CLOSE
Authors Posts by Leah Dunaief

Leah Dunaief

464 POSTS 0 COMMENTS

by -
0 635
Pixabay photo

By Leah S. Dunaief

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

Almost everyone I have ever asked hates housekeeping. Who wants to be scrubbing floors, cleaning bathrooms and dusting furniture when one could be taking a walk, reading a book or just visiting with a friend? Well, here comes a solution, if not immediately, then before too long. It’s called a domestic robot.

Robots that clean swimming pools and sweep carpets have been in use for many years, but according to news reports, more personal robots are on the way. If you were to own one, in theory at least, what would you have it do?

I would gladly yield to a robot that could sew on a button, or fold the laundry at the end of the wash cycle and put the items away in the drawers. How about one that could iron? Talk about spoiled! 

I can clearly remember when, as a small child, I would watch my parents washing their clothes by rubbing them against  a “wash board” in the soapy work sink, then hanging them, with a myriad of clothes pins, to dry. We thought we had come so far when washing machines and dryers were invented. Now I am asking for an unpaid valet to do the job of several maids over 100 years ago in Downton Abbey.

I would also appreciate a robot that could take out the dog for a walk on freezing or snowy or rainy days when I would prefer to stay nicely warm under the covers in bed.

“Edgar,” I would say, for I would have already named my robot, “Please take the dog as far as the stop sign this morning and dry him off before he comes back into the house.” The dog, of course, would have to get used to the robot first, but with a little patience that could be managed.

Then there could be a sous-chef robot. “Cut the red onions, mushrooms, red pepper, cucumber and radishes for a salad, Edgar. And tear apart the Boston lettuce. While you are at it, put all the ingredients in a bowl and set it on the table along with oil, balsamic vinegar and serving tongs.”

Now I don’t mind cooking. In fact, I rather enjoy it. But it would encourage me to make more complicated dishes than tuna fish with mayonnaise if I could summon Edgar to clean up after I was finished. While I was cooking, Edgar could set the table, and when we were finished eating and were leaving the dining room, Edgar could put the dishes in the dishwasher and turn it on. 

Remember how excited we were in the olden days when dishwashers appeared in our lives? Now I’m looking to have them filled, then unloaded, with the dishes put back in the cabinet, ready for the next meal. Sounds ridiculous? It’s not.

According to Wikipedia, “A domestic robot or homebot is a type of service robot, an autonomous robot that is primarily used for household chores, but may also be used for education, entertainment or therapy. While most domestic robots are simplistic, some are connected to WiFi home networks or smart environments and are autonomous to a high degree. There were an estimated 16.3 million service robots in 2018.”

Robots have been designed since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution to help with production, but personal robots started to appear, according to Wikipedia, in the 1980s. “People could use it to play songs, games, wake people up in the morning, notify important events, and even guard the home.” The robot can be programmed with a computer and some software or it could be controlled with an infrared transmitter and a remote pad.

So guess what?

In addition to cleaning floors, there does exist an ironing robot, a laundry-folding robot, and even a cat litter box-cleaning robot. There also exist robots that can make rotis and tortillas. And robots can patrol the house with night vision to protect against intruders.

All of these will, I suspect, become family members soon. 

by -
0 676
Pixabay photo

By Leah S. Dunaief

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

Houses are like children. They need constant care and rescuing, especially in this current bout of tempestuous weather we’ve been having. Sometimes they have several needs that just pile up on each other.

The trouble started Saturday, when we plugged the vacuum cleaner into an electric strip and the lights went out. So did the computers. After much hunting and flipping of fuses in the fuse boxes, we finally found the culprit and restored the electricity—but not the computers. That took another long and arduous retracing of procedures, with the help of a kindly electrician, who came over despite his hernia operation four days earlier, until they  worked.

Vowing never again to plug the vacuum into the power strip, we thankfully continued on with our lives. We might have even felt a little smug about figuring out how to solve the various problems. 

That is, until Monday. Now, no one I know loves Mondays. Unless they work on the weekends and have the day off. So it was not a pleasant beginning to the anyway unwelcome start of Monday, when we found that the fearsome winds of Sunday night had knocked down a heavy tree. It had fallen across the driveway, innocently forming a perfect right angle with the blacktop, making the driveway passable only for deer.

