Democrat's hypocrisy dealing with climate change is easier to understand than Republican's total blocking of any attempts to address it.

Republicans seem to block any attempt to deal with climate change. One wonders if they don't care about future generations? Either that, or they don't believe the science. The science of climate change is getting more convincing each day.

What's wrong with Republicans? I'd like to ask if someone like Mitch McConnell thinks anything needs to be done about climate change?

I can better understand the seemingly hypocritical actions of liberals and Democrats when it comes to talking a good line about climate change, but still driving cars, complaining about rising gas prices and so forth. In a way, that's more understandable.

The carbon intensive American way of life has become so alluring and convenient that it is hard to change. The business models, for new ways of doing things, are not secure. One's survival and one's family's success often depends on playing the game of life the way it's been played for the past few decades.

In some ways, that problem is more understandable than what seems like the absolute blocking of any attempt to address climate change by Republicans.

Yes, maybe the second infrastructure bill isn't the best way to deal with this issue, but Republicans don't seem to offer ANY solutions to the climate change problem which I am pretty sure we are going to have to deal with; one way or another.

Blogs, Redditt and Flickr. Alternatives to Facebook?

For folks thinking of dumping Facebook, I do value expressing my thinking on Facebook, but there are alternatives. The alternatives are just not as alluringly convenient.

For instance there are forums on Redditt; which I'm thinking of learning to use.

As for my own outlets, I post a lot of the same pictures and comments on Flickr that I put on Facebook. For postings not related to photos, I use this blog.

One thing I like about Facebook, that Flickr or the blogs don't provide, is links and thumbnails to various articles in other media. I follow a lot of those links and post some of them myself.

There are other sources for media links. Yahoo News feed for instance. NPR Radio dishes up a lot of stuff as well. I navigate to lots of sites.

Another thing one can get from Facebook is the interaction. It can be alluringly convenient. It's the feedback of the network effect, but I'm noticing that it seems to be hitting a bit of a dry spell these days. Maybe people are backing off from Facebook a bit.

Elizabeth Warren's idea of breaking up Facebook may require friendship networks to be less like walled gardens.

Senator Elizabeth Warren says, "it is time to break up Facebook."

She also said; like when Ma Bell was broken up, we still need to be able to communicate with each other across the different platforms. Telephones can still connect.

I would guess this could mean doing away with having to friend someone to see their postings. Content would need to be accessible across a multitude of platforms.

We have already had that; in the early days of the internet when content was just out there on the open web. It was pretty seamless and accessible. One could navigate and interact with pretty much anything they wanted. It's the World Wide Web. Content hosted on lots of servers, run by lots of different organizations.

Part of the reason why Facebook has gotten so dominant is when friendship circles became more important. They became somewhat like walled gardens and people's friends pretty much all ended up on Facebook.

Other platforms are out there, but they don't have the "momentum" of friendship links to get going, big time. They don't have as much of what's called "the network effect."

The network effect is a feedback loop. Outside of Facebook, it's hard to get the ball rolling again.

Opening up, across the entire web, could mean less privacy; in some respects. Having things more accessible on the open web. Having content more searchable to everyone.

There is more to it that just this, however.

Facebook is very convenient. User friendly. It's kind of like "The McDonalds of social networking."

Before Facebook, it took a little more work, digging and thinking to make connections. As I remember, connections weren't quite as prolific.

To some extent, Facebook has set the bar higher in how much interaction we expect each day. A higher bar, or greater addiction?

I remember the mid 1990s when I first set up my own website; long before Facebook existed. Even back then, I thought that mostly just my friends would look at it, but it was nice to have a place to make my writing and photography accessible. I wouldn't have to buy stamps and mail it to people. One could just put their web address on a business card and hand it out.

That seemed like enough, back then. I'd already been in something called the Mail (Postal) Art Network. I'd circulated in many face to face gatherings, here in Bellingham. I'd written scores of letters to the editor of publications and to a lot of politicians.

Soon after I started my site, I found that the server it was hosted on, was keeping statistics on pageviews. I was getting views from all over the world!

That made me happy. Hundreds of views at least. Not big time fame and fortune, but more than just the friends I could meet and hand cards to. It was beyond just my own contacts. What was it?

Search engine traffic. Yes, topics being searched. My site was coming up in searches.

