Ray Lockard

Ray Lockard and his wife, Yvonne, were longtime friends of our family.  I came across this obituary the other day.

Obituary : Ray W. Lockard

Ray W. Lockard March 11, 1927 - September 22, 2010 Funeral services for Ray will be held at Greenlawn Southwest Mortuary, 2739 Panama Lane, Bakersfield CA, at 3:00 p.m., Monday, September 27, 2010. Visitation will be Sunday, September 26th, from 12:00 to 4:00 p.m. Ray was born in Tolbert TX, the 9th of 11 children, to Thomas and Birdie Lockard. The family moved to Bakersfield in 1939. He attended Kern County Union High School (BHS) and after serving in the Army, met and married the love of his life, Yvonne Jones. They were inseparable for almost sixty years. Ray dedicated his life to Yvonne and his daughters Lisa and Kathy and later to his three beloved grandchildren. He worked as an accountant for Trico, Bender, Apex and Fairway/Houchin. Family and friends will miss his great sense of humor and his intellect. He had an uncanny way of making everyone feel as if they were the most important person in the room. His favorite things were playing dominos at the Petroleum Club and Friday night dinners at Mexicali with family and friends. He and Yvonne were lifetime members of the Bakersfield Racquet Club. They loved playing tennis and played often with good friends Bob and Margaret Self. They also loved their wonderful friends on Cork Lane. Ray is survived by his daughter, Kathy Graham; grandson, Jayce Graham; granddaughters, Kaydee and husband Steve Trojanowski, Candice Graham, Brandee and Chris Ramirez; and beloved brother, T.H. Lockard. Ray was preceded in death by parents, Thomas and Birdie Lockard; his wife, Yvonne; daughter, Lisa; sisters, Nita, Reudean, Mary and Louise; brothers, Ralph, Shaw, Bedford, Chancy and Curtis. In lieu of flowers, make donations to Hoffmann Hospice, 8501 Brimhall Road #100, Bakersfield, CA 93312. Greenlawn Southwest Mortuary

 

Preparing for Disasters

At work, we had many fire drills and alarms over the years.  Get up from your work station immediately, proceed to your designated exit, leave the building, go to the designated assembly point, do not return until you receive the all clear from the fire department.

For earthquakes, it was similar.  When you feel a tremor, duck under your desk or table, wait for the tremors to stop, leave the building if ordered, don't stand near the building, go to the designated assembly point, wait for further instructions. 

It was necessary to practice.  The first time we had an alarm, some staff wanted to log off their computer, finish a task, run to the washroom, or return for a forgotten purse.  After a few trials, we improved.

We also trained first aid attendants, stocked emergency supplies, brought canned food, held monthly meetings of the health and safety committee.  We had inspections for occupational hazards (loose electrical cords, blocked doors, tidiness).  We appointed floor wardens and fire marshals.

Of course, no one knew what would happen if we had a once in two hundred years, 9.0 earthquake.  The building might be severely damaged, the bridges down, the power out, possibly flooding along the Fraser River.  We considered that we might not be able to get home.

In Japan, for all their training for earthquakes, they had not practiced what to do in a real tsunami.  It's difficult to anticipate exactly what the situation might be: how high the water might reach, how much time you might have, how to protect vulnerable people. Clearly, they needed a better plan in some of the towns affected. Those who left immediately when the alarm sounded, survived.  Those who procrastinated, did not.  In all cases, you need a plan; to practice it; to act on it immediately.

There are similarities between the Japan tsunamis and the Katrina hurricane.  Risks not properly assessed.  Failure of the evacuation plan.  Resistance of  the population.  Difficulty assisting the elderly and sick.  In some ways, these seem to be recurring factors in all large scale disasters.   

Free Speech -- U. S. Style

The U. S. Supreme Court has ruled 8-1 that the Westboro Baptist Church has a right under  the 1st Amendment  to picket funerals of soldiers and display signs such as, "Thank God for Dead Soldiers", "God Hates Fags", and "God Hates Jews".   In Canada and European countries, their signs would be prohibited as hate speech.  In the U. S., they are protected as free speech.

The protection stems from a strict legalistic interpretation of the U. S. Constitution regarding  freedom of speech, although the U. S. does place some limits on it.  Initially, it may be limited by considerations of place, time, and manner.  You may not, for example, shout your message in a quiet neighborhood at 3:00 in the morning. You may not be able to say what you want in your workplace or on a university campus.  You may not incite a riot or violence against a group or individual, where the prospect of violence is imminent.

