News from the Just Not Getting It Department
I was heading home last night, crossing Riverfront St. to get on the bike path that runs all way through town and out to the trestle that takes me back into Seabright. Nothing unusual about that, but when I hit the path, a guy went buzzing by me on his bike. Uphill, at speed, without pedaling. I followed him for a little while and not once did the guy pedal the bike. Not a single revolution of his pedals by his own power. He was motoring along with one of those little add-on motors that basically turns an exercise machine into a toy motorcycle.

And he had this smug look on his face as he motored by, like he was actually doing something good for himself by riding a bike. And normally he would be doing something good but it appeared to have completely missed him that bikes are really only good for you if you do the pedaling. Not if you allow a motor to propel you everywhere. You might as well get a motorcycle or a car for all the exercise you get from it. It just struck me as kind of stupid and I wanted to catch up to him just to tell him so but my little cruiser bike's a single speed and there was no way I was catching him on it. So I'm writing it here instead.

People, if you're riding a bike for exercise then you absolutely need to pedal. Sure, you can get a motor if you want but don't use it unless you have to. The bike is there for pedaling, its fun to pedal your way home instead of letting the motor push you. I'm sure that guy talks about how good it is to ride his bike into the office everyday without even considering the fact that he's getting absolutely zero exercise by his method.

Oh well.

Another Just Not Getting It Post has to do with a conversation we had last week on the way back to New York from Maine.
It went a long ways toward explaining the gap between the haves and the havenots. My brother, who is a have by the virtue of his incredibly tough work ethic and his brains and he deserves every accolade he receives, was talking about one of our relatives who bought a whole bunch of something on sale because she knew that she could put the extras up on auction at eBay and would make a decent chunk of change from it. My brother couldn't fathom why someone would go to all that trouble just to make a couple of hundred bucks.

The reason is that his time is valued at a much higher rate than other peoples and it was a losing proposition to consider spending two hours to make two hundred bucks when he makes that much in an hour or less normally. And he was slightly derisive towards her for what P and I thought was a good idea and a good way to generate some extra income without much risk. It highlighted the gap that exists between those that have to figure out where the PG&E money is coming from, where the money to pay the telephone bill is coming from and how much money is left over to buy groceries. It was a non-issue to him, his life operated at whole other magnitude of expense and the paltry sums of electric bills, groceries and other necessities was below his threshold of ability to care about.

It kind of gave me a glimpse into the huge chasm that exists between those of means and those who live from paycheck to paycheck. I don't hold him to blame for the gap but I do think that his ability to empathize with those in less fortunate circumstances has diminished greatly. I wonder if he's become a Republican in thought if not in deed (no wait, we had the George Bush is a crook talk and we were in total agreement there so I think his soul is still safe).

But its scary to think that this is my brother, a highly intelligent guy who does come from not the most wealthy past and he's unable to empathize with lower income people's plights. What does that mean for rich politicians in Washington who can't even begin to worry about not having enough money for dinner or they have to choose between getting the car fixed and paying rent?