Eventually we got out, only to be informed that the toilet bowl in the office was having a bad day. According to prior plans, the plumber had come to restore the grout at the base of the pedestal, from which tiny amounts of water had been seeping onto the floor. In the process, he heard something snap, he said, and suddenly the minute (my-NOOT) leak turned into a gusher. 

We rushed around the building, fumbling for the intake valve. Before we could turn off the water, the plumber somehow stopped the flow, but the problem was not solved. He told us that he needed to replace a particular part. Of course, Monday was Presidents Day, a holiday for plumbing supply stores the world over. After a fashion, our plumber was able to put the crisis on hold until the following day, but not until considerable hysteria was expended, along with the water.

We went home Monday evening, consoling ourselves that these were only inanimate material losses. At least we had personally survived unscathed.

At 7:12 the next morning, a text message arrived, informing us that the managing editor, our only managing editor, had a temperature of 102.3 degrees. She gamely told us that she could do some of her work remotely, but it was going to be a difficult day since the papers are due at the printer Wednesday afternoon. We took some prophylactic action, helped by the good nature and generosity of others, and hoped for the best.

The miseries weren’t over. When we got home, the mixer we were using, that had been valiantly making pulp of the raw fruits and vegetables for a smoothie, suddenly stopped. Just like that, in the middle of making dinner. Unplugging, replugging, restarting, shaking, switching receptacles, giving it a rest, were all to no avail. It was as if a ghost had snuck into the house and jinxed the heretofore powerful mixer, which wasn’t nearly old enough to have died on the job. We looked up the brand on the internet to see if instructions might help us solve the trouble. We found lots of instructions, all of which we had already tried, and the dumb machine just remained on the kitchen counter, silently defying us.

Exasperated, we moved into the living room, picked up the daily newspaper and were ready to turn our attention to exogenous problems about which happily we had no responsibility to solve. 

And there it was. One more impotent machine before us. One more challenge to try and fix. The humidifier that we rely on to keep the heat from drying out our biological pipes, as well as our house, was not sending up its normal stream of vapor. I capitulated and went to bed. 

Those few days, there must have been something in the water. 

by -
0 540
Pixabay photo

By Leah S Dunaief

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

What happens when opposites attract? Are those the most successful marriages? It is sometimes said that we subconsciously supply missing strengths to our partners when we select a mate. Do we really? Or is it just chemistry? Or possibly both?

We all know different couples and can notice who brings what to each pair. But of course, we don’t truly know about any marriage except our own, and to some extent, that of our parents.

Speaking for my own marriage, I can attest to the fact that differences make for an interesting life. The first example that comes to mind was our view toward vacations. Here is a typical scenario.

He: “Let’s go on vacation next month.”

She: “Oh, I couldn’t leave work next month. We have two new supplements due and not enough staff to finish them.”

He: “You always say that.”

She: “Besides, where would we go?”

He: “How about white water canoeing in the Adirondacks?”

She: “With the children?”

He: “Yes. We can all learn how to canoe. And we can bring the dog.”

She: “How would that work?”

He: Pulling out from his inner suit jacket pocket an envelope stuffed with tickets, “I have reservations for a cabin, four canoes and an instructor for five days.”

You probably guessed. We went. We had a wonderful time. My mother and sister came too, which was critical since our third son was too young to join us on the water. He had a good time back at the cabin, and we did indeed learn how to white water canoe, although I have probably forgotten by now. 

I also thrived on the break in my work routine, and the competent staff back at the office handled the workload just fine. 

Since my husband died, I have had to set a date deliberately for each vacation, and it’s a fight I have with myself because I don’t think I should leave the office. But I also know that I will function much better if I take a rest, and thanks to him, I have become a big believer in the restorative power of vacations.

So what did I bring to the relationship?

Here is another true life adventure story. The children were a bit older, and we were going to learn to ski in Vermont.

He: “I’ll do some research and make the reservations.”

She: “OK, I’ll pack.”

We got a late start and didn’t arrive at the motel until well after dark. Exhausted, we fell  asleep despite uncomfortable beds. The morning light revealed an unmanageable scene. The five of us, along with our suitcases, boots, heavy ski pants, sweaters and jackets, hats and gloves, could barely fit into the room. I had brought a toaster oven with the thought of making Eggos for breakfast and then getting an early start on the slopes. When I plugged it in, a fuse blew with a nasty zap. The bathroom left a great deal to be desired and there were no closets.

She: “Why did you select this motel? Are we near the lifts?”

