use self-checkout to “save jobs” would scream bloody socialism if you asked them if we should raise the minimum wage. 

I do think a tiny element in why some people don’t want to use self-checkout is because they see being a cashier as “beneath” them.  We sell a lot of clothes at our store, and some customers will take the hangers off so all I have to do is scan and bag the clothes.  But some customers will just dump twenty or so shirts on the counter and just step back and watch as I fumble to get the hangers out.  If they’re little old ladies, or they have kids, that’s fine.  But for some I get the feeling that making my job easier is of no concern to them.

So what are my final thoughts on self-checkout?  If you’re buying an entire cartload of stuff, it will probably be faster to go with a human cashier.  In part because we actually know how to scan a lot of stuff quickly.  But if you’re only getting a couple of things, then instead of ringing you out that cashier could be putting that deodorant away.  Also, I don’t know how many times someone with an entire cartload of stuff has come up, and then somebody with a fifty pound bag of dog food gets into line behind them.  Normally, I’d call up whoever I’m working with to ring them out, but sometimes the person I’m working with is on their break, or checking in a vendor, or putting the ice cream delivery away before it melts, or some other more pressing task.  So the dog food person just has to wait several minutes for me to scan the forty-seven cans of cat food or whatever.  But with a, working, self-checkout they could quickly be on their way.  Or there are times when there is a line and I’ll look up and see someone is seven or eight customers back, and five or so minutes later when they get up to the register all they’re getting is a candy bar and drink.  And often the only reason they’re buying something is because they want cashback and we don’t have an ATM.  You know, those things that took away all those bank teller jobs.

Technology is always changing.  In the olden days, a cashier either had to know the price of a can of soup, or the price had to be on a sticker on the can.  Now we just scan it, there’s a beep, and the computer finds the price and adds it all up.  Maybe a decade from now there won’t be human cashiers.  You’ll take your cart up to a spot, and robotic arms will pick up all your items, scan, bag, and return them to your cart.  Or maybe you won’t even go to the store.  You’ll just make a list of what you want, text it to a store, a robot will pick it all out, pack it, and then a self-driving car will drop it off at your house.  Personally, I look forward to the day machines take my crappy job because being a cashier sucks. 

First city to go full autonomous taxi

I am a big supporter of autonomous vehicles.  Not only are they an aspect of “The Future” that we’ve been waiting so long for, but they will make life better for so many people.  I live – I like to say – a short drive from the middle of nowhere and if I need to go to work or a store, it takes half-an-hour to get there.  But if my car just drove itself, I’d have that extra time to read, watch YouTube, or write. 

Unfortunately, we’re not at the point of fully self-driving cars on country roads.  They’ll start in cities, which got me wondering which will be the first city with a self-driving taxi service.  I don’t mean when some tech billionaire gifts ten self-driving cars to their small hometown so it now has a self-driving taxi service, but some city – like New York or London – that currently has a taxi service switches over entirely to a self-driving service.  My top picks are some city in Japan, China, or Germany.  Japan because they like robots and have a population issue, and China and Germany to show off their technological might. 

Whatever city goes first, it will be closely watched by the rest of the world, and as long as there is no major issue there will be a rapid – maybe ten years – transition to self-driving taxis in other cities.  Mainly because they’ll be cheaper to operate because they don’t have to pay drivers.  They may even cut fares to knock the people protesting the “dehumanization” off-balance.  Still, there will be a few hold outs like New York and London which are known for their human taxis.

So millions of taxi customers may save money, but what about all the taxi drivers?  What will happen to them?  They’ll just have to find new jobs.  Before you start yelling that that’s a cold view to take, realize, that’s capitalism.  How many horse farms were put out of business when people started buying horseless carriages?  If you don’t complain about that, why complain now about drivers being put out of business by driverless cars?

Some of these taxi drivers could make a new career as … I guess tour guides.  If you just need to go to work, or the airport, or whatever, when you order your taxi you could specify a fully autonomous one.  But if you’re on vacation, you could get one with a tour guide.  These could take you around, tell you the history of the places you go by, maybe recommend some restaurants, stuff like that.  Those that aren’t that interesting, wouldn’t be rated that highly, and would have to look for yet another job. 

