busybee fluffy rambles

When I adopted Tyler, his tail had a couple of kinks in it, apparent signs of dislocations or other injuries. The vet said that they’re just a normal thing that happens to some cats, and that it’s generally not harmful to them and there isn’t really anything that can be done.

Unfortunately, Tyler how has a third kink in his tail, and this one’s pretty close to his spine, and he’s clearly in pain from it. He’s been unable to clean his hindquarters anymore (which he was never great at to begin with) and whenever I try brushing him or even gently petting him there he’s clearly in a lot of distress. Even just lying in place he’s having a lot of trouble getting comfortable.

So, I’m going to take him to the vet, and I expect that whatever they find it’s going to be pretty expensive to take care of. Sigh.

From what I’m finding online, most likely the vet will want to do some x-rays, and depending on what they find they might either need to set the joints and splint his tail for a while or, unfortunately, they may need to amputate.

But he’s clearly in a lot of pain and I want him not to be!

Hi, I am once again writing to request a reconsideration of the state-wide Electric Vehicle Transportation Fee, the additional $75 line-item added to electric vehicles' car registrations in the state of Washington.

The purpose of this fee is supposed to be to encourage the adoption of electric vehicles, but it does exactly the opposite. This $75/year fee represents more than I pay for energy on my electric vehicle in any given year, and I, like most EV owners, charge my vehicle at home on equipment I paid hundreds of dollars for.

This is on top of the already ridiculously-high $150/year fee that is meant to offset the missing fuel tax, which already is for more than the total amount of fuel I would have bought in any given year.

I only drive around 1000 miles per year. I am disabled and on a limited income. I bought an older, used electric vehicle somewhat to reduce my already-low transportation costs but mostly to be better to the environment based on how little I drive to begin with, as the environmental impact of the oil changes that I no longer need was pretty significant, especially compared to how little I was driving.

This $225 total in fees means I am paying vastly more than my fair share compared to drivers of internal-combustion vehicles, and am being actively punished for making the right choice in terms of harm reduction on the environment.

I am also already paying more for the infrastructure offsets actually taken by my (again, seldom-driven) electric vehicle in the form of the two “additional vehicle weight” fees, which total $35 (split up into $10 and $25 for some reason).

A much more equitable approach would be to assess a much smaller fee across drivers of all vehicles, regardless of fuel type, which would actually encourage EV adoption, and would also generate more revenue for the state.

I urge you to please re-evaluate these regressive fees and to consider a more equitable means of offsetting infrastructure costs.

The vet just got back to me with the results of yesterday’s tests.

Her white blood count is elevated (indicating inflammation or an infection), and the radiologist says that the concerning bits on her lungs are just her asthma being especially bad right now.

So, we’re giving her a short course of Prednisone and hopefully that clears things up.

It’s unclear what caused the weight loss but given how enthusiastic she’s been about wet food and how meh she’s been about dry food, I think she’s just going to get a lot more wet food going forward. That’ll make it easier to give her the meds anyway.

The most important takeaway is that she is almost certainly not dying any time soon. Yay!