Are “bumper sticker” sayings adequate for complicated issues? …. (What if the experts disagree?)
Do people have “uninformed” and “unproven” conclusions?
Is a vote by the uninformed “viable”?
Is it “impossible” to deal with “the people” rather than their governments?
How to get young people interested in anything that’s not “physical” or “personally emotional”?
On “being informed”……. (a few of the questions…)
How to speak? …. What to say? …. Speaking to the public in “general” (Is there a “public in general”?)…. Not giving the enemy your “game plan” in an effort to keep “people” informed…. What of a different “expert’s” opinion? (which “book” do you believe and why?).... The people’s constant changing of their minds…. The people’s changing of policy (war or not war…and what else?) …. What is the meaning of “values”?
You must be able to “reason” and “think”. Somewhere, somehow you must learn how to seek “alternatives”. You simply “can’t” be informed without these two things. The search for “definitions” must be a part of your understanding.
Look at the questions!.....
“Being informed” is complicated!.... Not everyone has the “access” to the material and the people. Suppose each of the authors has an “agenda”? Are you capable of knowing this?
“Being informed” is complicated!.... Not everyone has the “desire” to be informed as well as is possible.
Given the differences in “opinions”, who is to be believed? Is the opinion worth considering? Has the author of this opinion sufficiently, in your mind, given adequate proof? Can adequate proof ever be “sufficient”, in your mind? Can you just “consider” two differing opinions without drawing your own opinion? Is just “considering” a mark of progress in understanding?
“Being informed” is complicated!!.... (How else can you “consider” these questions?)
Friday, November 30, 2007
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Current – #301 - #51 - What exactly do you want America to become?
Do you want America to become “the world’s policeman”?
Do you want America to become “the world’s answer to poverty and inhuman conditions”?
Do you want America to become “a world evangelist for Democracy”?
Do you want America to become “a world military power”?
Or…. Do you want America to try and protect its “standard of living”, its particular “values”, and its present “defensive posture”?
All of this requires a “price to pay”! Are you willing to give up something? Are you willing to “pay” some price?
If “it” requires you to give up some privacy, are you willing to do it? If “it” requires you to give up some of your Constitutional values, are you still willing to “pay”…. to give up?
How about some “freedom of speech”? If you can’t say “FIRE”! in a crowded theater, what is permissible in a state of war?
It is interesting to find those persons unwilling to do anything while we are at war! What do they “give up”?
Do those who love the Constitution so much, are they among those who won’t pay any price?
Do we abandon the Constitution? Do we forget about our cherished, hard won values? No!...but we modify , carefully, those that are inappropriate in a state of war. Do we have to attack our Constitution? No…the temporary modifications will be small and, we hope, in a short time span.
We don’t want to be the “world’s policeman”!
We cannot solve the world’s poverty problem with our own resources!
We don’t want everyone to love Democracy. We already know that some civilizations are not ready!
We understand the limitations of military power! After all, we don’t want anything from anybody. All we want is a way to preserve the American continent, with peace and justice for all!
What exactly do you want America to become?
Do you want America to become “the world’s answer to poverty and inhuman conditions”?
Do you want America to become “a world evangelist for Democracy”?
Do you want America to become “a world military power”?
Or…. Do you want America to try and protect its “standard of living”, its particular “values”, and its present “defensive posture”?
All of this requires a “price to pay”! Are you willing to give up something? Are you willing to “pay” some price?
If “it” requires you to give up some privacy, are you willing to do it? If “it” requires you to give up some of your Constitutional values, are you still willing to “pay”…. to give up?
How about some “freedom of speech”? If you can’t say “FIRE”! in a crowded theater, what is permissible in a state of war?
It is interesting to find those persons unwilling to do anything while we are at war! What do they “give up”?
Do those who love the Constitution so much, are they among those who won’t pay any price?
Do we abandon the Constitution? Do we forget about our cherished, hard won values? No!...but we modify , carefully, those that are inappropriate in a state of war. Do we have to attack our Constitution? No…the temporary modifications will be small and, we hope, in a short time span.
We don’t want to be the “world’s policeman”!
We cannot solve the world’s poverty problem with our own resources!
We don’t want everyone to love Democracy. We already know that some civilizations are not ready!
We understand the limitations of military power! After all, we don’t want anything from anybody. All we want is a way to preserve the American continent, with peace and justice for all!
What exactly do you want America to become?
Current - #201 - #7 – A “B.T.” letter on the World Trade Center and 9/11 bombings!
***October 14, 2001 ***Please take the time and read it carefully...all the way thru!
Dear Sirs,
I am writing this letter in hopes that someone will gain some personal perspective and peace during today’s dramatic changes. I do not think you will hear these ideas from anyone in the political process or anyone whose public or private stature, or reputation, is dependent on the acclaim of the public. I encourage you to use all or part of these comments in any useful way you deem appropriate. I do not seek public office or public acknowledgment in any way. I sincerely wish to offer a simple explanation of what’s happened to us in hopes that a more simple understanding will help in reducing the pains of anxiety and stress that appear to have affected so many people.
I believe the partial answers lie in expressing, in the right simple words, an understandable description of “what and where” we are now.
It is abundantly clear that America has had the same concerns (serial murder, gangs, terrorist acts, etc.) before; but, this was so enormous and so clearly an act against America (indiscriminate civilians without a chance), that America was forced out of its semi sleep, its natural reaction to talk its way out, to delay, to put off, etc. So, America always did have these concerns; but now, they are on the front burner like every other country. We are forced to personally protect our “way”. This is the first time on our soil!!! This is not a World War II where nations are trying to take territory. This is about protecting a way of life. This is about an opposition that does not share our value of life but thinks it has an alternative plan for its “believers”.
If you believe it is fundamentally a case of “Haves versus Have-nots” you can reason your own position in where we are now. If you believe it is a religious or territorial conflict you may think differently.
The solutions are an entirely different matter!!
I would not, for one minute, attempt to dissuade you from your “meditative” or “religious beliefs. That’s what you own! …. That’s what you believe. . I also agree that certain “documentation” may serve your beliefs. If I have a different view, it is not to in any way to denigrate your views, it is merely that I do not fully equate your experiences and their effects, with my own present understanding of what’s going on.
It is a matter of simple “difference” between us. It has nothing to do with “good or bad, useful versus useless, etc.” It is merely a matter of “difference”. After all we are both trying to achieve the same general ends, namely, an end to this useless violence.
I hope you truly understand my position in all this. By all means continue to follow your own beliefs.
For more than human history, there has been a battle between the “Haves and the Have-nots”. The beginning of war started when a group of so called human beings found out that they could grow a surplus … i.e. more than they needed. Another group in the north were unable (for one reason or another) to produce just exactly or maybe even slightly less than they needed for themselves. Soooo .. they found out about the group that could raise a surplus and decided to use force and “TAKE” whatever they wanted from that “surplus group”. …Thus was the beginning of war!
In its simplest form, the root of the problem “now and in the past” has always been the battle between the “Haves and the Have-nots”. Yes, they have hidden this “battle” in many different terms.
Such terms as Religion, as in Protestants versus Catholics in Ireland (it’s nothing but a Have Have-not battle between the North with its viable economic system and industry and the less productive south where there are more Catholics).
Such terms as a “Religion mixture”, as in Islam (the difference between the overwhelming numbers of believers in the ancient Islam traditions and the “new” Fundamentalist, the terrorist faction).
The “Have Have-not” battles that continue in the USA.
The Sudan is where the so-called leadership is in the power for itself and the population be damned. Etc., etc.
Many of the problems lie in unstable leadership where there is a military backed leadership which controls the meager assets of the country “for its own comfort”, or, a tribal committee in which each “chieftain” tries to defend his territory (of course, including all the assets in his territory). These so called leaders or governments do not produce anything of value for their citizens. There’s no economic plan, no economic opportunity, no advances in the public infrastructure and many times not enough food or water. The governments do NOT serve the people … just themselves! It really makes no difference what you name it. It’s a matter of a battle between the Haves and Have-nots!
However, we are NOT engaged in Nation building. The people will have to organize themselves. We can go into a limited partnership to help in providing limited services for the people; but, we CANNOT select the leadership or the type of government in any country!!
Somehow or other, the experiment where everyone has the same amount of everything (except of course, those in a “leadership” position which preserved perks for themselves) failed horribly. This system curbed motivation, experimentation, risk, opportunity, etc.
Other so-called “systems” including “tribal councils”, warlords, small separate states (the leaders of which could never really agree on anything) all left a “growing” population with no real economic or industrial base.
So if you were lucky and were one of the few that were able to manage an education, you quickly realized you had no better future, nor hope of a better future, when you returned to the country in which you originally came. You returned with no hope. So you got angry and decided to at least do something.
Some charismatic leader arose and said “Kill Americans. They are the source of your frustration!” So you finally had a plan to relieve your own frustrations….
This all starts as the result of a “Have Have-not” scenario.
One group has, (more or less), been able to organize a society in which, (more or less), there is a choice, an opportunity to raise oneself up; an economic system that, (more or less), is productive and can actually produce a surplus; and a society which is, (more or less), free to exercise certain rights of free speech and criticism, rights of free practice for all religions and thought systems, and other rights that seem more or less “protected” as a policy. It’s not perfect and some people actively protest this fact (although they continue to offer no “successful alternatives” …they’re just “against” something!!!)
On the other hand, we have large groups of people in this world who have been unable to organize themselves into a more “productive” society. Food, shelter and defense have not been adequately shared nor encouraged. There is a “hand to mouth” existence that doesn’t seem to be changed. These are the Have-nots. They want what the Haves have!!! Anyway they can get it!
The “Red Guard” in Germany bombed and terrorized Europe 20 years ago. The Irish situation still exists. Sudan, Ethiopia, most of Africa, etc still have this same problem. IT IS NOT NEW!!
Even the USA has the same problem. The McVeys, the armed militia units, the Skinheads, etc. all have their “griefs” and commit murder in their name to so-called “right the wrongs”.
