2012
AMERICAN POLITICS
16/09/12 13:34
What stands as politics in our country is a great democratic charade that shows well while having these over-riding goals:
Once these goals are understood the tactics of both the Democrats and the Republicans become perfectly clear.
- Consolidation of power and of wealth in the fewest possible number of hands;
- Subjugation and shaping of the population into massive submissive groups whose individual identities are primarily established by their level of personal consumption;
- Unfettered increase in the growth of business to supply consumption demand without outside intervention;
- Division of the electorate into as many groups as possible upon irreconcilable grounds; and,
- Absolute control over who may enter the pool of candidates for election to public office.
Once these goals are understood the tactics of both the Democrats and the Republicans become perfectly clear.
UNITED
10/07/12 16:23
One for All. . . All for One. . .
When is the last time you heard someone use that phrase?
It is sometimes used when someone wants you to fight a war, to join a team, or to put forth extraordinary effort to achieve a goal.
United suggests community and concern for the welfare of all.
Most of us want to be part of a united country.
So what attributes would each citizen have in a united country?
How about these:
- each one is well fed;
- each one is well clothed;
- each one is well housed;
- each one is well treated when ill, sick, or injured;
- each one is skilled to her or his capacity;
- each one has the opportunity to work at a wage that pays for the rest.
Now ask yourself:
Why is this untrue in the United States?
A Good Society
12/06/12 22:52
Does anyone want a bad society? Not likely if our choice and preference may be given sway. We will choose good over bad if we can recognize the difference. It is a simple concept and most would agree: good is better than bad.
The problem comes in the definition. The employed manager of a business wants to please his employers, the owners of the business. The owners of the business want a sizable and growing return from their investment. In many commercial activities the largest expense of business is the cost of paying workers. As night follows day you may be sure that the successful manager will offer the lowest possible rate of pay to workers in order to increase profits and the return on investment to owners. So low pay is good for the manager and the owners and low pay is bad for the workers.
The value judgements here are these:
Would any of us disagree with these judgements? Probably not.
Question is: How may we have a good society when the same thing that is good for some members of society is bad for other members of society?
The problem comes in the definition. The employed manager of a business wants to please his employers, the owners of the business. The owners of the business want a sizable and growing return from their investment. In many commercial activities the largest expense of business is the cost of paying workers. As night follows day you may be sure that the successful manager will offer the lowest possible rate of pay to workers in order to increase profits and the return on investment to owners. So low pay is good for the manager and the owners and low pay is bad for the workers.
The value judgements here are these:
- low pay is bad for workers
- growing profits are good for managers and for owners
Would any of us disagree with these judgements? Probably not.
Question is: How may we have a good society when the same thing that is good for some members of society is bad for other members of society?
America - Bought and Paid for
31/05/12 16:39
Democracy is where every individual’s choice is counted and where each person’s will is felt in the process by which decisions are made and things get done. Most Americans would agree with that.
There is a little more than five months between now and the national election of 2012. According to Tom Raum of the Associated Press, The Obama-Romney Election Contest will cost about $1.6 billion plus “another few hundred million from super PACs and convention spending”.
The question is: Where among this hoopla and deluge of cash does one find the “choice and will” of any particular person? On the national news? Gallup poll results, maybe. What the person wants who lives across the street in our towns or cities, not likely. Perhaps that is why only 56.8 percent of the voting age population turned out to vote in 2008.
The only individuals who end up running for office in America as a Republican or a Democrat are those whose political highways have been paved and paid for by those who can afford to pay $1,000, $5,000, or more for a plate of food and a speech at a campaign dinner.
There is a little more than five months between now and the national election of 2012. According to Tom Raum of the Associated Press, The Obama-Romney Election Contest will cost about $1.6 billion plus “another few hundred million from super PACs and convention spending”.
The question is: Where among this hoopla and deluge of cash does one find the “choice and will” of any particular person? On the national news? Gallup poll results, maybe. What the person wants who lives across the street in our towns or cities, not likely. Perhaps that is why only 56.8 percent of the voting age population turned out to vote in 2008.