I still have that site, but the traffic has slowed to a crawl. It's buried in information overload as the web has grown and Facebook has, admittedly, taken much of the oxygen out of the room.

I've remained on Facebook for that reason. It's where the pageviews and comments seem to be, these days.

Some of this dynamic has to do with how algorithms direct traffic. Maybe today's search engines don't rate my website as high as they once did.

Facebook algorithms come under question as well. What type of content gets boosted? Do the feedback loops just reinforce and reward people's worse tendencies to go for the sensational over what's thoughtful?

I remember the days before Google. That was back when there were quite a few competing search engines; speaking of different platforms.

There was Altavista, Lycos and so forth. All searching the same web so they were pretty interchangeable. A seamless system across lots of platforms; like Elizabeth Warren is wishing for. Non monopolies.

Being able to connect with any telephone across a multitude of phone companies can work, but we have this in something called email and one has to say, it's not nirvana. The accessibility of email has created a nightmare of spam, rendering that invention nearly worthless.

Again, algorithms to the rescue. To sort out the relevant from what we each consider to be the junk.

Figuring out how to best manage all our dump trucks of information is something society is trying to figure out at this stage in the evolution of the information age.

If Biden goes to climate conference empty handed, he might want to say

If the infrastructure bills haven't passed yet, when Biden goes to the Climate Conference in Scotland, what would he say?

He could say, "sorry, we just don't have the political will, in USA, to do much about the climate change problem." That might be a powerful message aimed back home at Congress, the Republicans and some Democrats like Manchin.

The infrastructure bills aren't necessarily magic answers, however. They are likely just steps in a good direction.

Beyond just setting emissions standards.

Lots of goals are debated about at the climate summit. What should each country's emission target be? Then, unfortunately, life gets in the way. Seems like the goals are usually not attained. Our way of life, itself, does need changes.

Setting the goals gets lots of focus, but it may not matter that much anyway, unless the goals are followed. It may just be a waste of jet fuel getting people to the conference and another excuse for the masses to say their leaders are hypocritical with their own carbon footprints.

Dedication of Edward R. Murrow Center at WSU, 1973. My senior year in Pullman High School.

Going through old photos and thinking about my senior year in high school. Long before anyone knew what social media was, I was thinking about a possible career in broadcast media. It ended up being more like an avocation in social media.

During my senior year in high school (1972-73), I used to wander freely in the halls of KWSU's radio and TV studios in Pullman. It was in campus buildings open to the public.

One could peer through windows into an interesting world.

In 2013, when I bicycled back to Pullman for my 40th high school reunion, I revisited those same halls.

My sister Judith lives in Pullman. Being a bit less shy than me, at the time, she ask someone passing in the hall if we could tour a studio. They opened some things up, beyond just the hallways and answered many questions.

Here's a view from one of the halls I wandered in high school. The hall is still there, but the view has changed in this 2013 image.

KWSU TV Master Control.

New equipment now, but back then, the office looking room on the right had big video tape decks in it. They were the kind that stood on the floor; the size of a big home furnace back then. Furnaces are smaller, these days, as well.

Through the windows more to the left was master control, itself, with many TV screens. Looked different then.

The door on the right led to an observation area that looked down into two big TV studios.

More facilities than a small town TV station would need, but this was also a college of communications.

To this day, one still hears NWPB say they are a "service of the Edward R. Murrow College of Communications at Washington State University."

Here's another hallway I wandered. Probably more off limits, but they invited me in, during my high school years. Then again in 2013.

The radio studios.

On the right was the news booth. Farther down the hall was the main studios.

To the left was more space where they said, when I was in high school, "we will probably get FM."

KWSU Radio was all on AM back then, but now it's the heart of a large empire of regional transmitters, mostly on FM. The heart of Northwest Public Broadcasting which serves many parts of the Pacific Northwest, including Bellingham.

During my high school years, it was a bit more informal. One of the students, working there, told a story about how they used to try and get the newscaster to break up laughing during the news.

One of the antics was to walk past the news booth and start crouching at the knees. From inside the booth, it looked like the person was starting down a flight of stairs.

There were no stairs in that hallway.

I attended the dedication of what was those new studios, during my senior year. It's the Edward R. Murrow Communications Center.

A building dating back to 1899 was remodeled and a new wing was added behind. Radio and journalism was in the old section, TV in the new section.