These are not “terrorists” they are simply murderers, serial killers! America is filled with Americans and some American murderers. So is France, Italy, Israel, Egypt, Islam, etc. It’s all the same!! It still starts with frustration between the Haves and Have-nots.
I think it’s simple. I think we haven’t wanted to realize it. I think we realize that we don’t want to give up our unusual, hard earned, lucky advantage. We can share some of our material surplus to a point. We do not wish to make this “point” so it interferes with our current standard of living. We also realize that mere material sharing WILL NOT permanently solve the Have/ Have-not problem. The more you give the less the incentive to change. This is our real dilemma.
I fully believe that once you can put into words what you think the real problems are you can more successfully cope with our present realization. True, that once you have truly experienced this uncomfortable reality and have escaped; having to go backwards is a terribly difficult thing to face. But as long as you’re in the USA it is of a great deal less concern. A concern? Yes! …. A lesser concern? Yes!!
This “Have/ Have-not” conversation was something I felt I needed to express.
Thank you for your indulgence!
Respectfully submitted…. Bill T.
Dear Sirs,
I am writing this letter in hopes that someone will gain some personal perspective and peace during today’s dramatic changes. I do not think you will hear these ideas from anyone in the political process or anyone whose public or private stature, or reputation, is dependent on the acclaim of the public. I encourage you to use all or part of these comments in any useful way you deem appropriate. I do not seek public office or public acknowledgment in any way. I sincerely wish to offer a simple explanation of what’s happened to us in hopes that a more simple understanding will help in reducing the pains of anxiety and stress that appear to have affected so many people.
I believe the partial answers lie in expressing, in the right simple words, an understandable description of “what and where” we are now.
It is abundantly clear that America has had the same concerns (serial murder, gangs, terrorist acts, etc.) before; but, this was so enormous and so clearly an act against America (indiscriminate civilians without a chance), that America was forced out of its semi sleep, its natural reaction to talk its way out, to delay, to put off, etc. So, America always did have these concerns; but now, they are on the front burner like every other country. We are forced to personally protect our “way”. This is the first time on our soil!!! This is not a World War II where nations are trying to take territory. This is about protecting a way of life. This is about an opposition that does not share our value of life but thinks it has an alternative plan for its “believers”.
If you believe it is fundamentally a case of “Haves versus Have-nots” you can reason your own position in where we are now. If you believe it is a religious or territorial conflict you may think differently.
The solutions are an entirely different matter!!
I would not, for one minute, attempt to dissuade you from your “meditative” or “religious beliefs. That’s what you own! …. That’s what you believe. . I also agree that certain “documentation” may serve your beliefs. If I have a different view, it is not to in any way to denigrate your views, it is merely that I do not fully equate your experiences and their effects, with my own present understanding of what’s going on.
It is a matter of simple “difference” between us. It has nothing to do with “good or bad, useful versus useless, etc.” It is merely a matter of “difference”. After all we are both trying to achieve the same general ends, namely, an end to this useless violence.
I hope you truly understand my position in all this. By all means continue to follow your own beliefs.
For more than human history, there has been a battle between the “Haves and the Have-nots”. The beginning of war started when a group of so called human beings found out that they could grow a surplus … i.e. more than they needed. Another group in the north were unable (for one reason or another) to produce just exactly or maybe even slightly less than they needed for themselves. Soooo .. they found out about the group that could raise a surplus and decided to use force and “TAKE” whatever they wanted from that “surplus group”. …Thus was the beginning of war!
In its simplest form, the root of the problem “now and in the past” has always been the battle between the “Haves and the Have-nots”. Yes, they have hidden this “battle” in many different terms.
Such terms as Religion, as in Protestants versus Catholics in Ireland (it’s nothing but a Have Have-not battle between the North with its viable economic system and industry and the less productive south where there are more Catholics).
Such terms as a “Religion mixture”, as in Islam (the difference between the overwhelming numbers of believers in the ancient Islam traditions and the “new” Fundamentalist, the terrorist faction).
The “Have Have-not” battles that continue in the USA.
The Sudan is where the so-called leadership is in the power for itself and the population be damned. Etc., etc.
Many of the problems lie in unstable leadership where there is a military backed leadership which controls the meager assets of the country “for its own comfort”, or, a tribal committee in which each “chieftain” tries to defend his territory (of course, including all the assets in his territory). These so called leaders or governments do not produce anything of value for their citizens. There’s no economic plan, no economic opportunity, no advances in the public infrastructure and many times not enough food or water. The governments do NOT serve the people … just themselves! It really makes no difference what you name it. It’s a matter of a battle between the Haves and Have-nots!
However, we are NOT engaged in Nation building. The people will have to organize themselves. We can go into a limited partnership to help in providing limited services for the people; but, we CANNOT select the leadership or the type of government in any country!!
Somehow or other, the experiment where everyone has the same amount of everything (except of course, those in a “leadership” position which preserved perks for themselves) failed horribly. This system curbed motivation, experimentation, risk, opportunity, etc.
Other so-called “systems” including “tribal councils”, warlords, small separate states (the leaders of which could never really agree on anything) all left a “growing” population with no real economic or industrial base.
So if you were lucky and were one of the few that were able to manage an education, you quickly realized you had no better future, nor hope of a better future, when you returned to the country in which you originally came. You returned with no hope. So you got angry and decided to at least do something.
Some charismatic leader arose and said “Kill Americans. They are the source of your frustration!” So you finally had a plan to relieve your own frustrations….
This all starts as the result of a “Have Have-not” scenario.
One group has, (more or less), been able to organize a society in which, (more or less), there is a choice, an opportunity to raise oneself up; an economic system that, (more or less), is productive and can actually produce a surplus; and a society which is, (more or less), free to exercise certain rights of free speech and criticism, rights of free practice for all religions and thought systems, and other rights that seem more or less “protected” as a policy. It’s not perfect and some people actively protest this fact (although they continue to offer no “successful alternatives” …they’re just “against” something!!!)
On the other hand, we have large groups of people in this world who have been unable to organize themselves into a more “productive” society. Food, shelter and defense have not been adequately shared nor encouraged. There is a “hand to mouth” existence that doesn’t seem to be changed. These are the Have-nots. They want what the Haves have!!! Anyway they can get it!
The “Red Guard” in Germany bombed and terrorized Europe 20 years ago. The Irish situation still exists. Sudan, Ethiopia, most of Africa, etc still have this same problem. IT IS NOT NEW!!
Even the USA has the same problem. The McVeys, the armed militia units, the Skinheads, etc. all have their “griefs” and commit murder in their name to so-called “right the wrongs”.
These are not “terrorists” they are simply murderers, serial killers! America is filled with Americans and some American murderers. So is France, Italy, Israel, Egypt, Islam, etc. It’s all the same!! It still starts with frustration between the Haves and Have-nots.
I think it’s simple. I think we haven’t wanted to realize it. I think we realize that we don’t want to give up our unusual, hard earned, lucky advantage. We can share some of our material surplus to a point. We do not wish to make this “point” so it interferes with our current standard of living. We also realize that mere material sharing WILL NOT permanently solve the Have/ Have-not problem. The more you give the less the incentive to change. This is our real dilemma.
I fully believe that once you can put into words what you think the real problems are you can more successfully cope with our present realization. True, that once you have truly experienced this uncomfortable reality and have escaped; having to go backwards is a terribly difficult thing to face. But as long as you’re in the USA it is of a great deal less concern. A concern? Yes! …. A lesser concern? Yes!!
This “Have/ Have-not” conversation was something I felt I needed to express.
Thank you for your indulgence!
Respectfully submitted…. Bill T.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Definitions # #301 - #06 - The Mercenaries
Suppose somebody offered you your first job … your first real paycheck and food and shelter. All you have to do for this is to kill people. If all you’ve ever seen is killing and war, what’s the big deal!! After all, you grew up in this environment and it doesn’t seem so unusual…. It’s a “fight to the death”!
My friend you are now a “Mercenary”……
You have become a paid “killer”. You don’t care what nationality, or what race, or what religion … you are being paid to obey orders and kill anyone. By the way, prisoners are an “inconvenience”. What do you do with a prisoner? You have to feed him, house him, guard him, and provide him with many other services that you don’t enjoy yourself!! … So, don’t take any!!!
You may be called a “terrorist”, a “murderer”, a “freedom fighter”, a suicide bomber” … what do you care? You have a “job”!!!
Sometimes you are paid to kill the “innocent” … the civilian, the men, the women, and the children! So what … you have a “job”!!
And, yes, sometimes you are paid to kill other “nationals”, other people of different religious back rounds, other “specific targets”! So what …. You have a job!!
What does the “civilized world” do with people that think like this??
In the animal kingdom they are referred too as “rogue animals” … killing for killing’s sake!
They are usually “loners”, misfits… beyond normality. But what if a recognized group sees no harm in employing these people? What do you do?…And, what do you do about the people who employ these people?… And, what do you do with these “employees”!
This is the present “state of affairs”…….
In one sense, the conclusions are too obvious. It’s “them or me”! I do not think it is even perceivable to “negotiate”, “to talk”. We’re much beyond that! We cannot “negotiate or talk” our way out of this one!
These are people from a separate civilization. The world must recognize this as an “aberration”, an unfortunate “mutation”. If you have been involved in this environment for the last 30 years or more, you simply do not think like the rest of the industrialized world. Is there room for more “worlds”? Can the “industrialized” world live in the same space as “another type” of world? Can there be many different “worlds” in the space we refer to as “the World”?
If the “worlds” are kept separate and one “world” does not interfere with the other “worlds” that share the same space … then, I guess, you could “survive”. What do you do if the “worlds” begin to interfere with each other? And, what do you do with these “employees”!
This is the present “state of affairs”…. I don’t think we can talk our way around this one!!Definitions
My friend you are now a “Mercenary”……
You have become a paid “killer”. You don’t care what nationality, or what race, or what religion … you are being paid to obey orders and kill anyone. By the way, prisoners are an “inconvenience”. What do you do with a prisoner? You have to feed him, house him, guard him, and provide him with many other services that you don’t enjoy yourself!! … So, don’t take any!!!