Before cars, a lot of people knew how to ride a horse, but now that’s rarely a necessary skill.  Now, most people know how to drive a car, but that will become an unnecessary skill in the coming decades.  It’s possible that in some future amusement park there might be a place where you could drive a car.  Perhaps these aging, out of work cabbies could give those whippersnappers a … crash course on how to drive.  Although a virtual reality setup might be better.  Of course, that could lead to a Virtual Virtual Skeeball scenario.

Short story – “Too Good to be True”

“Too Good to be True”

Pointing out the passenger side window, Jeff said, “I don’t know what they sell, but I think I’ll do all my shopping there this year.”

His wife Diana glanced at him and asked, “Where?”

“Uh, a store back there.  I didn’t catch the name of it.”

Diana gave him a longer glance with a raised eyebrow.  “Let me get this straight, you don’t know the name of the store, or what they sell, but you’re going to do all your shopping there?”

“They had a big sign out front saying ‘We don’t play Christmas music.’”

Diana smiled and shook her head.  After a moment, she said, “You know, they’ll be packed.  It’s probably like Black Friday in there the whole month of December.”

Jeff sighed.  “Of course.  I find something wonderful and you immediately find fault with it.”

“What did you expect?  I’m pretty sure I put that in my vows.”

With a falsetto, Jeff said, “Oh, let’s write our own wedding vows, it will be so romantic.” In his regular voice he added, “I knew that was going to bite me in the ass.”

Diana playfully slapped his shoulder.

***

The other night at work – as I listened to the fourteenth version of “Frosty” in ten minutes – I thought that if a store put out a sign saying they didn’t play Christmas music, I’d go in, without even knowing what they sold.  I thought that was a great idea, so I hammered out this story.

As I worked on the story, I realized that what we really need is a holiday from holiday music.  If you really love Christmas music, there are plenty of ways for you to listen to it.  But for captive audiences – shoppers or the poor workers who have to listen to it for hours on end – it would be nice to have an auditory break.  So I’m proposing that December 15 become No Christmas Music Day.  It’s about the middle of the month-long assault by Frosty the Red Nosed, silver, jingle bell who’s coming to town to make out with your mom, so it’s the perfect time for a break.  If we’re lucky, and it takes off, this formally one day holiday may start to creep and we’ll have two or three days free from Christmas music. 

One can hope.

The Billionaire College

Here’s an idea on how to replace the Electoral College.  This election system starts much the same way as the current one does, with each party holding a primary to select a candidate.  But once these candidates are selected they go before what I call, the Billionaire College.  This would consist of the nine richest Americans on some predetermined date.  They would be the ones to choose the next President.

So what are the pros of this idea?  Well, as things stand now, candidates spend hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars – a sizable portion of which is supplied by the members of the BC – to try to convince us peons that they deserve our votes.  All the annoying ads you skip, mailers you throw away, and all the countless speeches would be pointless.  It wouldn’t eliminate, but would drastically cut the number of arguments around the Thanksgiving table.  And what could be more American than some shyster selling overpriced garbage to raise the money to gain political power?

What are the cons to this idea?  Well, the naïve view that every person should have a voice in choosing their government.  I guess that’s a “nice” idea, but it’s not like we live by that now.  From aggressive voter purges, to long lines on Election Day, to cutting early voting or voting by mail to make the lines even longer, there are factions in this country trying to take voting away from the “peons” and too few people care.  Maybe we should stop ignoring that we live in an oligarchy and just go all in.

Everyone should work in retail, at some point in their lives

About ten years ago, I had a good paying, 9-5 job that I … didn’t like all that much.  So I moved back home to help my parents around the house and farm and to have time writing.  Which is great, but it did burn through my savings.  So a couple of years ago I got a crappy retail job to pay the bills.  Was it my dream to return to retail?  Fuck no.  But there aren’t that many good paying jobs where you only work a couple days a week because you also need time to help you dad bale hay or pick green beans for your mom to can or write.  And over the years I’ve come to the conclusion that everyone should work in retail, at some point in their lives.  And it’s not because of some grand social ideology of seeing how rough it is for people stuck in low paying jobs – that’s a side benefit – it’s to see how fucking annoying customers can be.

I’m not talking about the “If you tell me to wear a mask I’ll shoot you” type of customers, I’m talking about the little annoyances that build up day after day.  Like whenever something doesn’t want to scan so the standup comedian goes, “It must be free.” Yeah, that wasn’t funny the first forty times I heard that today.  Or the people who assume – since you work there – you must know the price of this random item, half of which I didn’t even know we sold.  Or, why do so many people feel the need to explain – sometimes in detail – why they are buying anti-diarrhea medicine? 