However, if the violence is not imminent, you are in a public place, and not interfering with others, you may spout hate speech as much as you like, attacking race, religion, gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation.

I wonder whether this "freedom" really serves the United States, or  is even what the framers of the Constitution intended.

Other countries realize that attacking diverse groups because of  race, ethnicity, or religion divides the society and leads to group animosity.  Attacking someone for gender or sexual orientation is degrading.  It's hard to see that allowing this with impunity promotes in any way a stable, harmonious society, or "promotes the general welfare", which is a principal responsibility of laws and government.

The argument that hate speech may be prohibited only if produces "imminent" violence, but is protected if it only contributes to "eventual" violence seems flawed.  In either case, the harm is potentially the same.

New Era of Labour Conflict

Free market capitalism is praised for creating an efficient utilization of resources, producing  goods with high demand and low cost. Uncontrolled, it also has the disadvantages of reducing competition through corporate consolidation, producing unemployment, and concentrating wealth.

During the last century, federal reforms were legislated to reduce practices that limited competition (anti-trust acts); create social safety nets (unemployment insurance); and mitigate the impact of the business cycle (fiscal and monetary policies of the Federal Reserve Bank). 

In 1935,  in an attempt to reduce labour conflict and provide for a greater sharing of wealth, the U. S. passed the National Labor Relations Act, allowing employees to establish collective bargaining through labour union representation.   It became illegal for employers to interfere with the process of union certification, to attempt to intimidate employees, or to refuse to bargain in good faith.

We now have the sad situation in Wisconsin, in which the recently elected governor has announced that he doesn't believe in collective bargaining. His position is that management alone should establish wages, benefits, and working conditions.  The rationale given is the need to reduce a projected state budget deficit.  Further, he threatens the employees with massive layoffs, if he doesn't get his way.

These tactics are meant to intimidate employees and reduce their power in the workplace.  The proper, honest way to amend a collective agreement is through negotiation, not by decree.

Prior to the passage of the NLRA, clashes between union organizers and management security were frequently violent.  Employees advocating unionization could be fired and blacklisted.  They fought back through sit-ins and wildcat strikes.  I wonder if this is where we are headed again.

Debt Woes

In 1993, Canadians became concerned about the amount of debt its federal government was accumulating.  The debt/GDP ratio had risen to 68% and 35% of all revenue was going to pay interest on the debt.  It was time to get the financial house in order.

Over the next few years, a number of unpopular measures were instituted.  The Goods/Services Tax was introduced; the federal government stopped cost sharing with the provinces for health and social services; Employment Insurance eligibility was curtailed.  For a dozen years (1997-2008), the Canadian federal government ran a surplus.  The debt/GDP ratio fell to 29%, by far the lowest of the G7 countries.

Canadians, as usual, took these changes with stoicism, perhaps even with some satisfaction.  There was grumbling about the GST, but not many demonstrations.  Part of the reason was that the increased burden of providing services was absorbed by the Provinces; and the cutbacks were followed by a period of relative prosperity, during which the economy grew.

During the current recession, the Canadian federal debt/GDP ratio has climbed back to 38%.  The situation in all other developed countries seems much worse.  In the U. S., it sits at 70%; (100%, if you count debt to the Federal Reserve).  Some European countries have debt over 100% of GDP.

The Canadian and U. S. federal figures, of course, don't show the debt of the Provinces/States.  The Provinces of Ontario and Quebec have fared more poorly than the western provinces, as the Canadian economy has shifted from manufacturing to resources.  Down the road, they may face more austerity.

In the U. S., many states are struggling with their budgets.  Sadly, in Wisconsin, the first remedy is an attack on the collective bargaining rights of the public employees.  Turning Wisconsin into a "right-to-work" state (union membership not required, regardless of vote) will not help the people of Wisconsin.          

The solution to U. S. debt woes is tax reform; an honest, perhaps unpopular, review of entitlement programs; as well as the question of how much world-policing can they afford. For all the complaining about taxes, U. S. tax rates are low.  Such deductions as mortgage interest are of most benefit to the wealthy.  And why mortgage interest any more than rent?  Most developed countries have some form of value-added or federal sales tax.  There are bound to be unpopular choices, but they are much better than attacking middle-class workers.