There was some other stuff too; like the WSU Syndicated Tape Network. Educational shows were mailed out on reel-to-real tape for various other radio stations.

A practice now made obsolete by the internet.

Someone, who lived on my paper route when I was in 8th grade, had a show called "Science In The News." That was one of the shows sent out over the WSU Tape Network.

Another view of the old section of Murrow Center.

I kept a lot of papers from that dedication.

A famous CBS news commentator named Eric Sevareld came out from New York City to speak at the dedication.

My only memory of his address, which was held at Bohler Gymnasium that many years ago, was his description of trying to book a flight to Pullman, WA. from New York City.

A travel agent handed him the ticket with several stopovers to change planes. She said, "I think this will get you there, but it's the first time it's ever been tried." Most people in New York City have never heard of Pullman, WA.

This might be an urban legend that I heard from my mom. She had read an article, somewhere, that one of the plane stops was Spokane, just before Pullman.

Knowing that Sevareld would be in the area, they invited him to speak in Spokane also. He sent them a postcard with one word on it.

"Bunk."

Like thinking of Spokane as just a whistle stop, it must have been seen as an insult.

For Pullman, it was a David and Goliath moment, as Spokane is the biggest city and trade center of that region.

My mom didn't think much of Spokane with it's more conservative politics than little Pullman. Pullman is a college town.

These days, that story would be thought of as "liberal elitism."

My mom noted that she traveled to Seattle, 300 miles away, more often than Spokane; a mere 80 miles away. She often took the Greyhound Bus (she was a non driver) to Seattle where she had volunteer activity, at the state level, in our liberal church denomination; the United Church of Christ (Congregationalist Churches).

Comparing Seattle to Spokane, my mom would say, "Spokane thinks its big, Seattle knows its big."

As I remember, there was some friction between the CBS news operation, in New York, and Spokane's CBS affiliate which was then KXLY TV Channel 4.

Several years later (if I remember correctly) CBS dropped KXLY and went to Spokane's KREM, Channel 2. KXLY then picked up the ABC network so the Spokane stations kind of did a network shuffle.

Picture of me on left in a high school TV production class.

I also kept copies of the high school newspaper that I was a reporter for.

The high school was also in a brand new building, my senior year. It featured some sophisticated communications equipment of its own.

Headline below is from another edition where I wrote an editorial. I still have that copy posted on Flickr.

KWSU TV was planning to move their transmitter to Kamiak Butte and I favored the idea. Increase the reach for educational media.

The editor, of the high school newspaper, was against the plans for putting a TV tower on Kamiak.

She printed my editorial and wrote one of her own in a "point counterpoint feature."

Before moving to Kamiak, KWSU's TV antenna was on the top of Bryan Hall Clock Tower. It only had about a 15 mile reach from there.

After that controversy cleared, they did build a tower on the left side of Kamiak Butte north of Pullman. Built sometime after I graduated from high school.

The tower is hardly visible (or not visible at all) in this picture that I took looking north from Terrell Library Plaza at WSU in 2001. There are dormatories in the foreground.

The range of the signal is much farther from Kamiak, but now it might not matter as much as just about everything goes worldwide on the internet.

Tax cuts do help the rich as they pay more of the taxes

Something to think about.

If the rich pay more taxes than the middle class and the poor; as some right wing people claim, then tax cuts benefit the rich more than anyone else. Seems like politics of tax cuts does mostly favor the rich, but lots of people still support that; for some reason.

They must still believe in trickle down? I can see being pro business, but often the tax cutting politics is what seems to increase income inequality still farther.

Maybe future generations will be toppling statues of contemporary people who continue using fossil fuels

I hear that a statue of Thomas Jefferson was recently toppled. He had some good ideas, but he did own slaves.

Yes, the context of the times was different.

Maybe future generations will topple statues of today's leaders as future generations might say, "they lived at a time when green house gas emissions was commonplace." "They stood by and allowed that to happen; even participating in it themselves."

With energy prices going up, now is the time to consider a variable rate carbon tax.

Carbon taxes seem like good tools. Even Biden doesn't promote them because of side effects. A carbon tax is thought of as being regressive to poor folks who still have to commute to work.

One idea, I think about, is a variable rate carbon tax. Impose it during times of low fossil fuel prices and cut it back, or take it off, during times of high fossil fuel prices. It would be a variable tax.