He: “It was the most reasonable one. The slopes are only ten miles away.”

She: “C’mon kids, pack up. We are going to find another place to stay.”

And we did. It was more expensive, a half a mile from the entrance, and we did become a skiing family. It was also a bit of a turning point. My husband and I agreed that henceforth, we would spend enough money to be comfortable on our two weeks of annual vacation, and upon our return home, we would resume our normally frugal lives.

After that, even our children noticed the difference.

by -
0 471
METRO photo

By Leah S. Dunaief 

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

Cancer. Half a century ago, it was a word only whispered, so dreaded was the disease. It was considered a death sentence. People who had it were often shunned, as if it were contagious. And hospital treatments were demonic. As one cancer specialist at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston put it, “We were kind of just pushing poisons and hoping for the best.”

But cancer deaths have plummeted in the last 30 years, as scientists and physicians have greatly improved their understanding of the pathology, and treatments now target some cancer-causing genes. Likened to diabetes, cancer might be thought of as a manageable chronic disease.

What exactly is cancer?

An excellent article in this Tuesday’s issue of The New York Times science section tackled that question. “Every day, billions of cells in our body divide or die off. Once in a while, though, something goes awry, and cells that should stop growing or die simply don’t. Left unchecked, those cells can turn into cancer,” writes Nina Agrawal.

Why that happens and how to treat the problem still puzzles scientists and doctors, but there has been great progress in understanding the disease in its various forms. While they used to think that mutations of genes caused all cancer, that has turned out to be only part of the story. Some mutations lay dormant an entire lifetime and never lead to cancer.

Separate from DNA code mutations, there are epigenetic changes, changes due to our environment in the way genes are expressed, that play a huge role. These may be caused by aging, dietary and environmental exposures, and chronic inflammation.

Some chemicals have long been known to cause cancer, like asbestos and those in cigarette smoke. Air pollution is now thought to increase risk, especially for lung and breast cancers, triggering inflammation. So does eating an unhealthy diet, which “can upset the balance of our microbiome, allowing certain bacteria to grow unchecked. Scientists think this may cause chronic inflammation, which can lead to colon or pancreatic cancers,”  Dr. Davendra Sohal, a gastrointestinal oncologist, told The New York Times.

Interestingly, malignant tumors are made up of cancer cells, as well as normal cells “that have been recruited to support their growth,” according to The NYT. “Many of these normal cells are the same type of immune cells that will flood the site of an injury or infection to help heal that wound—by helping new cells multiply, generating blood vessels, stimulating new connective tissue and avoiding attacks from other parts of the immune system. These are capabilities that cancer cells can co-opt indefinitely to support their own growth.”

Epidemiologists estimate that 40 percent of cancers and cancer deaths can be caused by controllable risk factors. These include cigarette smoking, sun exposure, alcohol use and excess body weight. Some infections, for example, caused by hepatitis B and C viruses, human papillomavirus and H. pylori bacteria, can also cause certain cancers, according to the article.

Understanding better how the immune system works has opened up a new treatment field called immunotherapy, using T-cells, immune system fighters produced or processed by the thymus gland that kill cancer cells in lungs and skin, among others. Engineered by doctors, T-cells, forming CAR T-cell therapy, have been most effective against blood cancers, the reporter said.

Can cancer be cured?

While physicians are reluctant to use that term, newer treatments like stem cell transplants and CAR T therapy make for optimism, especially after a number of years elapse when a patient is in remission.

Research further to develop prevention and treatments must continue.

by -
0 431
METRO photo

By Leah S. Dunaief

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

The articles I’ve read recently call it “financial infidelity” and blame it on some percentage of all couples, but especially on Generation Z. “It” refers to hiding money from each other, or if not exactly hiding, then not sharing either the money itself or its existence. And since money seems to be the primary issue couples argue about over the long term, the question of how much to share is highly relevant to any relationship.

A survey by consumer financial services firm Bankrate indicated that 67 percent of 18 to 28- year-olds hide money information from each other in committed relationships. That drops to 54 percent of millennials, 33 percent of Gen Xers and 30 percent of baby boomers, according to Newsweek. For some reason, older than baby boomers aren’t in the survey. I can try to offer that perspective since I am in the older group.

“Hidden debts, undisclosed spending, or secret accounts can, as well as undermining a partner’s trust, disrupt shared financial plans, such as saving for a home, retirement or children’s education, causing long-term financial strain,” according to the article.

