Wednesday, January 30, 2008
a bit of news
good morning everyone. this is just to let you know that i've added most of the poetry i've written in the past year to my "work in progress" blog. i haven't posted in a very long time, so if you're at all like me, you've probably stopped checking it. so, just in case you're interested, it's back!
Headline Confusion
I was reading the news this morning and came across the following headline: "French Police Deal Blow to Microsoft." Intrigued, I clicked the link to read the article and discovered that my assumptions were mistaken. What the article was really about was the French police are switching all their computers to Linux Operating Systems, specifically, Ubuntu Linux, of which I am a big fan.
So I told Janelle about the headline and, after I explained the article to her, she said, "Oh, so they're not dealing cocaine to Microsoft." What a relief.
I pasted the article below, in case you're curious.
French police deal blow to Microsoft
The French paramilitary police force said Wednesday it is ditching Microsoft for the free Linux operating system, becoming one of the biggest administrations in the world to make the break.
So I told Janelle about the headline and, after I explained the article to her, she said, "Oh, so they're not dealing cocaine to Microsoft." What a relief.
I pasted the article below, in case you're curious.
French police deal blow to Microsoft
The French paramilitary police force said Wednesday it is ditching Microsoft for the free Linux operating system, becoming one of the biggest administrations in the world to make the break.
The move completes the gendarmerie's severance from Microsoft which began in 2005 when it moved to open sourcing for office applications such as word processing. It switched to open source Internet browsers in 2006.
Linux is an open-source operating system, which used to be the reserve of computer geeks but is now an easy-to-use system aimed at average users.
The gendarmerie's 70,000 desktops currently use Microsoft's Windows XP operating system. But these will progressively change over to the Linux system distributed by Ubuntu, explained Colonel Nicolas Geraud, deputy director of the gendarmerie's IT department.
"We will introduce Linux every time we have to replace a desktop computer," he said, "so this year we expect to change 5,000-8,000 to Ubuntu and then 12,000-15,000 over the next four years so that every desktop uses the Linux operating system by 2013-2014."
There are three reasons behind the move, Geraud said at the Solution Linux 2008 conference here. The first is to diversify suppliers and reduce the force's reliance on one company, the second is to give the gendarmerie mastery of the operating system and the third is cost, he said.
He also added that "the Linux interface is ahead of other operating systems currently on the market for professional use."
Vista, for example, Microsoft's latest operating system, is being spurned by consumers who cite "concerns about its cost, resource requirements, and incompatibility with their existing applications," according to InformationWeek.com.
Geraud explained that the move to an open source operating system was logical after the police switched in 2005 to open sourcing for its office applications and in 2006 for its Internet browsers and its email.
The move away from licenced products is saving the gendarmerie about seven million euros (10.3 million dollars) a year for all its PCs.
"In 2004 we had to buy 13,000 licences for office suites for our PCs," he said, "but in the three years since then we've only had to buy a total of 27 licences."
In 2005 the gendarmerie switched from Microsoft Office to OpenOffice -- a collection of applications such as a word processor, spreadsheet, and presentation programme similar to Microsoft Powerpoint, all of which can be downloaded free.
A year later it abandoned Mircosoft's Internet Explorer for the Mozilla Foundation's browser Firefox and its email client Thunderbird.
"When we made that choice Firefox represented about 3.0 percent of Internet browsers and it's about 20 to 25 percent now which confirms our choice," Geraud said.
The gendarmerie with its 100,000 employees is the biggest administration to shift to open sourcing for its operating system, but it is not the first in France. That honour belongs to the National Assembly which adopted Ubuntu for its 1,200 PCs in 2007.
Although the gendarmerie is ahead of the market the market is catching up.
Dell, for example, this week started offering Ubuntu Linux 7.10 on its XPS 1330 laptops in France, Germany, Spain and Britain, while US customers will be able to order the machines within the next week or so, according to the company's website.