This could prevent fossil fuels from undercutting renewable energy sources during times of cheap fossil fuel prices.

Today, lower income people are paying more for energy anyway now that the price has gone up again.

A better way to help low income people, than cheap fossil fuels, is to create new money (Modern Monetary Theory) and give it out for stimulus during times of low prices. This was done during the pandemic and it seemed fairly successful.

Economists often say you don't want to raise taxes during a recession as that just pushes the economy down further. My idea of a variable carbon tax would do just that. Raise taxes on fossil fuels that usually do go down in price during a recession.

Still, the stimulus idea can counterbalance that.

The debacle around former WSU Coach Rolovich demonstrates the need to spend more money on science than sports

South grandstands, WSU football stadium. Picture taken during my 2017 bicycle trip to Pullman. Grandstands only filled several times per year.

Who was the highest paid public official in the state of Washington? The football coach at Washington State University in my hometown of Pullman, WA.

He was recently let go from his job due to the mandate among Washington State employees to be vaccinated against the coronavirus. He refused to get the vaccine for undisclosed personal reasons, at first and then when push came to shove claiming the religious exemption which was later denied by the university.

In my opinion, it doesn't make sense not to get the vaccine unless there is a medical reason. Mandates may be a bit draconnian, but they do seem to work in reducing spread of disease. In an ideal world, mandates would not be necessary as people would function more rationally out of the goodness of their hearts and an understanding of the best science currently available.

Aside from all that, this firing of Rolovich is rocking the boat at WSU. It's problems associated with these high stakes games. That's one aspect of this whole story that most people wouldn't think about buried under the headlines. Why has football had to become such a high stakes endevour?

I hear that the team is now over 80 million dollars in debt. Having a wining team and a wining coach is considered crucial for the roadmap to paying off that debt. Paying the bills with TV revenues, ticket sales and so forth. Supposedly this isn't taxpayer's dollars, but as debts and problems mount, self sufficiency for the team becomes a more distant aspiration.

Seems like there are too many things, in our society, where the stakes are made high. Stuff that shouldn't be that important.

I've never been much of a sports fan, however.

There is a new coach, at least temporarily, filling in the position and a game is coming up Saturday (tomorrow). Many folks are holding their breaths and hoping the football season will continue with some wins.

Since there doesn't seem to be enough common sense and there isn't enough understanding of science, in our society, these problems happen. This is a big deal because of the importance of Football, at WSU and the amount of debt riding on the situation. At least there is one expense that has been saved, coach Rolovich's high salary; the highest paid public official in the state.

He is now suing the university in a wrongful dismissal suit. Now, money going to lawyers.

This whole situation has lead to a lot of divisiveness among Cougar fans, alumni and so forth.

Maybe we need to value science more and celebrity culture, including celebrity sports, less.

Maybe we are all robots anyway, since the subliminal advertising on television that they worried about many years ago.

About the supposed microchips being placed in the vaccines, I haven't noticed anything different since I got the vaccine.

That's probably because I've already been turned into a robot from the subliminal advertising, that they worried about being sent over televisions, around the 1970s.

Update about Bellingham waterfront redevelopment district, October 2021.

It looks like construction might be starting on the waterfront condos that they started digging the foundations for and then stopped for some reason (I posted about below). Now it looks like things may be moving forward again according to a recent Herald article (October 25 2021) which might be behind a paywall for some people.

I picked up a recent Whatcom Watch newspaper (October 2021) with a big article about the many complexities at the second Harcourt construction site in Bellingham's waterfront redevelopment district.

It's basically still just a hole in the ground. Everything from worries about rising seawater to the virus has troubled this large project.

My image from about a year ago.

Without going into all those details, I got to thinking about a concept that is talked about in the Strong Towns Facebook Group. Incremental development. Often development evolves from small scale to larger scale over time; like as a small town, or neighborhood, grows up and densifies.

Seems like one of the problems with this waterfront district is that people have been trying to plan for the final outcome, right from the start. Planning the outcome before knowing what developments would want to move into that district, or where the money would come from.

People have debated, "how dense should it be?" "How tall should the buildings be?" "Should it all be park instead?"

No one knew what would naturally evolve there. By naturally, I'm meaning what the market, or taxpayers would bring. Maybe I shouldn't use the word naturally, here.