Some 40 percent of couples in the United States have kept secrets from each other about money, according to the study involving 2217 adults. These secrets may include spending more than a partner would approve of (33 percent), keeping hidden debt (23 percent), having a secret credit card (12 percent), a secret savings account (15 percent), or a secret checking account (13 percent).

Yet these figures exist despite 45 percent of those surveyed disapproving of what is termed financial infidelity and even equating it with actual unfaithfulness. If a secret financial situation is discovered, it tends to disrupt the trust that relationships are built upon and perhaps cause speculation over what else might be hidden 

One senior industry analyst, Ted Rossman, maintains, “Money secrets can undermine a relationship. It’s hard enough to meet your financial goals when you are pulling in the same direction. It’s almost impossible when you’re pulling in opposite directions.” 

Rossman goes on to say that being open about your finances doesn’t mean you need to combine all your money. A yours-mine-ours is a possible arrangement for those who feel more comfortable that way.

Despite the importance of money in a marriage or committed relationship, half a century ago, when I was married, money was the last thing on our minds. We were entirely caught up in the romance and didn’t consider the business aspect of lifetime coupling. So when the time came to buy a house, my husband and I counted our pennies and came up a little short for the down payment on the mortgage.

“I’ll take a loan from the bank, using my stocks as collateral,” I said.

“Stocks?” he responded with surprise.

“Yes, I think I have just enough to bridge the difference between our savings and what we need,” I said. “I have been buying a couple of shares of stocks each year with my allowance since I was a child,” I explained. 

It had never occurred to me to tell my husband. Needless to say, he was delighted to discover this mysterious side of me. Marriage arrangements were traditional at that time. The husband was the breadwinner, the wife the homemaker. The husband’s paychecks went into a joint bank account and  both drew from that account for expenses. 

Husbands may have laughed at the saying, “What’s mine is hers and what’s hers is hers,” but they subscribed to it. What we brought to the marriage financially was of little concern since we were young and generally without any serious assets, and we didn’t think of pooling those. We wives were advised then, in women’s magazines for example, to keep a little stash on the side for personal expenditures that needn’t be discussed.

Many couples are older now when they marry, and both work, thus the landscape is different. So I don’t know what to advise. Maybe that’s why we elders weren’t polled.

by -
0 883
METRO photo

By Leah S. Dunaief

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

There is a place called Ramsey, where they have banned cellphones during class. Perhaps you have heard of it? It’s in New Jersey. Ramsey High School has banned students from using cellphones and electronic devices during school hours, except at lunch. The idea was to reduce distractions and improve mental health.

No doubt you have been reading or hearing about how cellphone overuse is ruining our kids’ moods and minds, not to mention how hard it is for teachers to reach the students if the latter are plastered on their cellphone screens. 

Well, a San Francisco company called Yondr has stepped into the breech with a lockable pouch for each student that keeps phones out of reach until the pouch is tapped on an unlocking base.

There are 741 students in the high school, and upon entering the building they put their  cellphone into the small holders that they carry with them but cannot open until lunchtime. They can then check their messages, text with friends, play videos, and otherwise use their phones until they return to class, where the procedure repeats itself. At the end of the school day, they reclaim their phones and can jump back on them as they go home or wherever they go next.

How did they do it? 

The district was able to put the policy together, after board approval, by sending three letters: one to parents, one to students and one to teachers and administrators, explaining the program. Communication was good, and the policy was helped by New Jersey’s Governor Phil Murphy endorsing the idea for all 600 school districts in his State of the State address.

How is it working for them?

Many of the students have responded positively to the change. They point out that they are actually happy to see their friends in the hallways and talk with them, whereas before, they were all in their cellphones while changing classrooms. So better socializing has been a plus.

Grades have improved, according to some of the students and teachers, as student attention is now directed to the lessons. Teachers undoubtedly find it more satisfying to teach less distracted kids. And cyberbullying seems reduced.

Concerns about safety have subdued. Should emergency messages need to be sent, having clear bandwidth to the police or whomever would be an advantage. The investment for the district was $30,000.

UNESCO is advocating cellphone bans in schools, arguing that the devices are distractions from learning, are bad for teens’ mental health and may be an obstacle for students’ privacy, as some digital education tools can survey the children using them. The recommendations come from the 2023 Global Education Monitoring Report, which analyzes global policies on technology use in classrooms.