You may be called a “terrorist”, a “murderer”, a “freedom fighter”, a suicide bomber” … what do you care? You have a “job”!!!
Sometimes you are paid to kill the “innocent” … the civilian, the men, the women, and the children! So what … you have a “job”!!
And, yes, sometimes you are paid to kill other “nationals”, other people of different religious back rounds, other “specific targets”! So what …. You have a job!!
What does the “civilized world” do with people that think like this??
In the animal kingdom they are referred too as “rogue animals” … killing for killing’s sake!
They are usually “loners”, misfits… beyond normality. But what if a recognized group sees no harm in employing these people? What do you do?…And, what do you do about the people who employ these people?… And, what do you do with these “employees”!
This is the present “state of affairs”…….
In one sense, the conclusions are too obvious. It’s “them or me”! I do not think it is even perceivable to “negotiate”, “to talk”. We’re much beyond that! We cannot “negotiate or talk” our way out of this one!
These are people from a separate civilization. The world must recognize this as an “aberration”, an unfortunate “mutation”. If you have been involved in this environment for the last 30 years or more, you simply do not think like the rest of the industrialized world. Is there room for more “worlds”? Can the “industrialized” world live in the same space as “another type” of world? Can there be many different “worlds” in the space we refer to as “the World”?
If the “worlds” are kept separate and one “world” does not interfere with the other “worlds” that share the same space … then, I guess, you could “survive”. What do you do if the “worlds” begin to interfere with each other? And, what do you do with these “employees”!
This is the present “state of affairs”…. I don’t think we can talk our way around this one!!Definitions
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Current - #201 - #4 - I'm at a loss as to how to deal with various ethnicities....
I’m at a loss as to how to deal with a….“different”, politically encouraged, enthusiastically defended, independent ethnic group.
I’m at a loss as to how to successfully deal with a culture or language other than “American”.
I’m at a loss as to what we’re supposed to do with people who live amongst us but are different and/or simply not interested in our rules, laws, or customs.
“They” are, as discussed, a “different”…. politically encouraged …. enthusiastically defended … independent ethnic group.
Some of them may already be American citizens!They “live amongst us”!!
They share the “bounties” of being in America….. and many share in the financial costs of America.
Some risk their lives and fight for the American ideal.
So what’s the problem? ……..
“I’m at a loss as to what we’re supposed to do with people who live amongst us but are different and/or simply not interested in our rules, laws, or customs.”
If your original culture is personally crowded and filled with people, you speak in a normally loud voice to be overheard. Now, however, you are not in a personally “crowded” space but, because of your normal habits, you still speak with a raised volume.
In your original ethnic culture, a large family is warranted because of a normally high childbirth death rate or there is a desire to have a family “group” to support you in your old age. Now, however, the success of available, modern medicine makes childbirth death significantly less of a threat, and still you believe in large families. Old age in the American society is now publicly supported and the need for a personal family “group” support system is no longer necessary. Now, since your move to America, you may not need to have extra, inexpensive labor to run your farm or increase your income from a “family” shop. You may not “need” to have a large family.
BUT…. If you enjoy a large family , and can support a large family, and have a large family for reasons other than “extra”, inexpensive labor; in America, it is looked on with admiration. It is NOT the large family, but rather the “reasons” for having a large family that creates the problem. Being proud, being financially able, and above all, being loving and fond of your large family is a thing of profound admiration.
The size of your family is determined by the time and efforts you have to share with each member of your family…. Being loving, being financial able to support your family, being personally responsible to see your dreams come true for all the members of your chosen family are all admirable reasons to decide the size of your family.
BUT….. If you carry with you your original cultural and original environmental “baggage” into your new country, which , luckily provides an entirely different set of conditions; and you make decisions based on your “original” culture; you are creating “ethnic problems” with your more established neighbors . Our cultures look at things differently. You may be just as “right” in your own ideas, in your own “original” culture; but this new society thinks things differently! This is a different “culture”.
“I’m at a loss as to what we’re supposed to do with people who live amongst us but are different and/or simply not interested in our rules, laws, or customs.”
Well, what to do?
This is the reason for discussing this issue.
This is NOT racist! This is NOT discriminatory! This is NOT against immigration! This is NOT “anti” anything!!!
This is an attempt at finding reason and logic in what is a “Loss as to what we are supposed to do…”
Does the process of “assimilation” into the American culture have any present value? Are we to grow up as a nation of “dis-similar” people with different desires and different ways of life? Is this good or bad for the country now known as America?
Again, “I’m at a loss as to what to do, even how to think!”
And again…. Is “assimilation “ a valuable thing? Is it good or bad for America?
I’m at a loss as to how to successfully deal with a culture or language other than “American”.
I’m at a loss as to what we’re supposed to do with people who live amongst us but are different and/or simply not interested in our rules, laws, or customs.
“They” are, as discussed, a “different”…. politically encouraged …. enthusiastically defended … independent ethnic group.
Some of them may already be American citizens!They “live amongst us”!!
They share the “bounties” of being in America….. and many share in the financial costs of America.
Some risk their lives and fight for the American ideal.
So what’s the problem? ……..
“I’m at a loss as to what we’re supposed to do with people who live amongst us but are different and/or simply not interested in our rules, laws, or customs.”
If your original culture is personally crowded and filled with people, you speak in a normally loud voice to be overheard. Now, however, you are not in a personally “crowded” space but, because of your normal habits, you still speak with a raised volume.
In your original ethnic culture, a large family is warranted because of a normally high childbirth death rate or there is a desire to have a family “group” to support you in your old age. Now, however, the success of available, modern medicine makes childbirth death significantly less of a threat, and still you believe in large families. Old age in the American society is now publicly supported and the need for a personal family “group” support system is no longer necessary. Now, since your move to America, you may not need to have extra, inexpensive labor to run your farm or increase your income from a “family” shop. You may not “need” to have a large family.
BUT…. If you enjoy a large family , and can support a large family, and have a large family for reasons other than “extra”, inexpensive labor; in America, it is looked on with admiration. It is NOT the large family, but rather the “reasons” for having a large family that creates the problem. Being proud, being financially able, and above all, being loving and fond of your large family is a thing of profound admiration.
The size of your family is determined by the time and efforts you have to share with each member of your family…. Being loving, being financial able to support your family, being personally responsible to see your dreams come true for all the members of your chosen family are all admirable reasons to decide the size of your family.
BUT….. If you carry with you your original cultural and original environmental “baggage” into your new country, which , luckily provides an entirely different set of conditions; and you make decisions based on your “original” culture; you are creating “ethnic problems” with your more established neighbors . Our cultures look at things differently. You may be just as “right” in your own ideas, in your own “original” culture; but this new society thinks things differently! This is a different “culture”.
“I’m at a loss as to what we’re supposed to do with people who live amongst us but are different and/or simply not interested in our rules, laws, or customs.”
Well, what to do?
This is the reason for discussing this issue.
This is NOT racist! This is NOT discriminatory! This is NOT against immigration! This is NOT “anti” anything!!!
This is an attempt at finding reason and logic in what is a “Loss as to what we are supposed to do…”
Does the process of “assimilation” into the American culture have any present value? Are we to grow up as a nation of “dis-similar” people with different desires and different ways of life? Is this good or bad for the country now known as America?
Again, “I’m at a loss as to what to do, even how to think!”
And again…. Is “assimilation “ a valuable thing? Is it good or bad for America?
Monday, November 26, 2007
Current - #201 - #03 - I’m at a loss as to…..
How to “even communicate”, or in fact, “whether to bother to communicate” with a
person, who has such a “meaningless value system! (“meaningless” at least to me!)
Should you just ignore someone whose “value system” is unlike your own?
Should you even try to find a mutual ground to start a “mutual” discussion?
If you want to take the time and effort, could you just sharpen your understanding of the other person’s “value system” and let it go at that; or, do you have to try to explain your own “value system”.
If you want to take the time and effort, is it of any value to you that you try?
Conclusion:
It all depends!! ……..
If you wish to remain in contact with the other person for any number of reasons; you may try to be “politically correct”, civil, polite, engaging, etc. and stay away from any discussion where a “value system” (what’s important to you) is involved. Jokes, sports, social chit chat, etc. may serve you well and THEN go to the golf course!!! You might as well stay home and “take a warm bath” if you think you can have a “mutual exchange” with someone whose values are directly different from your own. Stay away from any meaningful exchange…. It is fruitless and will only give you a stomach ache!
On the other hand, if you want to try and expose your own “value system” for their consideration, there are certain steps you must take…..
a) First, you must be sure you understand what the other person’s “value system “ is.
b) Second, you must try to find “common language” to make sure that any thoughts you have are “received” and “mutually understood”. There is no meaningful dialogue if people are using language that is not “fully and mutually” understood. Without it, you will engage in an exercise of “oral static” (noise)!! (Again, take a bath!)
c) Try to refer to the other person’s experience in your use of language and examples.
d) Lastly….Don’t be disappointed or angry if your mission fails! All you can do is try your best. You do not need to make an enemy or lose a friend if your experiment fails. Just realize that your relationship has become more restricted.
Try to decide what is “valuable to you” before you start….. or, as soon as you recognize a “chasm of difference”.
person, who has such a “meaningless value system! (“meaningless” at least to me!)
Should you just ignore someone whose “value system” is unlike your own?
Should you even try to find a mutual ground to start a “mutual” discussion?
If you want to take the time and effort, could you just sharpen your understanding of the other person’s “value system” and let it go at that; or, do you have to try to explain your own “value system”.
If you want to take the time and effort, is it of any value to you that you try?
Conclusion:
It all depends!! ……..