More Adventures of Patrick and Janelle
When we tried to leave the apartment this morning, Janelle and I discovered that our lock was broken and that we couldn't unlock the door. Janelle called our landlady who promised to have it fixed and I, using some ingenuity and a screw driver, removed the lock and slid the bolt using pliers. Then we headed out for a celebratory breakfast and some morning-shopping.
We had BELTs at Tim Horton's and then headed to Wal-Mart. Janelle bought some pants and a pitcher and a few other things. Then we drove down to TBC Computers and I asked for a price on a computer system. The price they gave me was so phenomenal that I bought the computer without doing any shopping around, like I had planned to, and they had it assembled for me in two hours! What was even more phenomenal was that they provided a free power surge protector. They explained that since they had started giving these gizmos away, the amount of money they lost on warranties dropped significantly.
Anyways, I brought Janelle to school, bought a keyboard at Staples, picked up the computer, brought it home and installed it, picked up Janelle at school and took her to lunch and to the post office, where we had Janelle's student loan processed by a room full of comedians... I brought Janelle back to school and had just enough time to get into my Little Caesar's uniform and before heading to work.
Afterwards Janelle and I had dinner at Dan and Katie's and it was fantastic.
We had BELTs at Tim Horton's and then headed to Wal-Mart. Janelle bought some pants and a pitcher and a few other things. Then we drove down to TBC Computers and I asked for a price on a computer system. The price they gave me was so phenomenal that I bought the computer without doing any shopping around, like I had planned to, and they had it assembled for me in two hours! What was even more phenomenal was that they provided a free power surge protector. They explained that since they had started giving these gizmos away, the amount of money they lost on warranties dropped significantly.
Anyways, I brought Janelle to school, bought a keyboard at Staples, picked up the computer, brought it home and installed it, picked up Janelle at school and took her to lunch and to the post office, where we had Janelle's student loan processed by a room full of comedians... I brought Janelle back to school and had just enough time to get into my Little Caesar's uniform and before heading to work.
Afterwards Janelle and I had dinner at Dan and Katie's and it was fantastic.
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
The World Through My Glasses (Part Three)
The headline read something like this, "Britney Spears' British Accent Raises Questions About Her Psychological Health." As if everything else she's done hasn't? If speaking in a British accent makes one questionably insane, my wife is definitely under suspicion... along with just about everybody in England.
Today Janelle and I were at the post office and the lady behind the counter spoke with a distinct British accent. I felt like asking her if she was suspected of being insane.
Anyways...
The new Tata Nano was unveiled in India this month. By the way, Tata is the auto manufacturer that plans to buy Jaguar and Land Rover. The Nano is a car that costs only $2500 US, it is very minimal--for example, it has no power steering, no radio, no air conditioning. It boasts almost phenomenal gas mileage, though and is widely referred to as "the people's car"--I guess Volkswagen isn't anymore.
And what do environment activists have to say about this? They're not happy, because a cheap car will result in more people owning cars, roads will become more crowded, and--as a result--there will be more pollution. What do you think of that?
My big question is, what's the problem? If it's okay for some people to have a car, shouldn't it be okay for everyone to have a car? And if an auto manufacturer wants to make it possible for more people to have automobiles, that's fantastic! Or is it only okay for "rich" people to own cars? When we start to think this way, we jump over the individual, we think in terms of groups of people--or worse, we ignore the individual altogether and only think about our policies, and what is better for our world. I don't think any right-headed person or group would prevent any individuals from owning cars if they could afford them (for example) but when we say things like a cost-effective car like the Nano is harmful to the environment and, therefore, must be controlled or limited and we create government policies to that effect, what we are doing is preventing individuals from owning automobiles. To me, there's a certain amount of hypocrisy in that. We want to prevent lower-income people from owning automobiles because of the possibly disastrous results, but we ourselves won't give up our automobiles.