Similar to knowing the price are the people who assume I know what all the sales are.  It seems that I’ll be off for three or four days and I’ll walk in and someone will immediately come up to me, show me an item, and ask, “Is this on sale?” And while I want to just shrug and go, “Fuck if I know,” you can’t do that and stay employed.  Speaking of sales, a couple of years ago, it was probably mid-December and we needed to get rid of all the Christmas lights so we could start putting out Valentine’s Day crap, so we had a one day sale of Buy One Get One Free on your basic, $2 Christmas lights.  This one lady got super pissed off when she found out it wasn’t on these $20 Projector light things that just so happened to be on the same shelf as the stuff that was on sale.  Apparently, she wanted us – shorthanded to begin with and at Christmas – to rearrange everything on a shelf for a One Day Sale, because she couldn’t be bothered to read to see what exactly was on sale.

Probably the issue that irks me the most are the customers who assume I have no idea what I’m doing.  For example, several times each shift someone will ask, “Did you ring up this item?” Sometimes – because of the stupid layout of everything – I won’t see a pack of gum or something small.  But nine times out of ten the item in question is a 48 roll of TP that takes up 2/3 of our counter space.  I almost want to slap myself and go, “How did I miss that?”

Worse are the people who don’t know how everything works, so they assume we’re cheating them.  Like our system for calculating sale discounts makes perfect sense … to a computer.  It’s just not the clearest thing for customers to understand, so we must be ripping them off.  “Why did those each ring up at $3 when on the shelf it says 2 for $5?” “Because it doesn’t actually take the sale price off until I hit the total button.” The reason it does that, is because some sales are “Buy X, get Y for half-off,” and it is so much easier for the computer to check all your items for these X-Y, or 2 for whatever, sales once at the end instead of after each item scanned. 

A related issue are our receipts.  It’s almost a code that gives as much information about each item sold in as small a space as possible, and once you know what it is doing it makes perfect sense.  I don’t know how many times people have come in five minutes after leaving – looking over their receipt in the parking lot – and demand to know why they didn’t get some discount, like a $5 off their total sale.  And I look at their receipt and go, “It did take the discount off.  It took a little bit off each item, that’s what these little amounts here are,” and I sometimes circle the discount it took off each item.  And they usually argue with me, like I was the idiot that designed the system.  And half the time they usually just huff and leave the store thinking we cheated them, when they are the ones who refused to listen to the explanation. 

That’s why I think everyone should work retail at some point in their lives because when you’re the one standing behind a register, you see how fucking annoying people can be.  I consider myself a good customer: I don’t tell pointless stories, I don’t make scenes, and I don’t demand to see a manager because I don’t understand a line on the receipt.  Part of that is because I’ve worked retail.  Probably a big part is that I’m not an asshole.

The economics of Speed Demon Construction

So the other night – as I was trying to fall asleep – I had an interesting idea I thought about turning into a story, for a bit.  It seems that – in the comics and movies and whatever – whenever someone develops supernatural powers they become either a superhero or supervillain.  But I wondered what if some Joe got super speed and instead of fighting crime they started a construction business.  You’d buy all the materials and have them sitting on your lawn and the Speed Demon would show up, and a minute later you’d have a new roof, or garage, or whatever.  You’d pay like a hundred bucks, and then he’s off to the next job.  He’d probably have a deal with all the local pizza and sub shops to have something set out for him every half-hour or so.  There’d be a blur and the pizza would be gone with a $50 bill in its place.

Of course even in a large town there wouldn’t be enough construction jobs to keep the Speed Demon active all the time, so he’d diversify.  Like he’d have Speed Demon Movers where, in like thirty seconds he can have all your belongings packed up and loaded in a van.  And there’d also be the Speed Demon Garage.  You stop in, say the engine is making an odd noise, and in less than a minute – with you not even getting out of the car – the engine is disassembled on the floor next to you.  He fixes whatever the issue was, puts it all back together, and only charges for parts and maybe a flat $20 for labor.