If you wish to remain in contact with the other person for any number of reasons; you may try to be “politically correct”, civil, polite, engaging, etc. and stay away from any discussion where a “value system” (what’s important to you) is involved. Jokes, sports, social chit chat, etc. may serve you well and THEN go to the golf course!!! You might as well stay home and “take a warm bath” if you think you can have a “mutual exchange” with someone whose values are directly different from your own. Stay away from any meaningful exchange…. It is fruitless and will only give you a stomach ache!
On the other hand, if you want to try and expose your own “value system” for their consideration, there are certain steps you must take…..
a) First, you must be sure you understand what the other person’s “value system “ is.
b) Second, you must try to find “common language” to make sure that any thoughts you have are “received” and “mutually understood”. There is no meaningful dialogue if people are using language that is not “fully and mutually” understood. Without it, you will engage in an exercise of “oral static” (noise)!! (Again, take a bath!)
c) Try to refer to the other person’s experience in your use of language and examples.
d) Lastly….Don’t be disappointed or angry if your mission fails! All you can do is try your best. You do not need to make an enemy or lose a friend if your experiment fails. Just realize that your relationship has become more restricted.
Try to decide what is “valuable to you” before you start….. or, as soon as you recognize a “chasm of difference”.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Current - #201 - #02 – A “B.T”. letter on “Immigration”
Dear Sirs:
It was a pleasure to receive your email. I wanted to answer you as best I could.
I was only interested in the USA.
Immigration in the USA can pose a problem if the immigrants are non-productive. If they come only for protection, opportunity, free services like medical and education, or any other reason other than the desire and ability to become a productive citizen in the US economy, the USA faces a dilemma.
It is not a question of mere morality or democracy. It is an economic and standard of living question. The hard working citizens of the USA make many decisions and personal sacrifices to upgrade their standard of living. They simply would not understand how they could freely give away their time and efforts to give some one else the same standard of living without working for it. If the immigrant can become productive and earn his way, there would be no reasonable way for a US citizen to complain. How long would it take to cause great unrest in its own citizens, if the US government insisted that its working, productive citizens provide a free standard of living to immigrants that did not enter the productive marketplace.
This is an old story between the "haves" and the "have nots". If there was no incentive to better yourself, no one would be motivated to try. This "scares" people in the US. We already have a substantial problem with people who exist on the efforts of others. It's called "Welfare". It is a big problem and it keeps growing. More and more citizens do not take responsibility for their own lives. They do not seek to be productive. They depend on others to give them a standard of living. Not only do they depend on others, but they complain that what they get for free is not adequate!! This really upsets people who work hard!
How much more should one person have over another? This gets to the basics of the real problem. We happen, in the USA, to live in a sort of Democracy. It is fairly "uncontrolled" and free. But Socialism and Communism have a different idea of how to exist. Morality, different cultures, different religions, etc. have nothing to do with the idea of freedom of choice. Once you have an idea that "all" is to be controlled, all opportunities should be made the same, all standards of living should be equal … you have a different kind of country than what the USA is trying to achieve. Personal responsibility with a reasonable opportunity for all. That is NOT to say that everyone will try and seize the opportunities. But we try to make opportunities available to all.
We are not interested so much as to who has more. We are more interested that almost everyone has a chance.
Our economy mirrors this idea. To give away our treasure to provide a free standard of living just will not work in the USA. This is something other than a “free” society.
Immigration of various religions, cultures, nationalities, etc. has nothing to do with keeping our economy going so that it can provide growing opportunities for an increasing population.
The fear is that we are flooding the capacity of hard working people to support free standards of living to those who are not or don't wish to join in the working, productive society that makes all this possible.
Again, it is not the moral direction of our society, nor is it some kind of fairness doctrine that determines our views of immigration. It is the "standard of living", "choices and opportunities" that determine our thinking.
Respectfully submitted, Bill T.
It was a pleasure to receive your email. I wanted to answer you as best I could.
I was only interested in the USA.
Immigration in the USA can pose a problem if the immigrants are non-productive. If they come only for protection, opportunity, free services like medical and education, or any other reason other than the desire and ability to become a productive citizen in the US economy, the USA faces a dilemma.
It is not a question of mere morality or democracy. It is an economic and standard of living question. The hard working citizens of the USA make many decisions and personal sacrifices to upgrade their standard of living. They simply would not understand how they could freely give away their time and efforts to give some one else the same standard of living without working for it. If the immigrant can become productive and earn his way, there would be no reasonable way for a US citizen to complain. How long would it take to cause great unrest in its own citizens, if the US government insisted that its working, productive citizens provide a free standard of living to immigrants that did not enter the productive marketplace.
This is an old story between the "haves" and the "have nots". If there was no incentive to better yourself, no one would be motivated to try. This "scares" people in the US. We already have a substantial problem with people who exist on the efforts of others. It's called "Welfare". It is a big problem and it keeps growing. More and more citizens do not take responsibility for their own lives. They do not seek to be productive. They depend on others to give them a standard of living. Not only do they depend on others, but they complain that what they get for free is not adequate!! This really upsets people who work hard!
How much more should one person have over another? This gets to the basics of the real problem. We happen, in the USA, to live in a sort of Democracy. It is fairly "uncontrolled" and free. But Socialism and Communism have a different idea of how to exist. Morality, different cultures, different religions, etc. have nothing to do with the idea of freedom of choice. Once you have an idea that "all" is to be controlled, all opportunities should be made the same, all standards of living should be equal … you have a different kind of country than what the USA is trying to achieve. Personal responsibility with a reasonable opportunity for all. That is NOT to say that everyone will try and seize the opportunities. But we try to make opportunities available to all.
We are not interested so much as to who has more. We are more interested that almost everyone has a chance.
Our economy mirrors this idea. To give away our treasure to provide a free standard of living just will not work in the USA. This is something other than a “free” society.
Immigration of various religions, cultures, nationalities, etc. has nothing to do with keeping our economy going so that it can provide growing opportunities for an increasing population.
The fear is that we are flooding the capacity of hard working people to support free standards of living to those who are not or don't wish to join in the working, productive society that makes all this possible.
Again, it is not the moral direction of our society, nor is it some kind of fairness doctrine that determines our views of immigration. It is the "standard of living", "choices and opportunities" that determine our thinking.
Respectfully submitted, Bill T.
Current - #201 - #31 - Everybody “Hates” war!!!
Yep!!! Everyone does “Hate” war.
When is war inevitable?
When “talking” is impossible…. When “debate” has reached an impasse…. When the people involved become impossible to debate with…..When the people involved are not interested in “debate” or in the “sharing” of ideas. (It’s like having a fight where one person tries to kill his opponent and the opponent has one hand tied behind his back. Who do you think is going to win this fight?)
When a country or an “ideology” has one idea in mind and wants to make this “ideology” fit everyone else, that “the everyone else” fights back in the only way left…. that is “physically”…that is “War”!
We can all describe “war” and it’s inevitable mark on society…. the inevitable “collateral damage” etc. That’s easy!
But what’s it’s substitute?...... What’s “the successful alternative”? …..Well?.....
What’s the sense of repeating “I hate war!” when you have no “successful alternative”?
Yep!!! Everyone does “Hate” war.
What good does it really do to proclaim “I hate war!”?
After all, you admit that “negotiating” or “sharing” ideas has come to an end. The people on the other side do not want to “negotiate”. They already have their “agenda”. They want everyone else to have their “agenda”.
Yep!!! Everyone does “Hate” war.
Those that wear the slogan “I hate war!” is as useless as …………
When is war inevitable?
When “talking” is impossible…. When “debate” has reached an impasse…. When the people involved become impossible to debate with…..When the people involved are not interested in “debate” or in the “sharing” of ideas. (It’s like having a fight where one person tries to kill his opponent and the opponent has one hand tied behind his back. Who do you think is going to win this fight?)
When a country or an “ideology” has one idea in mind and wants to make this “ideology” fit everyone else, that “the everyone else” fights back in the only way left…. that is “physically”…that is “War”!
We can all describe “war” and it’s inevitable mark on society…. the inevitable “collateral damage” etc. That’s easy!
But what’s it’s substitute?...... What’s “the successful alternative”? …..Well?.....
What’s the sense of repeating “I hate war!” when you have no “successful alternative”?
Yep!!! Everyone does “Hate” war.
What good does it really do to proclaim “I hate war!”?
After all, you admit that “negotiating” or “sharing” ideas has come to an end. The people on the other side do not want to “negotiate”. They already have their “agenda”. They want everyone else to have their “agenda”.
Yep!!! Everyone does “Hate” war.
Those that wear the slogan “I hate war!” is as useless as …………
Friday, November 23, 2007
Government - #101 – #50 - The U.S.A. can never solve the world’s poverty problems!
Is this a possibility?
Do we have to pick winners and losers?
Is the American “pie” big enough?
What do we do about the rhetoric from the media.
What do we do about the “intellectuals” of the U.S. don’t think about the “How”.
What do we do about the “democracy” we built and now live in that is not fully appreciated.
What do we do about the American standard of living and our institutions of law and Constitution that are not meant for everybody.
What do we do about Americans that are afraid to pick one over another.
What do we do about the “thinking” that Americans believe everyone is suited for “democracy”.
Well, what to do or what to think……..
Without our Constitution and our Laws, our “Democracy” does not exist!
Does this mean that all the world’s people believe in the same things?
Is this “our way” the answer to the “world’s poverty” situation?
Does this mean that we can’t attempt to interest certain people in “our” way? (but only “certain people”!)
Will we have to choose? … You bet!
There are people that do not have any of the foundations or institutions like the U.S. There are many countries that do not share or care about the U.S.’s desire to have a uniform society. These people have a different way! …. Do we have to chose? ….. You bet!!!! (More complete)
We have to choose carefully so that we do not lose what we have; the best standard of living in the world!
We have limited treasure. We have a limit on the time and money we can spend. It has to be in our “National interest” to make the attempt. The U.S. citizenry must agree to this broad purpose before it can agree to the spending of its hard earned treasure! There are limits!!
We can tell the government NOT to spend our money on causes that do not help us.