If truly left to nature, it would evolve into weeds growing up out of gravel.

Old Georgia Pacific pulp tanks awaiting new use such as for art.

Long before I knew about the Strong Towns Facebook Group, I remember thinking it's hard to plan out the waterfront in a vacuum. Not knowing who, or what would have the money, or demand to build there. At start, I guess the plans can't be rigid.

Since those early days of waterfront planning, after the Georgia Pacific Pulp Mill closed, the planning situation has improved, or at least introduced more of the concept of flexibility, I guess.

After that area sat empty for many years, while plans came and went. The Port District seems to have basically said, "lets get something started down there." Now there are some portable, or what are called "pop up" businesses going in that area. A beer garden, an ice cream place and so forth.

There is something called a pump bicycle track. These things seem to be successful. They are fairly small scale and can be moved around as more things come in. Portable type buildings.

Harcourt has succeeded, I think, in converting the old Granary Building into new use. From what I read, it is mostly leased now with small businesses and office use. In background right above picture.

The larger projects and plans, based on what people thought the area would look like in 50 years, are stumbling at best. Meanwhile, smaller and more flexible development is starting to take hold.

Good to see the street, park (Waypoint Park) and the bike paths there. I would understand if those things had to change course a bit, like relocating a bike path around a building at sometime in the future; if need be.

New street and bike path.

Old Georgia Pacific acid ball sculpture, Waypoint Park.

Seems like it is hard to plan for everything at once. Hard to plan everything at once without lots and lots of money from a central source.

Western Washington University was talking about putting something like a branch campus down there, a few years ago. That plan is at least on hold. It would have been in one section of that neighborhood.

Meanwhile there are some things starting down there and those things may change and move around a bit as future developments happen. Hard to predict, at first, just what shape it might take, but like so many towns and neighborhoods, the changes are often incremental and evolutionary.

See some of my photos about Bellingham, WA. Waterfront Redevelopment District.

The immigration issue is about population as far as I am concerned

The debate about immigration often focuses on fear of crime coming into USA. Fear that may, or may not be legitimate. To me, that's not the main issue. The big issue is accommodating population.

We can accommodate more. It could even have benefits for work that needs workers, prosperity that needs consumers and culture than needs vitality.

Problem is, we have to make changes in the way we live, here in USA. Acres of free parking may have to go. Housing density needs to increase in some areas. The Southwest states are on the verge of running out of fresh water.

In some ways, we could live more fulfilling lives than we live now with the isolation and alienation of today's culture, but we have to be willing to make some big changes.

Population does have it's limits depending on how we live.

Censorship on media and social media, or just trying to prevent irrational panic.

There is news that one person, here in Washington State, has died due to the rare blood clot complications related to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. Apparently her obituary was censored on Twitter so now people are saying censorship.

Nothing is perfect and with 0% risk, but the vaccines are still safe, compared to being in a car or even riding a bicycle. Much, much safer than the risk of catching the virus, itself.

It's like playing the odds. What's the lowest risk, realizing that there's never totally no risk.

In an ideal world, all the news would be available, including the rare and freak incidents, but I can also see why media is under pressure to cool discussion a bit due to problems with public reaction.

Odd and rare stories, like a commercial airline crash, will make the news and be remembered, but something far more common, like everyday automobile crashes, gets less attention.

Due to this problem in public reaction, some types of news can feed people's distorted views of risk and cause reactions that lead to more deaths.

The news is out there, but I'm sure some editors are trying to cool things as so much of the public does tend to go off on distorted tangents.

I have heard about that situation with the J&J vaccine from several sources, so the news is out there.

Part of what makes this controversial is that the person didn't want to be vaccinated, but had to comply with a mandate related to being with a child at school.

Too bad she got the J&J as the Pizer or the Moderna are even safer and don't have that rare blood clot issue with pre menopausal women. I can only guess, but maybe she did the J&J because she was up against a deadline for the mandate and it's only a one shot vaccine. The Pfizer and Moderna are two shot vaccines which would take more time. That's only my guess.