The only individuals who end up running for office in America as a Republican or a Democrat are those whose political highways have been paved and paid for by those who can afford to pay $1,000, $5,000, or more for a plate of food and a speech at a campaign dinner.
Exceptional Performance
23/04/12 21:24
No one argues that each of us is equal in either native ability or skill. Few would claim that everyone completes their work with the same level of performance. Most would say that exceptional performance should be more highly rewarded than average or poor performance.
The questions are: Is there any possible reward that is too much? Is there any possible reward that is too little? How great a difference should there be between the reward of the exceptional performer and the reward of the average performer?
A little consideration will reveal that there are some limits to how high or how low a reward may be. If an imaginary company has ten employees and income of one million dollars a year, it is clear that no one employee can be paid one million dollars a year. If one was paid one million dollars, no one else would continue working since there would be no money left to pay anyone else a wage. Let us say that the minimum wage needed for an average worker to live a good life is $50,000 per year. If all were paid that minimum, then our imaginary company would have up to $500,000 a year available from which they might pay bonuses to the exceptional performers.
So compared to the average performer how much more should the exceptional performer be paid? Twice as much? Three times as much? Or more?
This is a value question, isn’t it? How much more should the exceptional among us get? Worth a thought, isn’t it?
The questions are: Is there any possible reward that is too much? Is there any possible reward that is too little? How great a difference should there be between the reward of the exceptional performer and the reward of the average performer?
A little consideration will reveal that there are some limits to how high or how low a reward may be. If an imaginary company has ten employees and income of one million dollars a year, it is clear that no one employee can be paid one million dollars a year. If one was paid one million dollars, no one else would continue working since there would be no money left to pay anyone else a wage. Let us say that the minimum wage needed for an average worker to live a good life is $50,000 per year. If all were paid that minimum, then our imaginary company would have up to $500,000 a year available from which they might pay bonuses to the exceptional performers.
So compared to the average performer how much more should the exceptional performer be paid? Twice as much? Three times as much? Or more?
This is a value question, isn’t it? How much more should the exceptional among us get? Worth a thought, isn’t it?
Looking For Work ?
19/03/12 07:22
According to Barron’s, as of February, 2012:
This is called a recovery ?
Some say job seekers should rely on networking to find employment. Sounds like a lot of phone calls to old contacts, doesn’t it ? After all, how many phone numbers do you actually have in your address book whose owner may know of a job opening ?
- There were 12 million 806 thousand unemployed people in America.
- There were 4 million 423 thousand Help Wanted Ads published.
- That is one ad for almost every three people looking for employment.
This is called a recovery ?
Some say job seekers should rely on networking to find employment. Sounds like a lot of phone calls to old contacts, doesn’t it ? After all, how many phone numbers do you actually have in your address book whose owner may know of a job opening ?
Real Change for America
10/03/12 20:39
Disentangle our foreign military involvement from as many places as possible as soon as possible.
Reduce our military expenditures to whatever minimum is required to ensure that we may respond to an attack upon us or upon any to whom we have currently committed ourselves to be a protector.
Negotiate a change in all of our current treaty agreements with the goal of gradually but absolutely removing ourselves from the obligation to go to war over disputes that exist between other parties.
Allow foreign trade with the explicit understanding that companies that choose to engage in such commerce do so at their own risk and without any assistance or protection from the United States government.
Limit private enterprise in the United States to only one type of entity: the corporate cooperative that is entirely owned and only managed by the executives and by the workers who are directly and personally engaged in the operation of the enterprise.
Set a date certain within five years when every sole proprietorship, partnership, and corporation will have been converted into a newly formed corporate cooperative or will have been sold at its current fair market value to a newly formed corporate cooperative on terms that allow payment of the sales price over any time period that is less than one hundred years.
Reduce our military expenditures to whatever minimum is required to ensure that we may respond to an attack upon us or upon any to whom we have currently committed ourselves to be a protector.
Negotiate a change in all of our current treaty agreements with the goal of gradually but absolutely removing ourselves from the obligation to go to war over disputes that exist between other parties.