We have to choose carefully! … We have to choose!!
Do we have to pick winners and losers?
Is the American “pie” big enough?
What do we do about the rhetoric from the media.
What do we do about the “intellectuals” of the U.S. don’t think about the “How”.
What do we do about the “democracy” we built and now live in that is not fully appreciated.
What do we do about the American standard of living and our institutions of law and Constitution that are not meant for everybody.
What do we do about Americans that are afraid to pick one over another.
What do we do about the “thinking” that Americans believe everyone is suited for “democracy”.
Well, what to do or what to think……..
Without our Constitution and our Laws, our “Democracy” does not exist!
Does this mean that all the world’s people believe in the same things?
Is this “our way” the answer to the “world’s poverty” situation?
Does this mean that we can’t attempt to interest certain people in “our” way? (but only “certain people”!)
Will we have to choose? … You bet!
There are people that do not have any of the foundations or institutions like the U.S. There are many countries that do not share or care about the U.S.’s desire to have a uniform society. These people have a different way! …. Do we have to chose? ….. You bet!!!! (More complete)
We have to choose carefully so that we do not lose what we have; the best standard of living in the world!
We have limited treasure. We have a limit on the time and money we can spend. It has to be in our “National interest” to make the attempt. The U.S. citizenry must agree to this broad purpose before it can agree to the spending of its hard earned treasure! There are limits!!
We can tell the government NOT to spend our money on causes that do not help us.
We have to choose carefully! … We have to choose!!
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Government - #101 - #11 - I’m at a loss ……
- I’m at a loss as to how to successfully deal in America with a culture or language other than “American”.
– I’m at a loss as to what we’re supposed to do with people who live amongst us but are different and not interested in our rules, laws, or customs.
– I’m at a loss as to how to “even communicate”, (or whether to “bother to communicate”), with persons of such different (or, at least to me) “meaningless value system”
– I’m at a loss as to how to interest, or, to motivate someone to try a new idea, a new approach.
– I’m at a loss as to where I “fit in” now..
– I am at a loss as to what “America or American” really stands for.
*** Simply….“I’m at a loss!!!” …. What to do? ***
Well, possibly, I can try to just live an “exemplary” life… “exemplary”, at least, by my standards!
First: I’d better understand myself, first!!! Then, and only then, can I undertake the “adventure” of going into other people’s “worlds”.
Second: I have to find out what my standards are. Do I have any?… What are they? …Can I define my “standards” in a language that can be understood by me, first of all; and then by “most”? … Can I make myself “understood”?
Third: Do I run a “hospital” for the world, or, shall I become involved only with my friends and a few groups with which I feel a mutual interest? Do I have an obligation of some sort to be involved with everything that happens in my path?
*********************************************************************
I have my own “garbage can”.
I keep a lid on it. Not everyone can throw his garbage in my can!!!!
I wish to control whose garbage is in my can!!!
Is this a selfish point of view? Is it “exemplary”?
“What’s the Successful Alternative?”
Should I take the risk of “confrontation” and express my own views in as “non-confrontational” way that I’m capable of; or, simply “shut up!!”
It’s a choice that I can make! … (It does not harm anyone but myself, as to which choice I make.)
Is it a choice I can discuss with others…especially with others I respect?
“SURE!!!” …… “You bet!!!” …….
(Perhaps this discussion can be “A Successful Alternative”?)
– I’m at a loss as to what we’re supposed to do with people who live amongst us but are different and not interested in our rules, laws, or customs.
– I’m at a loss as to how to “even communicate”, (or whether to “bother to communicate”), with persons of such different (or, at least to me) “meaningless value system”
– I’m at a loss as to how to interest, or, to motivate someone to try a new idea, a new approach.
– I’m at a loss as to where I “fit in” now..
– I am at a loss as to what “America or American” really stands for.
*** Simply….“I’m at a loss!!!” …. What to do? ***
Well, possibly, I can try to just live an “exemplary” life… “exemplary”, at least, by my standards!
First: I’d better understand myself, first!!! Then, and only then, can I undertake the “adventure” of going into other people’s “worlds”.
Second: I have to find out what my standards are. Do I have any?… What are they? …Can I define my “standards” in a language that can be understood by me, first of all; and then by “most”? … Can I make myself “understood”?
Third: Do I run a “hospital” for the world, or, shall I become involved only with my friends and a few groups with which I feel a mutual interest? Do I have an obligation of some sort to be involved with everything that happens in my path?
*********************************************************************
I have my own “garbage can”.
I keep a lid on it. Not everyone can throw his garbage in my can!!!!
I wish to control whose garbage is in my can!!!
Is this a selfish point of view? Is it “exemplary”?
“What’s the Successful Alternative?”
Should I take the risk of “confrontation” and express my own views in as “non-confrontational” way that I’m capable of; or, simply “shut up!!”
It’s a choice that I can make! … (It does not harm anyone but myself, as to which choice I make.)
Is it a choice I can discuss with others…especially with others I respect?
“SURE!!!” …… “You bet!!!” …….
(Perhaps this discussion can be “A Successful Alternative”?)
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Government - #101 - #12 What is "money" and what does it "do"?
It seems that “money” really is the root of some evil!”
Some say that “money” is a major cause of misunderstanding and family breakup.
At the very least, it is obvious that “money” is a major influence in our lives.
Sounds simple? … But what is “money”, really?
Suppose we said that money represents goods and services that can be had at any time in the future.
Still sounds simple?
What if I print more “money” and there is no increase in the amount of goods and services I can get in the future? …It’s another word for “Inflation”!!! …. more “money” but no more goods and services!
Getting more complicated, isn’t it?
What if I print more money and there is an increase in the amount of goods and services in the future?
Who can measure the amounts of goods and services at any time, much less the increase in the total amount in a given period of time? How do you do that? How do you get an accurate figure?
Could there be an advantage in stating that the reason you are going to print more “money” is that “you” have discovered an increase in the total amount of goods and services? You could arbitrarily increase the amounts of currency to boost commercial business activity and make it “look like” you have a successful economy. Until the “money using” public got wise, you could “fake” economic recovery for a while; but then…… ??
So the amount of “currency” printed must be monitored so that there is “always” a balance between the amount of goods and services available and the amount of “currency” available!
Simple? … But wait…..
What about borrowing money by issuing a piece of paper which says “We, your Government, will guarantee you 6% annual interest for the next ten years on the amount of currency you give us now”. This is simple a piece of paper, guaranteed by the your Government, that is not “currency”, is not “money”. It’s called a “Bond”! But the government now has your currency, your “money” for the next ten years, to pay for expenses, without changing the volume of goods and services available. Isn’t that also “inflation”? By the way, who do you think is going to pay this magical 6% annual interest? The Government is not in business. It doesn’t produce anything. Its income is from “YOU”, in taxes!!
Who keeps track of the Government borrowing? How is it related to the printing of “money”? Who keeps track of the balance between these two items and the total volume of goods and services at any one given time?? …. Pretty scary stuff!!!
Yeah, but what’s this “keeping track of” business? How do you do that?
It’s called accounting. It’s called “budgets”. It’s called accounting “principles!
It has been proven that you can take the same set of business figures and give them to the top accounting firms and get different answers. Some even may show a loss where others show a profit! Yet, each is figured according to acceptable accounting “principles”. What do I do with the money I spent for a bridge. Do I take it all as an expense this year. The bridge has a life span of 10 years, 20, 30, 50? Which do I choose? Do I take 1/10, 1/20, 1/30, or 1/50 of the total cost and apply it as an expense this year. Who determines that?
I can look much better if I only spent 1/50 th. of the total bridge cost this year. Look how little I spent!! Look how low my expenses are now! Why we even have money left over to buy a small park! …. Oh boy!
So… not so simple!!
Who does the so-called “accounting”? Who makes these decisions? What do the present numbers really mean? If my expenses go up, I need more money … higher taxes! If my expenses seem to go down I have a so-called “ budget surplus”. We, either, can spend more; or, pay off our debts (the National Debt), or, we can lower taxes. Yeah but, whose doing the “accounting”! How good are the “real” numbers?
So all this has to do with the definition of “money”.
All “money” can really buy is “Time”!!
“Time” to make choices.
Money doesn’t “make choices”, but “time” to make choices. If you make the wrong choices, that’s your problem; but at least, with money, you are not forced into making a “choice”, you have “time”.
If you choose wisely, for you, you have the advantages of “money”. If you choose badly …..!!!!
If you waste your assets on temporary acquisitions (material things) then you might not have the “time” to make more important choices in the future. This is called “Saving for a rainy day!”
It’s always “choices”!! …… “Time” available to make a “choice”!
That’s what “money” can do!!!
Some say that “money” is a major cause of misunderstanding and family breakup.
At the very least, it is obvious that “money” is a major influence in our lives.
Sounds simple? … But what is “money”, really?
Suppose we said that money represents goods and services that can be had at any time in the future.
Still sounds simple?
What if I print more “money” and there is no increase in the amount of goods and services I can get in the future? …It’s another word for “Inflation”!!! …. more “money” but no more goods and services!
Getting more complicated, isn’t it?
What if I print more money and there is an increase in the amount of goods and services in the future?
Who can measure the amounts of goods and services at any time, much less the increase in the total amount in a given period of time? How do you do that? How do you get an accurate figure?
Could there be an advantage in stating that the reason you are going to print more “money” is that “you” have discovered an increase in the total amount of goods and services? You could arbitrarily increase the amounts of currency to boost commercial business activity and make it “look like” you have a successful economy. Until the “money using” public got wise, you could “fake” economic recovery for a while; but then…… ??
So the amount of “currency” printed must be monitored so that there is “always” a balance between the amount of goods and services available and the amount of “currency” available!
Simple? … But wait…..