I said that I don't believe in changing the world, but I think we all agree that the world needs changing. And right now, I don't care about the Tata Nano or about government policies concerning the environment. I don't even care about Britney Spears' British accent. What I really want to talk about is individuals. When we talk politics, when we talk about global change, and activism, what we should be concerned about is not our policies and our ideas about what is good or bad for the environment because we cannot change the world systems. The world will always be corrupt, always be evil, always be governed by greed. We cannot change that. But we can change ourselves and that is the most effective and most important change we can make.
Of course, there's much more to be said on this...
Today Janelle and I were at the post office and the lady behind the counter spoke with a distinct British accent. I felt like asking her if she was suspected of being insane.
Anyways...
The new Tata Nano was unveiled in India this month. By the way, Tata is the auto manufacturer that plans to buy Jaguar and Land Rover. The Nano is a car that costs only $2500 US, it is very minimal--for example, it has no power steering, no radio, no air conditioning. It boasts almost phenomenal gas mileage, though and is widely referred to as "the people's car"--I guess Volkswagen isn't anymore.
And what do environment activists have to say about this? They're not happy, because a cheap car will result in more people owning cars, roads will become more crowded, and--as a result--there will be more pollution. What do you think of that?
My big question is, what's the problem? If it's okay for some people to have a car, shouldn't it be okay for everyone to have a car? And if an auto manufacturer wants to make it possible for more people to have automobiles, that's fantastic! Or is it only okay for "rich" people to own cars? When we start to think this way, we jump over the individual, we think in terms of groups of people--or worse, we ignore the individual altogether and only think about our policies, and what is better for our world. I don't think any right-headed person or group would prevent any individuals from owning cars if they could afford them (for example) but when we say things like a cost-effective car like the Nano is harmful to the environment and, therefore, must be controlled or limited and we create government policies to that effect, what we are doing is preventing individuals from owning automobiles. To me, there's a certain amount of hypocrisy in that. We want to prevent lower-income people from owning automobiles because of the possibly disastrous results, but we ourselves won't give up our automobiles.
I said that I don't believe in changing the world, but I think we all agree that the world needs changing. And right now, I don't care about the Tata Nano or about government policies concerning the environment. I don't even care about Britney Spears' British accent. What I really want to talk about is individuals. When we talk politics, when we talk about global change, and activism, what we should be concerned about is not our policies and our ideas about what is good or bad for the environment because we cannot change the world systems. The world will always be corrupt, always be evil, always be governed by greed. We cannot change that. But we can change ourselves and that is the most effective and most important change we can make.
Of course, there's much more to be said on this...
Thursday, January 10, 2008
The World Through My Glasses (Part Two)
In Michigan over the Christmas holidays, I heard about a campaign to ban the purchase of items made in China. These are easy to spot, mostly because of the little sticker label, "Made in China." One major reason for this campaign is that the workers who made these items were exploited, paid very little and made to work very long hours. I heard about some pregnant women being forced to work until they delivered and given only fifteen minutes to deliver their baby after which, they had to be back to work. This sounds terrible. I've also heard about children being forced to work fourteen hour days for very little pay. All this so that big businesses could earn big profits and so that good little western capitalist-democrats could save money buying cheap products.
In my previous post I talked about how the world's environment is changing. I wrote that the world is changing, and those who do not change with it will be destroyed. This is also true economically and politically. The West condemns exploitation in China and India and pretty much everywhere else in the East but ignores the economic and political basis for this exploitation.
The whole world sees the west and its luxury and success and riches and power and wants to be like it. But, part of the problem is, that we don't even remember how we, the West, got here. We talk about how bad the exploitation of workers during the industrial revolution of the late 1700s was a terrible thing, but we forget that without that industrial revolution and the accompanying exploitation of children and men and women we would not have the luxury and wealth and power that we enjoy now. We also forget to ask ourselves, "Is it worth it?" Is our current standard of living worth what it took to get here? To me, the answer is no. Absolutely not.
But those who live daily struggling for the basic necessities--food and shelter--and see the wealth that we take for granted and the luxury that we thoughtlessly enjoy, can we blame them if they feel a tinge of envy? They feel it and they are working to bring themselves comparable wealth and luxury and in many cases they are succeeding.