Pension Perils

Some say that I'm lucky to be retired and have an employment pension.  I agree.  My complaint is that my pension benefits seem to be deteriorating bit by bit.

I retired at a time when my employer was downsizing and the number of retirees suddenly increasing.  The Pension Board of Trustees announced that they could no longer afford the dental plan.  I could purchase Blue Cross dental insurance if I wanted.  Shortly after, the Extended Health Care annual deductible was increased from $30 to $250. 

The latest revelation from the Pension Trustees is that most of the group benefits are being eliminated, effective April, 2012.  This includes the Pension Plan portion of the Medical Services Plan premiums, which will increase my monthly payments from $45 to $109 ($768 annually); and Extended Health Care for spouses/dependents.  The latter covers 70% of the cost of prescription drugs, but it looks like I'll have to purchase more Blue Cross insurance if I want to include my wife's needs.  Group life insurance is also being eliminated, although I lost this a few years ago when I turned 65.  Those 60-65 will have to buy their own insurance (expensive when you are no longer in the larger pool of younger employees).

These benefits were promised, and we thought we were paying for them through years of contributing to the Pension fund.  We were assured that they would be there, and that the Plan was prudently administered.  The current newsletter states that the basic pension plan is secured and assured for life.  Unfortunately, that only means if nothing upsets the projections.

In reality, the Pension Board can't assure the pension.  Unforeseen events can bring it down.  Pension payout projections depend on forecasting the amount of contributions, the amount of benefit payments, and the amount of investment income.

When the BC Liberals reduced the size of Provincial Government in 2002-2003, the amount of contributions declined and the benefit payments dramatically increased.  This resulted in the elimination of dental coverage and the increased Extended Health Care deductible.  The current round of reductions is the result of mismanagement of the fund and a loss of $2.5 billion (14% of fund) in the economic downturn of 2008-2009.  Obviously not prudent management.  Although it has recovered somewhat, the amount of the Pension fund is still less than it was in 2007.

The consolation we are left with is that other major pension plans in BC are having to make similar changes.

For All Seasons

Thomas Cromwell (1485-1540)

I was watching "A Man for All Seasons", in which Thomas Cromwell (1485-1540), Chief Minister to Henry VIII,  attempts in a heavy manner to persuade a very principled Thomas More to support Henry's divorce from Catherine of Aragon and marriage to Anne Boleyn.  I felt a little uncomfortable, Thomas Cromwell being my 14th Great Granduncle.

I am descended from Thomas' sister Katherine Cromwell.  Although Katherine's husband was Morgan ap Williams, her son Richard preferred the Cromwell association so much that he adopted his Mother's name (and his descendants kept it).

Katherine's grandson Henry Cromwell was grandfather (through his son Robert) of Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658), Lord Protector of England.  Henry's great granddaughter Edith Cromwell (through his son John and grandson Richard) joined her brothers in Maryland and married Christopher Gist, my 9X great grandfather.

Christopher Gist, George Washington

Christopher and Edith (Cromwell) Gist's grandson, also Christopher Gist, was a scout for George Washington; and in turn grandfather of George Gist (Cherokee Native name Sequoyah), who developed a syllabary of the Native language.

My 5X great grandmother Mary Gist, also descended from Christopher and Edith (and second cousin to Sequoyah)  married James Stevenson (1754-1845), who served in the Revolutionary War at the Battle of King's Mountain.  Mary's granddaughter Mary Stinson (shortened from Stevenson) married John White  (1807-1857), had eleven children, including my gg grandfather Robert White (1844-1938).

James Stevenson

As well as Thomas Cromwell,  "A Man for All Seasons" also includes Anne Boleyn, my 1st cousin 14X removed.  We are both descended from Thomas Howard (1443-1524), 2nd Duke of Norfolk, his daughter and my 13th great grandmother Katherine Howard being sister to Anne Boleyn's mother Elizabeth.  I have the same relationship to Henry VIII's fifth wife, Catherine Howard, daughter of Thomas Howard's son Edmund.
Unfortunately for Anne, Catherine, and Thomas Cromwell, they all lost their heads at the Tower of London; Anne and Catherine for adultery (treason) and  Thomas for mismanaging Henry's fourth marriage to Anne of Cleves.  My own ancestor, Katherine, was widowed in 1531 by the execution of her husband Rhys ap Griffith Fitzuryan, also at the Tower for conspiring against the King.