What about borrowing money by issuing a piece of paper which says “We, your Government, will guarantee you 6% annual interest for the next ten years on the amount of currency you give us now”. This is simple a piece of paper, guaranteed by the your Government, that is not “currency”, is not “money”. It’s called a “Bond”! But the government now has your currency, your “money” for the next ten years, to pay for expenses, without changing the volume of goods and services available. Isn’t that also “inflation”? By the way, who do you think is going to pay this magical 6% annual interest? The Government is not in business. It doesn’t produce anything. Its income is from “YOU”, in taxes!!
Who keeps track of the Government borrowing? How is it related to the printing of “money”? Who keeps track of the balance between these two items and the total volume of goods and services at any one given time?? …. Pretty scary stuff!!!
Yeah, but what’s this “keeping track of” business? How do you do that?
It’s called accounting. It’s called “budgets”. It’s called accounting “principles!
It has been proven that you can take the same set of business figures and give them to the top accounting firms and get different answers. Some even may show a loss where others show a profit! Yet, each is figured according to acceptable accounting “principles”. What do I do with the money I spent for a bridge. Do I take it all as an expense this year. The bridge has a life span of 10 years, 20, 30, 50? Which do I choose? Do I take 1/10, 1/20, 1/30, or 1/50 of the total cost and apply it as an expense this year. Who determines that?
I can look much better if I only spent 1/50 th. of the total bridge cost this year. Look how little I spent!! Look how low my expenses are now! Why we even have money left over to buy a small park! …. Oh boy!
So… not so simple!!
Who does the so-called “accounting”? Who makes these decisions? What do the present numbers really mean? If my expenses go up, I need more money … higher taxes! If my expenses seem to go down I have a so-called “ budget surplus”. We, either, can spend more; or, pay off our debts (the National Debt), or, we can lower taxes. Yeah but, whose doing the “accounting”! How good are the “real” numbers?
So all this has to do with the definition of “money”.
All “money” can really buy is “Time”!!
“Time” to make choices.
Money doesn’t “make choices”, but “time” to make choices. If you make the wrong choices, that’s your problem; but at least, with money, you are not forced into making a “choice”, you have “time”.
If you choose wisely, for you, you have the advantages of “money”. If you choose badly …..!!!!
If you waste your assets on temporary acquisitions (material things) then you might not have the “time” to make more important choices in the future. This is called “Saving for a rainy day!”
It’s always “choices”!! …… “Time” available to make a “choice”!
That’s what “money” can do!!!
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Personal - #510 - #62 - Do you look to Government to solve all your problems?
Can the Government protect us from our own Ignorance?…..from the bad guys,,,, from our own discomfort…. from our own choices for education, diet, economic alternatives, happiness, success, etc…. I don’t think so!!
Well, what can our Government do?....
It can pass laws and regulations that satisfy the latest extreme public frauds, subject to the scrutiny of Constitutional and political and governmental pundits. Where do the excesses come from? The ecxcesses come from the public exercise of the Media. The louder the squawk, the more attention is paid. The public has “some” input, but until the Media picks it up….nothing! Included in the Media are governmental “oversee committees” that are televised and the political pundits that are covered in the Media.
What “CAN’T” the Government do….
It can’t protect us from our own ignorance…. ignorance due to the lack of interest and motivation in Public affairs. We assume that the facts come from T.V. and the media and never compare what people say or what the internet says or what we state are “the facts”….. More than half the time, we have “assumed the facts” and never check them through asking others. We are basically giving our opinions based on the “assumed” facts. How about giving your best “observations” when asked, and, not be so anxious to give “our opinions”! This is a quest for “new information”. This is a “debate” not an “argument”!
It can’t protect us from all of the “bad guys”…. Yes! There are bad people amongst us! People who want to do us harm…that want what we have just by taking it….If we try to “get in the way”, they’ll take our lives! “All” the bad people? Hardly! It would take an army of police which the public couldn’t stand for. The cost would be prohibitive. Besides who wants to live in a “police state”?
It can’t protect us from our own “discomfort”….. However our “discomfort” comes, no government can protect us from all of it. Prior to the modern age, our children were left “unprotected” from life. They were left to their own devices for the better part of the day. Today they are bussed to soccer practice, bussed to their recitals bussed to the ball games… protected all the time, or left to an “unsavory” neighborhood where “the bad people” inhabit. Obviously you can’t abolish every “bad neighborhood” nor can you expect parents to let their children go half the time. But something has changed! Parents do not handle things the way they were. Our children seem protected all the time or they’re let “loose”. There are no easy constraints. Kids seem to restrain themselves, at least for a time. There doesn’t seem to be any consequences…. no mild deterrents for misbehaving in society…. All people are taught to rely on the “government”!
It can’t protect us from “bad choices” in “education”, diet, alternative thinking, happiness, success, etc. The government does its best as a human run resource. It simply can’t protect us from “everything”!
Well, what can our Government do?....
It can pass laws and regulations that satisfy the latest extreme public frauds, subject to the scrutiny of Constitutional and political and governmental pundits. Where do the excesses come from? The ecxcesses come from the public exercise of the Media. The louder the squawk, the more attention is paid. The public has “some” input, but until the Media picks it up….nothing! Included in the Media are governmental “oversee committees” that are televised and the political pundits that are covered in the Media.
What “CAN’T” the Government do….
It can’t protect us from our own ignorance…. ignorance due to the lack of interest and motivation in Public affairs. We assume that the facts come from T.V. and the media and never compare what people say or what the internet says or what we state are “the facts”….. More than half the time, we have “assumed the facts” and never check them through asking others. We are basically giving our opinions based on the “assumed” facts. How about giving your best “observations” when asked, and, not be so anxious to give “our opinions”! This is a quest for “new information”. This is a “debate” not an “argument”!
It can’t protect us from all of the “bad guys”…. Yes! There are bad people amongst us! People who want to do us harm…that want what we have just by taking it….If we try to “get in the way”, they’ll take our lives! “All” the bad people? Hardly! It would take an army of police which the public couldn’t stand for. The cost would be prohibitive. Besides who wants to live in a “police state”?
It can’t protect us from our own “discomfort”….. However our “discomfort” comes, no government can protect us from all of it. Prior to the modern age, our children were left “unprotected” from life. They were left to their own devices for the better part of the day. Today they are bussed to soccer practice, bussed to their recitals bussed to the ball games… protected all the time, or left to an “unsavory” neighborhood where “the bad people” inhabit. Obviously you can’t abolish every “bad neighborhood” nor can you expect parents to let their children go half the time. But something has changed! Parents do not handle things the way they were. Our children seem protected all the time or they’re let “loose”. There are no easy constraints. Kids seem to restrain themselves, at least for a time. There doesn’t seem to be any consequences…. no mild deterrents for misbehaving in society…. All people are taught to rely on the “government”!
It can’t protect us from “bad choices” in “education”, diet, alternative thinking, happiness, success, etc. The government does its best as a human run resource. It simply can’t protect us from “everything”!
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Government - #101 - #51 - Who can reveal what the government is doing?
Which author from which secret source can reveal what he’s been doing for the government?
Which author, during wartime, can reveal what he’s been doing for the government?
Which part of government decides what is true and what is propaganda?
Who can reveal what?
When you see the various T.V. shows and listen to the various spokespeople, who can be believed?
What should form our opinions?
What should be our facts?
Is it propaganda or fact?
Is it government propaganda or “whose”?
Is there a vested interest or a political influence?
What are we to believe?
Are we just reacting or are we “planning”?
Can anyone plan for a future which is changing constantly?
Can we plan for the increase in gas prices when we don’t know how much gas the Chinese or the Indian population might use?
Can we overcome those groups that persist on no new oil drilling in Alaska or off the coast of California?
Can we plan for no new refineries or no new atomic plants or do we have to wait for a change in attitude? ….Do we just “react”?
Who says the oil company only has a profit of 10% on a gallon of gas? ….Who says the government takes 35% of all gas prices? ….. What are the real facts?
What are we to believe?
Can any legitimate administration be held responsible for gas prices?
Are the arguments ridiculous?
But suppose the general public (the “mob”) believe what they hear and make judgments on this lack of “real” information, what then? Does there have to be an improvement or just a change in politics? Will the change be beneficial? Although we don’t know what the changes might be, will a change in administrations be any better?
What’s in a change for me?
Which author, during wartime, can reveal what he’s been doing for the government?
Which part of government decides what is true and what is propaganda?
Who can reveal what?
When you see the various T.V. shows and listen to the various spokespeople, who can be believed?
What should form our opinions?
What should be our facts?
Is it propaganda or fact?
Is it government propaganda or “whose”?
Is there a vested interest or a political influence?
What are we to believe?
Are we just reacting or are we “planning”?
Can anyone plan for a future which is changing constantly?
Can we plan for the increase in gas prices when we don’t know how much gas the Chinese or the Indian population might use?
Can we overcome those groups that persist on no new oil drilling in Alaska or off the coast of California?
Can we plan for no new refineries or no new atomic plants or do we have to wait for a change in attitude? ….Do we just “react”?
Who says the oil company only has a profit of 10% on a gallon of gas? ….Who says the government takes 35% of all gas prices? ….. What are the real facts?
What are we to believe?
Can any legitimate administration be held responsible for gas prices?
Are the arguments ridiculous?
But suppose the general public (the “mob”) believe what they hear and make judgments on this lack of “real” information, what then? Does there have to be an improvement or just a change in politics? Will the change be beneficial? Although we don’t know what the changes might be, will a change in administrations be any better?
What’s in a change for me?
Friday, November 16, 2007
Personal - #501 - #61 - Another "Inconvenient Truth"....
What should people be really concerned about?
What should people be really interested in?
The terrorists (the Jihads, the Radicals, the Islamic Fascists, etc.) want to kill us!!! They want an end to the world’s “industrial revolution” as we know them!
Instead, we have Brittany Spears, Immigration reform, Congressional oversights, How our decision making process works, The coming election, The Iraq war, etc…. Sure, some of these are important, but “to kill us”?
What greater issue is there “but to kill us!”?
Is the great population so misinformed that they don’t see this as an issue of the greatest importance?