Allow foreign trade with the explicit understanding that companies that choose to engage in such commerce do so at their own risk and without any assistance or protection from the United States government.
Limit private enterprise in the United States to only one type of entity: the corporate cooperative that is entirely owned and only managed by the executives and by the workers who are directly and personally engaged in the operation of the enterprise.
Set a date certain within five years when every sole proprietorship, partnership, and corporation will have been converted into a newly formed corporate cooperative or will have been sold at its current fair market value to a newly formed corporate cooperative on terms that allow payment of the sales price over any time period that is less than one hundred years.
Decide For Yourself
04/03/12 11:44
Behind every action is a thought, an emotion, or a combination of the two.
We live in a community of many, a world of billions of inhabitants. Very little of what we have or what we experience is dependent solely upon what we alone have done. We rely on what others do to provide for our own well-being. Even when we are grown and pay our own way, we remain in debt to those who have shown us how to use the tools, how to organize our time, and how to accomplish the goals we seek.
Whatever we choose to do or to leave undone impacts the lives of others.
As they say, “This is not rocket science.”
So what about me? What about you? What do we believe? How do we feel?
Have we reviewed the facts? Considered opposing points of view? Identified the basis for our feelings? Established a concept that represents our own vision of the truth? Reached our own conclusion from which there is no escape?
Or have we accepted the conclusions and stated feelings of others merely because they sound like the opinions of friends and relations, of media commentators, of co-workers, or of anyone else who we believe is important?
In the end we all know the right answer: We must decide for ourselves.
We live in a community of many, a world of billions of inhabitants. Very little of what we have or what we experience is dependent solely upon what we alone have done. We rely on what others do to provide for our own well-being. Even when we are grown and pay our own way, we remain in debt to those who have shown us how to use the tools, how to organize our time, and how to accomplish the goals we seek.
Whatever we choose to do or to leave undone impacts the lives of others.
As they say, “This is not rocket science.”
So what about me? What about you? What do we believe? How do we feel?
Have we reviewed the facts? Considered opposing points of view? Identified the basis for our feelings? Established a concept that represents our own vision of the truth? Reached our own conclusion from which there is no escape?
Or have we accepted the conclusions and stated feelings of others merely because they sound like the opinions of friends and relations, of media commentators, of co-workers, or of anyone else who we believe is important?
In the end we all know the right answer: We must decide for ourselves.
I Must. I Shall. I Will.
02/03/12 16:57
Assertion garners support. Try these declarations instead:
I hope. I try. I might. Not quite the same, is it?
“I came, I saw, I conquered.”
Now there is an old Roman phrase that demands respect.
The conquerors claim all; the vanquished are overwhelmed and subservient. Might makes right and carries all in its favor.
We are. You are not. Custom and tradition becomes set as the rulers see fit.
In our modern era many assume that democracy and equal opportunity govern the open possibilities for most citizens.
In a world of practically unimaginable individual economic disparities and of numerous international corporate hierarchies - each one having wealth and power that exceeds that of many nations, one nagging question remains:
How much freedom of choice and of action do most individuals actually enjoy in shaping and determining the course of their lives?
I hope. I try. I might. Not quite the same, is it?
“I came, I saw, I conquered.”
Now there is an old Roman phrase that demands respect.
The conquerors claim all; the vanquished are overwhelmed and subservient. Might makes right and carries all in its favor.
We are. You are not. Custom and tradition becomes set as the rulers see fit.
In our modern era many assume that democracy and equal opportunity govern the open possibilities for most citizens.
In a world of practically unimaginable individual economic disparities and of numerous international corporate hierarchies - each one having wealth and power that exceeds that of many nations, one nagging question remains:
How much freedom of choice and of action do most individuals actually enjoy in shaping and determining the course of their lives?
Electoral confusion - not so long ago
29/02/12 13:38
“ . . . It seems all beyond our control. We cannot find who controls it. Is anyone controlling it? The newspapers tell us this or that about it. They are disturbing and alarming. Vast multitudes, we learn, millions are being thrust out of employment. There is plenty, locked up. There are dire want and misery. Then we find ourselves called upon to decide between politicians who demand that this shall be done and politicians who demand that that shall be done. It appears that we in our muddled multitudinousness are being called upon to make decisions. This immense tangled affair, we gather, is our affair. In various rather obscure ways we have been made responsible for it. We have to vote.”