A real good response to my post on Facebook

This is exactly the problem. The rare event gets lots of news coverage because it's rare, and then people see all that news coverage and get an exaggerated sense of the risk the rare event poses to their own lives and the lives of people in general. It's what's happening with the battery fires in Bolt EVs (electric vehicles). Some Bolt owners are panicking and selling their cars, saying they're going back to gasoline-powered vehicles and will never again buy an EV. There are far more fires in gasoline-powered vehicles than in EVs, but it's difficult to convince people of that.

Too many Third World Countries aspire to the bad, from USA life, without the good.

Today is National Coming Out Day, which I remember going back to my college days of the mid 1970s.

Since then, it seems like gay rights is one of the only social movements to make significant progress in USA. From coming out of the closet to legalized gay marriage. Meanwhile, other ideals haven't made such progress. Our carbon footprint is higher, income inequality is worse.

Unfortunately gay rights is still scorned in some Third World nations, yet it's one thing we have done right, here in USA. We've done good, though admittedly not as good in all parts of USA.

Basically Western Nations have made lots of progress on LGBTQA rights yet those rights are still scorned in much of the world. That is kind of ironic and unfortunate.

As for social justice, we in the west; especially in USA, have not done so good in reducing greed, resource consumption and carbon emissions. Things that I had also hoped for during my college years. Income inequality continues to grow and homelessness persists.

Seems like much of the Third World aspires to be more like us, materialistically, but not necessarily in terms of our human rights. Our greed and materialism has lead to the consequences of climate change and income inequality. It's like Third World nations want the bad without the good.

As for things that reduce global warming, one of western nation's greatest contributions is reducing our birthrates. Human rights plays a role here.

Other things, such as reducing our consumption, have not been as significant.

We have great technological innovations that hold promise, but they haven't been gaining traction as significantly as needed.

Meanwhile, energy prices are going up, worldwide, as the economy picks up speed. To put this in context, energy prices have been even higher, before; especially compared to other prices in the economy.

Still, green energy is not taking the load quick enough and / or our consumption habits are still too pervasive.

My vision of a low consumption, high technology future. Goes back to my college days.

I would like to see a world that, for the most part, embraces the abundance provided by technology. Smartphones, for instance.

At the same time, voluntary simplicity in terms of space used and resources consumed.

There are recent trends in electronic technology that use less energy and space. Microchips versus vacuum tubes, heat pumps versus woodstoves.

I would like to see less cultural pressure to work long hours and consume. Having more free time and work life balance would be good.

I would like to see less use of the private automobile due to the space and resources it consumes. Also the safety / accident problem. My ideal world would see more use of public transit and bicycles. Bicycles for health and the beauty of what can be seen at a slower pace.

High tech transit, like the Skytrain in Vancouver, BC. (actually started in 1986!) is good, but the simple city bus works also. We already have, at hand, much of what my future world would use.

Life could generally be at a slower and at a less stressful pace, but technology would be available and used wisely.

Most people would live in urban settings for transit, walking, bicycling and to protect farmlands from sprawl. Some folks would live in rural settings; especially if engaged in resource production such as farming, forestry and tourism.

Sensationalism might be a good concept to think about in terms of the Facebook algorithm issues.

Now comes the difficult task of trying to figure out how to regulate, or what to do about Facebook's algorithms. I think much of the problem isn't new, but just takes on new forms in new media. In journalism, it's called the problem of "sensationalism."

In the past, I've learned about the concept of "Yellow Journalism." There's the phrase, "if it bleeds, it leads." There's also the concept of "tabloid journalism."

Interesting that, so far, I haven't heard that terminology used; in terms of this Facebook issue. We keep having to reinvent the wheel, I guess.

Thinking of this in terms of sensationalism could be useful. How do we reduce it? Can it be regulated? Is it mostly just the fault of what people react to? Is it mostly the result of media businesses, including social media, pushing it as a business model?

On Facebook and other social media, it's artificial intelligence pushing things. AI that can still be programmed. In the past days of regular media, it was the likes of editors, journalists and headline writers.

On a personal note, I notice the things that I write about don't usually generate lots of emotional response.

Both Infrastructure Bill #1 and Infrastructure Bill #2 might pass. They might still pull it off.

Maybe #2 will be somewhat smaller, but they still might pull something off.

If not, they should still pass #1. Ideally, they can do a lot of what's in the spirit of the law for #2 on down the road. Ideally, if the Democrats had stronger backing from the voters, they could pull things off with more comfortable margins in the House and Senate. The real thin margin is nerve wracking.