Now this Speed Demon would likely put dozens of small business out of business by being able to do in an hour what would take them a month.  And even charging so little for his time, he could still make tens of thousands of dollars a day.  Some would say that if hundreds of people lose their jobs because someone else can do it better and cheaper, well, that’s Capitalism, and if you even think anything bad about Capitalism, well, you’re just a dirty socialist.

While in this world toxic goo usually just gives you cancer instead of superpowers, we do have a burgeoning Speed Demon: automation.  It’s unlikely we’ll have machines able to replace your roof in a minute or less, but it is likely that someday a (self-driving?) truck will pull up to your house with robotic arms in the back that lift up the materials and other robots that scurry around and do all the work.  Not as fast, but robots won’t need a lunch break, or even a restroom break, can work 24/7, and you don’t have to pay them.  So we’re coming to a point where hundreds of people will lose their jobs because machines will be able to do it faster and cheaper.  Yea Capitalism.  But how does Capitalism work if nobody has money because nobody has jobs?

Short story – “Naive Thoughts”

“Naïve Thoughts”

The old man stood up behind the podium and raised his snifter of brandy to the score of gentlemen seated around the conference table.  “As Prime,” he said, “I welcome you to the 417th Annual Meeting of the Cacumen Society.”

As one, they all took a drink.

The Prime smiled, then stated, “Before we get down to business, I wish to welcome Jonathon Lowe, son of the late Benjamin Lowe, to our ranks.”

The men nodded to a young man at the back of the room who smiled and returned several nods.

“Jonathon,” the Prime asked, “would you care to make an introductory speech?”

Jonathon stood and, after clearing his throat, said, “Yes.  Thank you, Prime.  I would very much like to make an introductory speech.”

The Prime stepped aside and waved to the podium.

Jonathon smiled then holding himself straight walked up to the podium.  He nodded to the Prime and said, “Thank you, Prime.” Turning to the room he began, “My fellow members.  When my father explained to me that we were members of this illustrious Society that controls the majority of world affairs, I frankly thought he was telling a joke.  But as I’m sure you all know, my father was not known for his sense of humor.” Several of the men gave smiling nods to that.

After a brief smile, Jonathon went on.  “I reviewed the information he gave me, and I came to the conclusion that there is indeed a secret society that controls worldly affairs.  This revelation surprised, pleased, disturbed and confused me.  The disturbed and confused part comes from the fact that, okay, we control the world.  But you have to admit, we’re doing a pretty poor job of it.”

There were a few grumbles from the room.

“On one hand,” Jonathon continued, “I understand how – by fomenting wars, for example – we can ensure a large profit from our companies manufacturing arms.  But I have to wonder, can’t we make just as much money – if not more – by selling dishwashers and computers to the Third World instead of guns.

“I brought some of my ideas up to my father, who explained that by keeping the population worried about war and crime and such, it keeps them from trying to better their lives, keeping them better sheep for us to control.  But to me, that seems like it would have the opposite reaction.  If we want docile sheep, then we should make them fat and content.  Instead of having them worried about crime, or losing their job, or where their next meal will come from, we should stuff them with quintuple cheeseburgers, give them movies filled with explosions and nudity and video games filled with violence.”

Jonathon looked around the room.  “In my opinion, what’s the point of ruling over a cesspit of a world?  Yes, we have our estates and private islands, but we have to keep bribing politicians and hiring security to keep them.  If everyone lived like we did, there would be nobody for them to rise up against.  I mean, with every assassination or rigged election, we run the risk of someone noticing our actions.  If that ever happens, then the hungry, snarling masses will come after us.  But if we just had them fat, content, and docile, we’d never have to worry about them again.

“Thank you for hearing me out.” Jonathon then stepped back from the podium.

The room was silent for a few heartbeats, then it exploded in laughter.

Wiping his eyes, the Prime stepped back to the podium.  He put a hand on Jonathon’s shoulder and said, “Ah, the naivety of youth.”

“What?” Jonathon asked.

“Your thoughts are not new,” the Prime explained.  “But in a few years, you’ll come to understand why we do things the way we do.

“Now, be a good lad and take your seat, so the meeting can begin.”

***

I first wrote this story in June 2013 under the title “Hmmm.” It began after I saw a comment online about how things can’t be fixed because “the ones in power” don’t want them to be fixed.  I recently came across it and figured I should repost it.  But I wanted to rework it first and one of the things I wanted to change was the title.  It took me some time, but I think “Naïve Thoughts” works pretty good.