By H. G. Wells from The Work, Wealth and Happiness of Mankind, published in 1931.
By H. G. Wells from The Work, Wealth and Happiness of Mankind, published in 1931.
40 Years: 1970 - 2010
28/02/12 15:16
U.S. Federal Annual Minimum Wage:
1970: $ 3,328
2010: $ 15,080
U.S. Median House Price:
1970: $ 23,400 - About 7 times the annual minimum wage
2010: $ 173,100 - About 11.5 times the annual minimum wage
U.S. Median Household Annual Income:
1970: $ 7,659 - 32.7 % of the median priced U.S. house
2010: $48,753 - 28.2% of the median priced U.S. house
1970: $ 3,328
2010: $ 15,080
U.S. Median House Price:
1970: $ 23,400 - About 7 times the annual minimum wage
2010: $ 173,100 - About 11.5 times the annual minimum wage
U.S. Median Household Annual Income:
1970: $ 7,659 - 32.7 % of the median priced U.S. house
2010: $48,753 - 28.2% of the median priced U.S. house
"Blue Skies Shining Above. . ."
24/02/12 21:10
According to the U.S.Census Bureau, in 2009 many of our households had far less annual income than many of us thought anyone could live on. . .
Rounded to the nearest million:
8,570,000 households ( 1 in every 13 U. S. Households ) had less than $10,000 in income for the year. That is less than $834 a month, less than $193 a week, $28 a day, $1.17 per hour.
At the other end of the income spectrum:
2,372,000 households ( 1 in every 49 U. S. Households ) had a minimum of $250,000 in income for the year. That is a minimum of more than $20,833 a month, more than $4,807 a week, $686 a day, $28 per hour.
Rounded to the nearest million:
8,570,000 households ( 1 in every 13 U. S. Households ) had less than $10,000 in income for the year. That is less than $834 a month, less than $193 a week, $28 a day, $1.17 per hour.
At the other end of the income spectrum:
2,372,000 households ( 1 in every 49 U. S. Households ) had a minimum of $250,000 in income for the year. That is a minimum of more than $20,833 a month, more than $4,807 a week, $686 a day, $28 per hour.
Gifts from the Taxpayer
24/01/12 15:09
The railroad companies were granted free tracts of land every half mile or so on alternating sides of the railroad tracks as an inducement to build the cross country railroad lines in the Nineteenth Century.
Examples of "corporate" welfare to promote economic development are countless and extend into the Twenty-First Century. The most recent example, of course, is the trillions and trillions of dollars of new debt and of grants, of loans, and of various other stimulants that were put in place at the end of 2008, in 2009, and since then to rescue the owners of the American financial establishment and to save other huge American enterprises from having to undergo a dramatic collapse of their financial positions.
Giving taxpayer money from all to benefit a group in the minority is nothing new in American history.
Before mocking the American worker collecting social security as just another deadbeat looking for a handout, one should keep these points of recent United States history in view:
Now it is time to start redeeming that Treasury Debt (issued since the 1980s) to get cash to pay for social benefits. But wait ! Eight out of every hundred workers are unemployed; those still working are over-extended, tapped out on their credit lines, and many underwater on their mortgages. It seems like the American Dream has come up a little short now that the debt induced party is over and the “baby-boomers” old enough to retire. The so-called “one percent” and other wealth holders do not want to raise their taxes to redeem the notes. Instead, the plan is to dramatically reduce or eliminate future benefits while continuing to collect payroll taxes at the same or a higher rate. This accomplishes the following wonders:
The rallying cry, of course, will be: "Don't raise taxes on job creators!"
Examples of "corporate" welfare to promote economic development are countless and extend into the Twenty-First Century. The most recent example, of course, is the trillions and trillions of dollars of new debt and of grants, of loans, and of various other stimulants that were put in place at the end of 2008, in 2009, and since then to rescue the owners of the American financial establishment and to save other huge American enterprises from having to undergo a dramatic collapse of their financial positions.