“Only technology that has a clear role in supporting learning should be allowed in school,” the United Nations agency for education and science stated, according to the publication, Global News. 

In fact, one in four countries has already implemented full or partial cellphone bans in schools, according to the report. “Incoming notifications or the mere proximity of a mobile device can be a distraction, resulting in students’ losing their attention from the task at hand,” the report states. One study showed  it can take students up to 20 minutes to refocus on learning once their attention was drawn away.

Data from a 2018 study showed that young people 11-14 on average spent 9 hours in front of a screen, down a bit to 7.5 hours for 15-18 year-olds. The report further pointed to an American study that showed higher screen time was associated with “poorer well-being; less curiosity, self-control and emotional stability; higher anxiety; and depression diagnoses.”

If this has a familiar ring to it, for those of a certain age, the same concerns were expressed in the early years of television. How did we deal with the problem? 

Less television.

P.S. Just woke up yesterday to learn that Gov. Hochul is advocating the same idea. She must have heard of Ramsey.

by -
0 453
Damage to a home and vehicle from the Eaton Fire in northern Altadena, California in January 2025. Photo from Wikimedia Commons. Public Domain

By Leah S. Dunaief

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

It may have started as a new year filled with hope, but this is a difficult week. The terrible fires in Southern California have burned entire neighborhoods to the ground, from mansions to mobile homes. We already know about the displaced and the deaths, but more destruction may yet come. Weather forecasts from the National Weather Service are predicting fierce winds ahead that may drive the fires into new areas.

The end is not in sight.

While this horror is on the other side of the country, it is not remote. Many of us have friends and relatives who live, work, study or are retired there, driving the tragedy right into our midst and into our hearts in a deeply personal way. These are not only abstract numbers of people and homes about which we would feel a humanitarian empathy. These are our people. These are our forests and our lands. The dreadful irony of it all, remembering the 1972 Albert Hammond song, “It Never Rains in Southern California.”

While there was already a serious homeless population for Los Angeles, the newly displaced are trying to figure out what to do next. The lucky ones have relatives or friends with whom they can seek shelter. It may be long weeks, even months before they can return, if their homes miraculously are still standing. What if they are not? Will the insurance companies hold up to enable rebuilding, or will some of them declare bankruptcy, as they have done in similar cataclysmic situations, like the one in the Caribbean Island St. Croix? Can FEMA bear the entire load?

Private citizens can be counted on to respond generously, as we have with virtually every disaster in the world. With such an enormous catastrophe, the entire national economy could take a hit. How will the new administration respond? 

Speaking of the government, we have less than a week before the new administration is sworn into office. The change of political parties may in itself contribute to some emotional reaction this week, regardless of one’s party affiliation.

Many Dems are worried, while many members in the GOP are optimistic. There has been much talk of changes to come, from buying Greenland for its exotic minerals to changing the name from the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. Perhaps more seriously, there may be a tax cut in the future, some change in immigration policy and new tariffs imposed or at least threatened.

Some good news did emerge this week. There may be a truce in Gaza after 15 months of violence, with some hostages to be exchanged for Palestinian prisoners and specific movements of Israeli troops. While the atmosphere surrounding the peace talks remains tense, according to media reports, there now seems some hope.

According to Secretary of State Antony Blinken, the negotiators are only awaiting Hamas’s sign off. Perhaps the imminent changeover of presidents from Biden to Trump in the United States hastened the deal. The governments of Qatar and Egypt have also directly participated in the talks.

Perhaps now the fighting in Ukraine and the fires in Southern California can also be brought to a halt. Then we could return to hope.

by -
0 580

By Leah S. Dunaief

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

They weren’t really New Year’s resolutions but rather goals I set out for myself during the holidays when the office would be closed and we would be on a staycation. Did I meet them? Even though I was ill with a nasty upper respiratory infection for the entire time off, I did manage to accomplish the desired result.

What were they? I wanted to read two unusual books, recommended by The New York Times, over the 10 day period. And I did.

Now that may not sound like such a challenge to most people, but my reading, because of my job, is to keep up with the news. After all, I am a newspaper publisher and newspapers provide the first draft of history

So reading books, for me, is a luxury, and I’d like to tell you what two books I read because I found them engaging and would, in turn, readily recommend them. One was the beautifully written, “Horse,” by Pulitzer-prize winning author, Geraldine Brooks. I should tell you that my favorite reads are historical fiction and biographies. Those are, for me, effortless ways to learn history and any other subject with which the characters are involved.