China is a case in point. China is gaining commercial capital through trade and industry; never mind that it's a 'communist' country--I won't get into that. I have met with, worked with, evangelized to many Chinese men and women and children. A friend, Hong Gang said that the biggest moral problem with China was its materialism. He admitted that the biggest obstacle to him accepting Christianity was his materialism. The Chinese people have been told and believe that it is glorious to be wealthy. If, to become wealthy, people must be exploited, it's worth it--all for the greater glory and--or, through--wealth of China. What we are seeing right now in China and the East is the equivalent of Europe's and the West's Industrial Revolution. Children and women were exploited for the greater wealth of greedy capitalists and we believed it was worth it. We now enjoy wealth and prosperity, power, luxury--Glory--because of that period of exploitation.
Not only were people exploited at home in the factories, but the West through the hundreds of years of the 'Glorious' age of Imperialism exploited people all over the world--including the people in China. Research this period of history, find out what happened to Japan when they closed their ports to American and British trade because they were being exploited. Find out what happened to China when they did the same. Find out what the British and French did in India, what the British, Italians, Germans, and French did to Africa. People were exploited everywhere because we felt that it was worth it in order to accumulate the capital to build the kind of society we have now.
Today, no matter what you buy, someone was exploited to produce and sell that product; whether it was you, the buyer, or the person who made it, or the person who sold it, or the poor night crew stock clerks who put the product on the grocery store shelves.
Where did the Chinese get the idea that it's glorious to be wealthy? No doubt, some of it came from looking at us. If we felt it was worth centuries of exploitation to have the kind of society we have today, how much more does the East now, when they see the glorious results?
We, in the West, can easily condemn Brazil for deforesting the Amazon Basin, we can easily condemn China for exploiting its workers but remember: they are only doing what we did to get to where we are now.
I'm not saying it's wrong to stop exploitation. Please, let your compassion flow. I believe that Grace is all we have. More importantly, Grace is all we need to change the world.
But I don't believe in changing the world.
In my previous post I talked about how the world's environment is changing. I wrote that the world is changing, and those who do not change with it will be destroyed. This is also true economically and politically. The West condemns exploitation in China and India and pretty much everywhere else in the East but ignores the economic and political basis for this exploitation.
The whole world sees the west and its luxury and success and riches and power and wants to be like it. But, part of the problem is, that we don't even remember how we, the West, got here. We talk about how bad the exploitation of workers during the industrial revolution of the late 1700s was a terrible thing, but we forget that without that industrial revolution and the accompanying exploitation of children and men and women we would not have the luxury and wealth and power that we enjoy now. We also forget to ask ourselves, "Is it worth it?" Is our current standard of living worth what it took to get here? To me, the answer is no. Absolutely not.
But those who live daily struggling for the basic necessities--food and shelter--and see the wealth that we take for granted and the luxury that we thoughtlessly enjoy, can we blame them if they feel a tinge of envy? They feel it and they are working to bring themselves comparable wealth and luxury and in many cases they are succeeding.
China is a case in point. China is gaining commercial capital through trade and industry; never mind that it's a 'communist' country--I won't get into that. I have met with, worked with, evangelized to many Chinese men and women and children. A friend, Hong Gang said that the biggest moral problem with China was its materialism. He admitted that the biggest obstacle to him accepting Christianity was his materialism. The Chinese people have been told and believe that it is glorious to be wealthy. If, to become wealthy, people must be exploited, it's worth it--all for the greater glory and--or, through--wealth of China. What we are seeing right now in China and the East is the equivalent of Europe's and the West's Industrial Revolution. Children and women were exploited for the greater wealth of greedy capitalists and we believed it was worth it. We now enjoy wealth and prosperity, power, luxury--Glory--because of that period of exploitation.