Is the fact that they don’t feel that they have “any” input? Does voting do anything about our National foreign policy? Does war and killing so disgust the American people that they won’t even discuss it?
Is there any solution???
Do we wait for “revolution”? This is where the uninformed mob hits the streets and the minority of “rulers” (legislators) and the highly paid and trained military fight to gain control?
Is this our future?
How do we have rational discussion?
How do we become “educated”?
What sources do we have to “inform” us?
Isn’t this the question?
Do the schools teach us to discuss rather than merely “express our opinion”?
Do ordinary people “discuss” rather than “give their opinion”?
Is this a matter of “education”, … “real” Education?
Why don’t ordinary people get involved….at least, “intellectually”?
What should make the teenagers more interested? …. (after all, they’re going to pay!)
Is it the job of the President to make the country more aware of it’s predicament with out giving the enemies a “game plan”? Is the current administration doing its job?
Who is going to change this?
Will a newly elected administration do this? … Will it also say how its going to improve the situation, or doesn’t it have a solution either?
What should people be really interested in?
The terrorists (the Jihads, the Radicals, the Islamic Fascists, etc.) want to kill us!!! They want an end to the world’s “industrial revolution” as we know them!
Instead, we have Brittany Spears, Immigration reform, Congressional oversights, How our decision making process works, The coming election, The Iraq war, etc…. Sure, some of these are important, but “to kill us”?
What greater issue is there “but to kill us!”?
Is the great population so misinformed that they don’t see this as an issue of the greatest importance?
Is the fact that they don’t feel that they have “any” input? Does voting do anything about our National foreign policy? Does war and killing so disgust the American people that they won’t even discuss it?
Is there any solution???
Do we wait for “revolution”? This is where the uninformed mob hits the streets and the minority of “rulers” (legislators) and the highly paid and trained military fight to gain control?
Is this our future?
How do we have rational discussion?
How do we become “educated”?
What sources do we have to “inform” us?
Isn’t this the question?
Do the schools teach us to discuss rather than merely “express our opinion”?
Do ordinary people “discuss” rather than “give their opinion”?
Is this a matter of “education”, … “real” Education?
Why don’t ordinary people get involved….at least, “intellectually”?
What should make the teenagers more interested? …. (after all, they’re going to pay!)
Is it the job of the President to make the country more aware of it’s predicament with out giving the enemies a “game plan”? Is the current administration doing its job?
Who is going to change this?
Will a newly elected administration do this? … Will it also say how its going to improve the situation, or doesn’t it have a solution either?
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Personal - #501 - #60 - Finger printing doesn't "show cause"
To “show cause” in court, you must have a good reason to arrest someone.
The fact that you have finger prints doesn’t mean you have “cause” to arrest or detain somebody.
The fact that somebody doesn’t speak English doesn’t mean you have “cause”
The fact that you assume somebody came into the States doesn’t mean anything unless you caught them in the “act” of committing the crime.
The courts have strict Constitutional limits!
The supposed fact that you are “illegal” or have ties to a “sabotage” group must be proved in court! Finger prints are not enough. You can’t stop someone in the streets and just finger print them without having “cause”! You can’t assume someone is guilty unless you prove the “act” in accordance with the law.
You can restrict the license of somebody to drive a car or a liquor license by making it mandatory that you first must be “finger printed”. That is a “regulation”. But you can’t prove the innocence of somebody without showing “cause” in a court of law. You must have a reason or actual evidence of breaking the law before you can stop someone.
The Constitution says so. That is America. No arrest without “cause”.
What of the “illegal”? …... You must “first” prove that he came and broke the law.
What of the “terrorist”? … You must “first” prove that he came and broke the law.
There is no substitute for “first” prove he broke the law… (No!.. “I thought so”, no “he looked like”, etc.)
To disprove the values of the U.S. Constitution. you would have to change the very things we count on!
Again…. To “show cause ” in court, you must have a good reason to arrest someone.
(Having or not having “finger prints” does not show “cause!”)
The fact that you have finger prints doesn’t mean you have “cause” to arrest or detain somebody.
The fact that somebody doesn’t speak English doesn’t mean you have “cause”
The fact that you assume somebody came into the States doesn’t mean anything unless you caught them in the “act” of committing the crime.
The courts have strict Constitutional limits!
The supposed fact that you are “illegal” or have ties to a “sabotage” group must be proved in court! Finger prints are not enough. You can’t stop someone in the streets and just finger print them without having “cause”! You can’t assume someone is guilty unless you prove the “act” in accordance with the law.
You can restrict the license of somebody to drive a car or a liquor license by making it mandatory that you first must be “finger printed”. That is a “regulation”. But you can’t prove the innocence of somebody without showing “cause” in a court of law. You must have a reason or actual evidence of breaking the law before you can stop someone.
The Constitution says so. That is America. No arrest without “cause”.
What of the “illegal”? …... You must “first” prove that he came and broke the law.
What of the “terrorist”? … You must “first” prove that he came and broke the law.
There is no substitute for “first” prove he broke the law… (No!.. “I thought so”, no “he looked like”, etc.)
To disprove the values of the U.S. Constitution. you would have to change the very things we count on!
Again…. To “show cause ” in court, you must have a good reason to arrest someone.
(Having or not having “finger prints” does not show “cause!”)
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Personal - #501 - #59 - "Who pays for the "consequences", and "suppose it turns out that you were wrong!"
It could be the “wrong solution or guess for the future?”
This is called “leadership”…… You voted for him…. now what?
Anyone who has a so-called “plan” and is unwilling to say what the consequences could be and how they would handle them, is an unwarranted “pundit”. It is basically “incomplete” to not speak about the “consequences”.
Do you measure a solution at the time it’s made, or, do you “Monday morning quarterback” and measure the “plan” sometime in the future? Is “planning” all about the future?
Is “leadership” all about the present or about the “future”?
Do you give the plans for attack to your enemy so they can plan a response? Do you “publicly” give your “game plan” away? How much do you give to your public?
Was there a plan or plans for a yet unconquered Iraq? Some of the generals wanted 2 to 300,000 troops while others, fearing the name “occupational troops” wanted less of a footprint. Suppose some of the decision makers feared the occupation of Hermoz oil channel for the health of the “industrial world” much less the American continent. (After all, we could simply buy the oil from Iraq or others if all we wanted was oil for our economy.)
There were many different discussions that were had before the invasions. To NOW proclaim there were no previous plans is ridiculous!....(unless you want votes from the uninformed public!!)
How then can the “public” be part of the “effort”?
How can we inform the “public” without giving away our plans?
Is part of the “leadership job” keeping the “public” adequately informed? ….Is this where we failed?
Who determines “adequately”? ….What more can be said if we are at war? ….Who’s to judge?
These questions may have no simple answers but that doesn’t mean that they are not to be included in the discussions.
This is called “leadership”…… You voted for him…. now what?
Anyone who has a so-called “plan” and is unwilling to say what the consequences could be and how they would handle them, is an unwarranted “pundit”. It is basically “incomplete” to not speak about the “consequences”.
Do you measure a solution at the time it’s made, or, do you “Monday morning quarterback” and measure the “plan” sometime in the future? Is “planning” all about the future?
Is “leadership” all about the present or about the “future”?
Do you give the plans for attack to your enemy so they can plan a response? Do you “publicly” give your “game plan” away? How much do you give to your public?
Was there a plan or plans for a yet unconquered Iraq? Some of the generals wanted 2 to 300,000 troops while others, fearing the name “occupational troops” wanted less of a footprint. Suppose some of the decision makers feared the occupation of Hermoz oil channel for the health of the “industrial world” much less the American continent. (After all, we could simply buy the oil from Iraq or others if all we wanted was oil for our economy.)
There were many different discussions that were had before the invasions. To NOW proclaim there were no previous plans is ridiculous!....(unless you want votes from the uninformed public!!)
How then can the “public” be part of the “effort”?
How can we inform the “public” without giving away our plans?
Is part of the “leadership job” keeping the “public” adequately informed? ….Is this where we failed?
Who determines “adequately”? ….What more can be said if we are at war? ….Who’s to judge?
These questions may have no simple answers but that doesn’t mean that they are not to be included in the discussions.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Government - #101 - #61 - Does America have to be “number 1”?
Is the American policy based on America being “#1”?
Suppose America was “#2 or #3”, would it make a difference?
What differences would it make?
a – Foreign countries no longer would “have to “adapt” to America’s way of life.
b– America would come to be aware of whether or not a country was “ready” to adapt to America’s way of life.
c – America would no longer think “might makes right”.
d – America would think twice before invading another country because a dictator was doing “bad” things to its people.
e – America would act if America could be in harms way because a dictator was doing “bad” things and had control of its people by any means (secret police, the army, etc.).
f – America would not try to “overtly control” (by Nation building) once it eliminated the dictator and his machine for mistreating his people, and there was no threat to American interests.
g – America would come to realize that NOT everyone was even “remotely literate” or spoke a cohesive national tongue.
h – America would no longer think it could actively seek “Nation building” within a limited time period or with a limited cost to its treasury.
i – America would realize that it had “limits” to what it could for people who did not help themselves.
j – America would never leave its propaganda or diplomatic pursuits, but with the knowledge that pure “might makes right” doesn’t work!
k – America could leave “national commiseration” to private groups who could organize and raise funds providing it didn’t harm the American security or the American interests as outlined by the American Congress.
l – America’s need to be “#1” would disappear and we would be on a better track!
If America could live by these suggestions, the Author is sure that the American public in general would think more highly of the legislators than they do now!
Our whole National attitudes would change!
No, we would continue to be a model for world’s best living standards but we would NOT insist upon it!
We will continue to deal with the government who seems to rule. We have no way to deal with the people directly!
Suppose America was “#2 or #3”, would it make a difference?