“Horse” is indeed about a four-legged animal named Lexington, probably the most famous American racehorse in our history, who lived in the mid-1800s and about art. The horse is the literary device that ties the characters, who live in three different centuries, together. Some of them live before and after the Civil War, some in mid-century 1900s and the rest in the 2019. With that temporal range, Brooks touches on key themes: class, race, regional cultures, war, and the intelligence and loyalty of animals. The book, to a remarkable extent, is based on real people, as evidenced by the extensive research provided by the author in the coda called, “Lexington’s Historical Connections,” and it has a riveting plot.

Now I happen to love horses, always did from my earliest memories, when I was enchanted by the horses and riders on the trail in Central Park and begged to join them. I believe that’s a passion handed down through our genes. My mother’s father, I was told, was something of a horse whisperer, and my father was persuaded to take time from his work, something he almost never did, and accompany me one afternoon on a horseback ride through the park when I was about six years old. Since he had grown up on a farm, riding was familiar for him, although he did ask the stableman where we rented the horses if he could ride bareback rather than on what he called the “postage stamp” English saddle. The groom leading out the horses for us was stunned. Surprisingly he let us ride away toward the park.

But back to the book. It is not only the tale of the remarkable horse that engages the reader of this beautifully written novel. It is the rendering of the time and place in which each character lives, the deftly drawn personalities of the people who populate the stories, the challenges and tensions of their times, and ultimately how much and also how little times have changed.

And if you are an animal lover, the true heroes of the book are the animals.

The second book, which I happened to read first, was “The Wildes,” by Louis Bayard. While it doesn’t have the runaway narrative of “Horse,” it is more of a look back in time at the way Victorian England viewed homosexuality. The theme is developed through the lives of Oscar Wilde’s wife, Constance, and two sons. We meet them half a dozen years before his infamous trial in London, when they seem to be living a luxurious and loving pastoral existence. He is highly regarded as a famous author, playwright and witty companion, and she is involved in feminist causes.  Enter the aristocratic young poet, Lord Alfred Douglas, and the reality of life at that time begins to change the narrative. Ultimately it is Douglas’s provocative father, who causes Wilde to sue for libel, throwing his life open to titillating and legal inspection that brings ruin to the whole family.

The book is both witty for its clever dialogue and sad for all the shadows it reveals about the Wildes, society at the end of the 19th century, and what might have been in modern times.

by -
0 542
METRO photo

By Leah S. Dunaief

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

Many people in their pajamas are now summoned to get dressed, leave their homes and work full-time in the office. The working-remotely imperative is being phased out as COVID-19 fades and the new year begins. No more pajamas in front of the computer, disguised with a proper work shirt as far as Zoom revealed. Remote work is becoming a unique chapter of the pandemic past.

Or is it?

Let me take you back to July 1965. I had just given birth to our first child in a Westchester County hospital, just north of NYC, and was in something of a new mother daze when my supervisor from work appeared at my bedside. I had been employed as a researcher in the editorial department at Time Inc until that past weekend, and the baby coming a little early surprised us all, apparently including my boss.

She was an attractive woman in her 40s, trim and almost six feet tall, and she supervised some 20 staffers. For a couple of seconds, I thought I might be imagining her, but she pulled up a chair, as if this visit was an ordinary occurrence, and we had the following conversation.

“Hello, Leah, congratulations to you and your husband.”

“Hello, Bea. What’s happening?”

“Oh, I thought I would drive up here to congratulate you properly, see the baby, and ask you if you would like to continue working.”

“What?”

She laughed. “I know you live in the Bronx, about 30 minutes from the office (which was in the Time-Life Building at 50th and Sixth Avenue) and right on the D line (subway). We could bring you the material and the books you need by messenger. Then, when you finish each batch of work, we could repeat the process. For questions, we could call you and discuss by phone. What do you think about that?”

I blinked. Was this really happening?

“I think I will be taking care of the baby,” I offered after a long pause.

“We thought about that. Mia (a staffer in the department) no longer needs her nanny, and she could  continue her work with your baby in your apartment. She is from Haiti and speaks little English, but I believe you speak French, yes?”

“A little.” I was now in a different daze.

“Then this could work. You will be able to stay at home with the baby and work comfortably in your apartment while the nanny takes care of your son from 10-6 (our business hours) in the next room. She will come Mondays through Fridays. She is very responsible. She has five sons of her own.”