Not only were people exploited at home in the factories, but the West through the hundreds of years of the 'Glorious' age of Imperialism exploited people all over the world--including the people in China. Research this period of history, find out what happened to Japan when they closed their ports to American and British trade because they were being exploited. Find out what happened to China when they did the same. Find out what the British and French did in India, what the British, Italians, Germans, and French did to Africa. People were exploited everywhere because we felt that it was worth it in order to accumulate the capital to build the kind of society we have now.
Today, no matter what you buy, someone was exploited to produce and sell that product; whether it was you, the buyer, or the person who made it, or the person who sold it, or the poor night crew stock clerks who put the product on the grocery store shelves.
Where did the Chinese get the idea that it's glorious to be wealthy? No doubt, some of it came from looking at us. If we felt it was worth centuries of exploitation to have the kind of society we have today, how much more does the East now, when they see the glorious results?
We, in the West, can easily condemn Brazil for deforesting the Amazon Basin, we can easily condemn China for exploiting its workers but remember: they are only doing what we did to get to where we are now.
I'm not saying it's wrong to stop exploitation. Please, let your compassion flow. I believe that Grace is all we have. More importantly, Grace is all we need to change the world.
But I don't believe in changing the world.
The World Through My Glasses (Part One)
We got our money back from the student loan people. It was unceremoniously dumped back into our account on Tuesday. Cheers to that! (I'm a BIG fan of getting my money back.)
So, before I got married I was told that if I didn't have sex before I got married, I'd have a boring sex life when I got married. Needless to say, I didn't believe it. A few years later I heard the exact same thing from my manager at Top Craft. He was talking about sex and saying that if you don't have sex before you're married, you'll have a terrible and boring and unpleasant sex life when you are married. The third time I heard this was from one of Janelle's fellow students at the Mount. He said that, before Janelle was married, way back when he found out that she wasn't going to have sex until after the wedding, he'd been worried about her, that she would have a terrible sex life with some guy who was no good in bed. (Don't get me wrong, I do believe there are guys who are terrible in bed--it's those selfish ones who are only in it for themselves.) Where do these people get these ideas? They must all read the same magazines.
First of all, how do they know? Everyone who's said this to me has had sex before they were married, so how would they know? Secondly, it's pretty ignorant to think that having sex before you're married improves your sex life after you're married. Either way, you're going to have sex for the first time at one point or another, and you're not going to start out an old pro at it on your first shot! Just like anything else, sex is something you get better at with practice--no matter what the magazines say. I don't know why people unquestioningly believe whatever shows up in those snot rags.
Speaking of "Science by Press Release" ...
If you ask anyone what climate change and global warming is, they'll probably tell you that it's carbon dioxide emissions trapping heat in the atmosphere and causing global temperature increase. Catastrophic consequences of this are the melting of the ice caps and the recession of glaciers resulting in rising sea levels and global flooding. That's why Canada is proposing a carbon tax to encourage industries to reduce their carbon emissions. There are global initiatives, such as the UNFCCC to reduce levels of carbon emissions world-wide. However, there is no proof that carbon dioxide causes climate change.
I think that the whole idea of Global Warming as a catastrophe is based on the assumption that planet Earth has always been a certain way. The Theory of Evolution is based on this same assumption that the Earth is static. But the Earth is not static, it changes and fluctuates. Right this minute we are still in the process of emerging from an ice age. Scientists postulate that the Earth is naturally ice-free, even in the high latitudes--except during periods of glaciation (otherwise known as ice-ages) when ice sheets advance to cover larger areas of the world. There is evidence that the whole planet, include the far north, was at the same sub-tropical climate; for example, mammoths have been found frozen whole in sheets of ice with sub-tropical vegetation undigested in their stomachs--keep in mind that they would have had to have frozen straight through and very quickly and this happened before the invention of any kind of deep-freeze device. Ice core samples in Greenland show that much of the southern inner mainland of Greenland was suitable for farming, raising crops and herds around 800 to 1300 AD, during what is known as the medieval warming period. These are only two examples; there are many others . The glaciers in Alberta's Jasper National Park are receding. I have heard this often cited in the news media as evidence for the severity of global warming. There are also glaciers in the Andes Mountains in South America that are receding. A recent news cast reported the almost overnight disappearance of a large lake in the Andes mountains because of a melting glacier. This was also blamed on global warming. However, if the Earth is emerging from an ice age, it makes sense that glaciers and ice sheets would retreat.