Giving taxpayer money from all to benefit a group in the minority is nothing new in American history.
Before mocking the American worker collecting social security as just another deadbeat looking for a handout, one should keep these points of recent United States history in view:
- About 2.7 Trillion dollars of the 15 Trillion Federal debt is excess money that was collected from worker's wages and used to buy Treasury Notes to be redeemed to pay for Social Security when the "baby boomers" retired.
- All of that 2.7 Trillion dollars was in fact used by government to pay for current expenses thereby not having to raise taxes to pay for those expenses.
- The remaining 12.3 Trillion of Federal debt is money that the Federal government borrowed to spend. This is a perfect method to get tax-payer guaranteed income into the hands of bond holders while allowing the government to carry on without having to raise the income tax. This is the kind of welfare that anyone would enjoy who has enough cash to buy the bonds and notes of the United States.
Now it is time to start redeeming that Treasury Debt (issued since the 1980s) to get cash to pay for social benefits. But wait ! Eight out of every hundred workers are unemployed; those still working are over-extended, tapped out on their credit lines, and many underwater on their mortgages. It seems like the American Dream has come up a little short now that the debt induced party is over and the “baby-boomers” old enough to retire. The so-called “one percent” and other wealth holders do not want to raise their taxes to redeem the notes. Instead, the plan is to dramatically reduce or eliminate future benefits while continuing to collect payroll taxes at the same or a higher rate. This accomplishes the following wonders:
- The Highest Marginal Income Tax Rates may stay the same or be reduced.
- Older workers will continue to get current benefits.
- Younger workers will pay the same or more payroll taxes while getting lower benefits.
- The trade off for even lower marginal tax rates will be the extension of the lowest tax rates to lower paid workers who pay no tax now and the reduction of itemized deductions so that those who remain in the middle class will, in fact, have their income taxes increased.
The rallying cry, of course, will be: "Don't raise taxes on job creators!"
Has Not Always Been The Same
20/01/12 13:46
We get so captivated by the way our world is organized that we forget that life was once conducted differently than the way we live now.
Once we were hunter-gatherers.
Once custom, tradition and religious belief held primary sway in our process of decision.
Once we were bound together by feudal ties and obligations.
Once most of us never left the place of our birth.
Once almost all of us were engaged in agriculture.
Once we rode horses.
Once the U.S. population was smaller and the demand for labor greater.
Things don’t stay the same. They change. So what is important?
What should we keep as we rush toward the future?
Once we were hunter-gatherers.
Once custom, tradition and religious belief held primary sway in our process of decision.
Once we were bound together by feudal ties and obligations.
Once most of us never left the place of our birth.
Once almost all of us were engaged in agriculture.
Once we rode horses.
Once the U.S. population was smaller and the demand for labor greater.
Things don’t stay the same. They change. So what is important?
What should we keep as we rush toward the future?
Some Values Are Worth Salvaging
17/01/12 13:40
“. . . with liberty and justice for all.”
How many times have Americans repeated those words at the end of our pledge of allegiance? Countless times without doubt. Some may be startled to find that the pledge was originally written in 1892 by a Christian Socialist named Francis Bellamy. It was in 1942 in the midst of World War II before Congress formally adopted it as an expression of loyalty to flag and country.
Unfortunately it now seems as if the last word has somehow been transposed from “all” to “me” in the minds of many citizens.
How else does one account for the wide disparity in the distribution of wealth, of opportunity, of liberty, and of justice that seems evident in the United States today?
How many times have Americans repeated those words at the end of our pledge of allegiance? Countless times without doubt. Some may be startled to find that the pledge was originally written in 1892 by a Christian Socialist named Francis Bellamy. It was in 1942 in the midst of World War II before Congress formally adopted it as an expression of loyalty to flag and country.
Unfortunately it now seems as if the last word has somehow been transposed from “all” to “me” in the minds of many citizens.
How else does one account for the wide disparity in the distribution of wealth, of opportunity, of liberty, and of justice that seems evident in the United States today?