Then she said those prescient words without knowing she was 60 years ahead of her time.

“You will be working remotely.”

And so it went. A few days after we brought our son home, the first batch of work arrived from the office via a cheerful messenger, and I was set up at a desk in the bedroom to continue my job. 

The nanny, Madame Bayard, also arrived and lovingly greeted and cared for our baby until I would appear. This unusual arrangement continued for almost two years. I would return to the office perhaps once a month for meetings and to touch base with my editor of the moment, but otherwise I did indeed work remotely, even from my parents’ bungalow in the Catskill Mountains the following summer. We gave Madame Bayard the time off, and while my mother cared for our son, I worked on a comfortable chaise in the shade of a tree, driving to the office only a couple of times in two months.

This idyllic arrangement ended when my husband finished his residency, and we moved to Texas, where he served at an Air Force base during the Vietnam War.

I finally left the employ of Time-Life. It was now too far for even a messenger to reach me. But today, my grandson and his wife both have satisfying jobs that call for working remotely.

by -
0 404
Photo by Andrea Piacquadio/Pexels

By Leah S. Dunaief

Leah Dunaief,
Publisher

A couple of my favorite restaurants will only accept payment in cash or check. My doctors’ offices will only take credit cards. Perhaps the next thing is that we’ll have to pay in beads, like the Europeans for Manhattan Island.

Those who only take credit cards explained to me that they are preventing robberies. They put up signs saying, “No cash” to dissuade potential thieves. And I suppose those who only take cash are refusing to share their revenue with the credit card companies. I can understand that, especially if the profit margin of the business is only a couple of percent.

But the swinging back and forth is taking its toll, especially on older consumers, who tend to use only cash and are hardest hit in a cashless situation.

“A Fight to Preserve the Value of Cash,” was an article in The New York Times by Paula Span this past Tuesday that addressed the subject.

“Some no-cash practices date to contagion fears after the outbreak of Covid; others are intended to discourage robberies,” explains the reporter. “But such policies are a disadvantage to several groups, including low-income people who don’t have bank accounts, people who have accounts but don’t qualify for credit or debit cards, the homeless, undocumented immigrants and older adults,” she goes on to say. 

Additionally, anyone can have a problem with electronic payments when it comes to paying, which can cause delay and frustration. Natural weather disasters can disrupt electricity and telecommunication networks that fail immediately disconnect a cashless society. Even international thieves can hack bank accounts on the internet. “With cash, a thief has to be within striking distance.”

Another disadvantage of credit cards is that consumers spend more when they are using them because it delays the “pain of paying” until the bill arrives at the end of the month.

And privacy concerns enter into the picture due to “middlemen facilitating digital transactions-credit card companies, banks, the tech giants behind mobile apps-(…) then sell consumers’ data.”

According to Pew Research, only 79 percent of people over 65 have a smartphone, which is often used in cashless systems, compared with 97 percent of those between 30-49. Those over 55 paid in cash 22 percent of the time last year, compared with 12 percent among younger groups, according to the Federal Reserve, as quoted by The NYT. 

And according to a federal survey, 85 percent used the internet for financial services in their 20s and 30s, but the percentage drops as the groups age. For people in their 60s, the number becomes 70 percent, for those in their 70s it is  64 percent, and in their 80s, it’s only about half.

Cash is so simple: no buttons, no passwords, no problems other than the possibility of counterfeit bills.

“Older adults are far more likely than younger ones to lose money to tech support fraud, lottery and sweepstakes swindles, and family impersonations”, according to the Federal Trade Commission and cited in The NYT. Losses to investment and romance cons continue to climb, too.

As a result of an experience I had some years ago, before plastic became so prevalent, I could personally attest to a cashless society working, at least for a few days. 

On my way out the door to my limo ride, I forgot my wallet. I realized half way to the airport and confessed to the driver. “No problem,” he said. “I take credit cards  Do you have one?” Fortunately I did. I then realized that I would depend solely on that card for all my expenses getting to, and from, and while I was at the convention. It was going to be an interesting experiment, I said to myself.

During those four days, I was able to manage quite well with only the card. The future for payments became clear to me.

Prev123...47Next Page 2 of 47
TBR News Media is your local news and entertainment website.
We provide you with the latest breaking news and information for your community.
Contact us: [email protected]

Most Viewed

©