(photo of the Athabasca Glacier, Jasper Nat'l Park)
While I do believe that carbon emissions reduction is beneficial to the environment I also think that the problem is not so much that carbon emissions are causing global warming but that we have built our cities too close to the water. Of course, this is unavoidable. But we've built them on the assumption that the world does not change, that change is bad. In reality, though, I believe the Earth will change and those who do not change with it will be destroyed.
So, before I got married I was told that if I didn't have sex before I got married, I'd have a boring sex life when I got married. Needless to say, I didn't believe it. A few years later I heard the exact same thing from my manager at Top Craft. He was talking about sex and saying that if you don't have sex before you're married, you'll have a terrible and boring and unpleasant sex life when you are married. The third time I heard this was from one of Janelle's fellow students at the Mount. He said that, before Janelle was married, way back when he found out that she wasn't going to have sex until after the wedding, he'd been worried about her, that she would have a terrible sex life with some guy who was no good in bed. (Don't get me wrong, I do believe there are guys who are terrible in bed--it's those selfish ones who are only in it for themselves.) Where do these people get these ideas? They must all read the same magazines.
First of all, how do they know? Everyone who's said this to me has had sex before they were married, so how would they know? Secondly, it's pretty ignorant to think that having sex before you're married improves your sex life after you're married. Either way, you're going to have sex for the first time at one point or another, and you're not going to start out an old pro at it on your first shot! Just like anything else, sex is something you get better at with practice--no matter what the magazines say. I don't know why people unquestioningly believe whatever shows up in those snot rags.
Speaking of "Science by Press Release" ...
If you ask anyone what climate change and global warming is, they'll probably tell you that it's carbon dioxide emissions trapping heat in the atmosphere and causing global temperature increase. Catastrophic consequences of this are the melting of the ice caps and the recession of glaciers resulting in rising sea levels and global flooding. That's why Canada is proposing a carbon tax to encourage industries to reduce their carbon emissions. There are global initiatives, such as the UNFCCC to reduce levels of carbon emissions world-wide. However, there is no proof that carbon dioxide causes climate change.
I think that the whole idea of Global Warming as a catastrophe is based on the assumption that planet Earth has always been a certain way. The Theory of Evolution is based on this same assumption that the Earth is static. But the Earth is not static, it changes and fluctuates. Right this minute we are still in the process of emerging from an ice age. Scientists postulate that the Earth is naturally ice-free, even in the high latitudes--except during periods of glaciation (otherwise known as ice-ages) when ice sheets advance to cover larger areas of the world. There is evidence that the whole planet, include the far north, was at the same sub-tropical climate; for example, mammoths have been found frozen whole in sheets of ice with sub-tropical vegetation undigested in their stomachs--keep in mind that they would have had to have frozen straight through and very quickly and this happened before the invention of any kind of deep-freeze device. Ice core samples in Greenland show that much of the southern inner mainland of Greenland was suitable for farming, raising crops and herds around 800 to 1300 AD, during what is known as the medieval warming period. These are only two examples; there are many others . The glaciers in Alberta's Jasper National Park are receding. I have heard this often cited in the news media as evidence for the severity of global warming. There are also glaciers in the Andes Mountains in South America that are receding. A recent news cast reported the almost overnight disappearance of a large lake in the Andes mountains because of a melting glacier. This was also blamed on global warming. However, if the Earth is emerging from an ice age, it makes sense that glaciers and ice sheets would retreat.
(photo of the Athabasca Glacier, Jasper Nat'l Park)Sunday, January 6, 2008
More Adventures of Patrick and Janelle
So after we flew in from Toronto, went to bed, slept in, and woke up, new adventures were already waiting for us at home. Pretty much the first thing I did when I got home was check our bank account to see how much money we'd spent over the holiday.
Well, those nasty student loan people did it again. It just so happens that I'm paying off my student loan by monthly payments. Every month, an amount of money is automatically withdrawn from my bank account and put against my student loan, until my loan is payed off.
Last month the student loan people took three payments out of my account for different amounts. This was unexpected and devastating. I checked the status of my student loan and noticed that none of the additional payments were registering, but there was also an outstanding amount of interest which nearly matched the extra amount taken out of my account. At the time, I concluded that the extra payments paid my outstanding interest and let it go.
When the same thing happened again in December, I figured there must be something wrong. So I telephoned the student loan people and they weren't even able to account for the extra withdrawals. So I called the bank. The bank put a stop on the additional payments and advised me to go to one of their locations to fill out a disputation form. So Janelle and I went to the Superstore at Joe Howe and while Janelle did a few groceries, I filled out four disputation forms (one for each amount). The disputation form was pretty much just a sheet saying that I never authorized these withdrawals and had my signature and the signature of a witness. They said that I would likely hear back from them within seven to ten days. That done, Janelle and I went home, enjoyed some chocolate milk and had a relaxing afternoon.
After meeting that evening Andrew came over with Dan and Katie for some pizza. Andrew surprised us by showing off his goofy whimsical side. We had a great time.
And the next day I was back at work, seven days in a row. Brutal; my feet hurt like the devil. Those nine hour shifts will be the death of me. It's funny, because I could handle ten to twelve hour shifts at the Superstore, no problem, but anything more than six or seven hours at Little Caesar's is killer. My feet go all stiff and afterwards I can't walk properly. Janelle and I were sitting in the study when the phone rang out in the living room, Janelle had her mouth full so I ran out to answer it, but I stumbled and limped and was all awkward because my feet were stiff and ran into the wall. I ended up crawling on my hands and knees to get the phone before it stopped ringing. That was funny. I've started wearing Janelle's crocs to work, they're far more comfortable, and they feel like I'm wearing socks. Except for when the floor is wet. Then they're just slippery.
Well, those nasty student loan people did it again. It just so happens that I'm paying off my student loan by monthly payments. Every month, an amount of money is automatically withdrawn from my bank account and put against my student loan, until my loan is payed off.
Last month the student loan people took three payments out of my account for different amounts. This was unexpected and devastating. I checked the status of my student loan and noticed that none of the additional payments were registering, but there was also an outstanding amount of interest which nearly matched the extra amount taken out of my account. At the time, I concluded that the extra payments paid my outstanding interest and let it go.
When the same thing happened again in December, I figured there must be something wrong. So I telephoned the student loan people and they weren't even able to account for the extra withdrawals. So I called the bank. The bank put a stop on the additional payments and advised me to go to one of their locations to fill out a disputation form. So Janelle and I went to the Superstore at Joe Howe and while Janelle did a few groceries, I filled out four disputation forms (one for each amount). The disputation form was pretty much just a sheet saying that I never authorized these withdrawals and had my signature and the signature of a witness. They said that I would likely hear back from them within seven to ten days. That done, Janelle and I went home, enjoyed some chocolate milk and had a relaxing afternoon.
After meeting that evening Andrew came over with Dan and Katie for some pizza. Andrew surprised us by showing off his goofy whimsical side. We had a great time.
And the next day I was back at work, seven days in a row. Brutal; my feet hurt like the devil. Those nine hour shifts will be the death of me. It's funny, because I could handle ten to twelve hour shifts at the Superstore, no problem, but anything more than six or seven hours at Little Caesar's is killer. My feet go all stiff and afterwards I can't walk properly. Janelle and I were sitting in the study when the phone rang out in the living room, Janelle had her mouth full so I ran out to answer it, but I stumbled and limped and was all awkward because my feet were stiff and ran into the wall. I ended up crawling on my hands and knees to get the phone before it stopped ringing. That was funny. I've started wearing Janelle's crocs to work, they're far more comfortable, and they feel like I'm wearing socks. Except for when the floor is wet. Then they're just slippery.
Our Christmas Holidays
Here is the long awaited post about what happened next. I really haven't had much time to write since coming home...
We drove down to Michigan on Friday night and around Saginaw we ran into a gianormous snow storm. Well, it wasn't that bad, but it did slow us down considerably. We arrived at Leanne's parent's house late in the evening.
Surprisingly, they had presents for us. For Chad and Leanne and Janelle and I! How nice. We sat in the living room, around the "festive bush" and opened them up. So the weekend was filled with wonderfulness. Grandma and Grandpa Black arrived from North Bay on Saturday, in time for supper, and on Sunday night the Brocks came. So by Monday morning the house was full of family, and it was pretty cool too because Janelle and I didn't feel left out at all, even though we weren't related. Food was fantastic, shopping was fun--if you ask Janelle--and we had a great time playing games--bananagrams--and sitting around chatting it up.
On Sunday they had me preaching again.
New years' eve night, we were up playing games, we played banangrams and Bible Guestures, and then Uncle Gord taught us a song and we sang it quite well into the new year. After that, it was late, so we went to bed. Next morning we were up pretty early, heading back to Toronto for our flight out.
We got there in time to have supper at C'est Bon, near where we used to live, and then we hung out at the airport for a few hours while our flight was delayed, and delayed again because of weather in Halifax. Finally we boarded, flew out, and the flight was quite prolonged. Janelle and I sat at the very back, in those seats that don't recline, and the flight was packed out. Descending into Halifax we hit rough turbulence and it was very scary. The plane was bumping all over and rocking like crazy and an old man sitting near us huddled into the crash position, Janelle screamed as the plane jarred us to the ends of our seat belts. After what seemed like hours of this harrowingness, we touched down with great relief, and came to a slippery, though safe, stop at our terminal and the passengers erupted into applause.
We drove home through snow and lightning, very slowly and scarily, and got in at two am, dropped our bags by the door shed our clothes and dropped into bed... we slept in until late the next morning, which opened a whole new adventure; but I'll write about that later.
We drove down to Michigan on Friday night and around Saginaw we ran into a gianormous snow storm. Well, it wasn't that bad, but it did slow us down considerably. We arrived at Leanne's parent's house late in the evening.
Surprisingly, they had presents for us. For Chad and Leanne and Janelle and I! How nice. We sat in the living room, around the "festive bush" and opened them up. So the weekend was filled with wonderfulness. Grandma and Grandpa Black arrived from North Bay on Saturday, in time for supper, and on Sunday night the Brocks came. So by Monday morning the house was full of family, and it was pretty cool too because Janelle and I didn't feel left out at all, even though we weren't related. Food was fantastic, shopping was fun--if you ask Janelle--and we had a great time playing games--bananagrams--and sitting around chatting it up.
On Sunday they had me preaching again.
New years' eve night, we were up playing games, we played banangrams and Bible Guestures, and then Uncle Gord taught us a song and we sang it quite well into the new year. After that, it was late, so we went to bed. Next morning we were up pretty early, heading back to Toronto for our flight out.
We got there in time to have supper at C'est Bon, near where we used to live, and then we hung out at the airport for a few hours while our flight was delayed, and delayed again because of weather in Halifax. Finally we boarded, flew out, and the flight was quite prolonged. Janelle and I sat at the very back, in those seats that don't recline, and the flight was packed out. Descending into Halifax we hit rough turbulence and it was very scary. The plane was bumping all over and rocking like crazy and an old man sitting near us huddled into the crash position, Janelle screamed as the plane jarred us to the ends of our seat belts. After what seemed like hours of this harrowingness, we touched down with great relief, and came to a slippery, though safe, stop at our terminal and the passengers erupted into applause.
We drove home through snow and lightning, very slowly and scarily, and got in at two am, dropped our bags by the door shed our clothes and dropped into bed... we slept in until late the next morning, which opened a whole new adventure; but I'll write about that later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)