What differences would it make?
a – Foreign countries no longer would “have to “adapt” to America’s way of life.
b– America would come to be aware of whether or not a country was “ready” to adapt to America’s way of life.
c – America would no longer think “might makes right”.
d – America would think twice before invading another country because a dictator was doing “bad” things to its people.
e – America would act if America could be in harms way because a dictator was doing “bad” things and had control of its people by any means (secret police, the army, etc.).
f – America would not try to “overtly control” (by Nation building) once it eliminated the dictator and his machine for mistreating his people, and there was no threat to American interests.
g – America would come to realize that NOT everyone was even “remotely literate” or spoke a cohesive national tongue.
h – America would no longer think it could actively seek “Nation building” within a limited time period or with a limited cost to its treasury.
i – America would realize that it had “limits” to what it could for people who did not help themselves.
j – America would never leave its propaganda or diplomatic pursuits, but with the knowledge that pure “might makes right” doesn’t work!
k – America could leave “national commiseration” to private groups who could organize and raise funds providing it didn’t harm the American security or the American interests as outlined by the American Congress.
l – America’s need to be “#1” would disappear and we would be on a better track!
If America could live by these suggestions, the Author is sure that the American public in general would think more highly of the legislators than they do now!
Our whole National attitudes would change!
No, we would continue to be a model for world’s best living standards but we would NOT insist upon it!
We will continue to deal with the government who seems to rule. We have no way to deal with the people directly!
Monday, November 12, 2007
Government - #101 - #11 - I’m at a loss ……
- I’m at a loss as to how to successfully deal in America with a culture or language other than “American”.
– I’m at a loss as to what we’re supposed to do with people who live amongst us but are different and not interested in our rules, laws, or customs.
– I’m at a loss as to how to “even communicate”, (or whether to “bother to communicate”), with persons of such different (or, at least to me) “meaningless value system”
– I’m at a loss as to how to interest, or, to motivate someone to try a new idea, a new approach.
– I’m at a loss as to where I “fit in” now..
– I am at a loss as to what “America or American” really stands for.
*** Simply….“I’m at a loss!!!” …. What to do? ***
Well, possibly, I can try to just live an “exemplary” life… “exemplary”, at least, by my standards!
First: I’d better understand myself, first!!! Then, and only then, can I undertake the “adventure” of going into other people’s “worlds”.
Second: I have to find out what my standards are. Do I have any?… What are they? …Can I define my “standards” in a language that can be understood by me, first of all; and then by “most”? … Can I make myself “understood”?
Third: Do I run a “hospital” for the world, or, shall I become involved only with my friends and a few groups with which I feel a mutual interest? Do I have an obligation of some sort to be involved with everything that happens in my path?
*********************************************************************
I have my own “garbage can”.
I keep a lid on it. Not everyone can throw his garbage in my can!!!!
I wish to control whose garbage is in my can!!!
Is this a selfish point of view? Is it “exemplary”?
“What’s the Successful Alternative?”
Should I take the risk of “confrontation” and express my own views in as “non-confrontational” way that I’m capable of; or, simply “shut up!!”
It’s a choice that I can make! … (It does not harm anyone but myself, as to which choice I make.)
Is it a choice I can discuss with others…especially with others I respect?
“SURE!!!” …… “You bet!!!” …….
(Perhaps this discussion can be “A Successful Alternative”?)
– I’m at a loss as to what we’re supposed to do with people who live amongst us but are different and not interested in our rules, laws, or customs.
– I’m at a loss as to how to “even communicate”, (or whether to “bother to communicate”), with persons of such different (or, at least to me) “meaningless value system”
– I’m at a loss as to how to interest, or, to motivate someone to try a new idea, a new approach.
– I’m at a loss as to where I “fit in” now..
– I am at a loss as to what “America or American” really stands for.
*** Simply….“I’m at a loss!!!” …. What to do? ***
Well, possibly, I can try to just live an “exemplary” life… “exemplary”, at least, by my standards!
First: I’d better understand myself, first!!! Then, and only then, can I undertake the “adventure” of going into other people’s “worlds”.
Second: I have to find out what my standards are. Do I have any?… What are they? …Can I define my “standards” in a language that can be understood by me, first of all; and then by “most”? … Can I make myself “understood”?
Third: Do I run a “hospital” for the world, or, shall I become involved only with my friends and a few groups with which I feel a mutual interest? Do I have an obligation of some sort to be involved with everything that happens in my path?
*********************************************************************
I have my own “garbage can”.
I keep a lid on it. Not everyone can throw his garbage in my can!!!!
I wish to control whose garbage is in my can!!!
Is this a selfish point of view? Is it “exemplary”?
“What’s the Successful Alternative?”
Should I take the risk of “confrontation” and express my own views in as “non-confrontational” way that I’m capable of; or, simply “shut up!!”
It’s a choice that I can make! … (It does not harm anyone but myself, as to which choice I make.)
Is it a choice I can discuss with others…especially with others I respect?
“SURE!!!” …… “You bet!!!” …….
(Perhaps this discussion can be “A Successful Alternative”?)
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Government - #101 - #10 - I'm at a loss as to "define" a right
What is it? …How many? …Where do they come from???
How often have you heard… “I have a right to that!”
True, everyone has a “right!”
Yeah! … But where do “they” come from?
Who “gives” ‘em that “thing”…that “right”?… How does a “right” stay alive?… Who maintains the “right”? Does a “right” really exist? …. How many of “them” are there?
Some countries and some societies claim different “rights”. As a matter of fact, some “rights” are rejected by some and accepted by others.
Don’t you think it would be a good idea to “first” state on what authority your “right” exists? If it happens to be the Constitution, then a short reference to the basis for your claim to a “right” is certainly in order. Because the American Constitution states “that all men are created equal” does not necessarily mean that in all societies “men are created equal”. What about “women”? …. Now who says what?
“The rights of the unborn” … The right of freedom of speech” … The right of free elections….. etc. What about these “rights”? How many people believe in the same “interpretation of these “rights”? How many societies have the same interpretation of what these “rights” mean? How many of these interpretations are acceptable? … And by whom?
So when you hear a cry for “rights”, when you hear a certain group claim the withholding of a “right”, when you hear “anything’ pertaining to a “right”, BEWARE! The source and interpretation of these “rights” are seldom discussed.
It is especially in the definition and “mutual” meaning of these “rights” that the difficulty starts. Little “meaningful” discussion can be held without mutuality. Mostly it becomes “oral static” … noise. Cries of anguish and shouts of alienation fill the air with recriminations. There is little meaningful or constructive dialogue. ….. .(Maybe it’s time “to take a nice warm bath”!)
Is a certain Government enslaved with the task of seeing that “rights” are adhered too? Do they do this with law and then with the threat of violence? Does this negate the very “rights” they are trying to enforce? Does “enforce” itself mean that “rights” are not always adhered too? … That there is also a “right” to enforce?
Are there “inalienable rights”? …. Kind of depends on who you’re talking about and to whom you are talking “with”!
How often have you heard… “I have a right to that!”
True, everyone has a “right!”
Yeah! … But where do “they” come from?
Who “gives” ‘em that “thing”…that “right”?… How does a “right” stay alive?… Who maintains the “right”? Does a “right” really exist? …. How many of “them” are there?
Some countries and some societies claim different “rights”. As a matter of fact, some “rights” are rejected by some and accepted by others.
Don’t you think it would be a good idea to “first” state on what authority your “right” exists? If it happens to be the Constitution, then a short reference to the basis for your claim to a “right” is certainly in order. Because the American Constitution states “that all men are created equal” does not necessarily mean that in all societies “men are created equal”. What about “women”? …. Now who says what?
“The rights of the unborn” … The right of freedom of speech” … The right of free elections….. etc. What about these “rights”? How many people believe in the same “interpretation of these “rights”? How many societies have the same interpretation of what these “rights” mean? How many of these interpretations are acceptable? … And by whom?
So when you hear a cry for “rights”, when you hear a certain group claim the withholding of a “right”, when you hear “anything’ pertaining to a “right”, BEWARE! The source and interpretation of these “rights” are seldom discussed.
It is especially in the definition and “mutual” meaning of these “rights” that the difficulty starts. Little “meaningful” discussion can be held without mutuality. Mostly it becomes “oral static” … noise. Cries of anguish and shouts of alienation fill the air with recriminations. There is little meaningful or constructive dialogue. ….. .(Maybe it’s time “to take a nice warm bath”!)
Is a certain Government enslaved with the task of seeing that “rights” are adhered too? Do they do this with law and then with the threat of violence? Does this negate the very “rights” they are trying to enforce? Does “enforce” itself mean that “rights” are not always adhered too? … That there is also a “right” to enforce?
Are there “inalienable rights”? …. Kind of depends on who you’re talking about and to whom you are talking “with”!
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Personal Message
I'll be in Utah from Sunday Nov 4 until Sat Nov 10-07.
Sorry, they'll be no blogs until I get back.
Thanks for your support- Bill T.
Sorry, they'll be no blogs until I get back.
Thanks for your support- Bill T.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Government - #101 - #09 – I’m losing my faith in both the “meaning” and the “truth” of the
The author is fully aware that many people read a newspaper and even more watch T.V. news and the so-called “Talk Shows”. After all, the paid-for commercials are “related” to the number of people “tuned in” So much of these programs are for “entertainment” ( rather that information or facts)
Query: Are there truly “two sides” to every argument?
Is there such a lack of respect to the reading and listening public that hearing “two sides” is ridiculous?
Does the source of the information have a vested interest, so that hearing “two sides” violates the purpose and intent of the information given?
Could there be an even more malicious side to the information given as “neutral news”? Could there be an insidious side to “influence” rather than to “inform”? Could “misinformation” be used to guide a point of view? How would you know? Is the “media” more powerful than an individual? Could an “individual” be so misrepresented by the media that he is forced to “give up, unable to fight effectively”? Is this the “malicious side”? Is this why the media is called “The Fourth Estate”?
Do the people involved in writing and delivering the information realize they are NOT “two sided”, NOT “neutral”, NOT merely “reporting”? Are they so unaware as to be NOT even qualified to report the facts?
Do the “owners and investors” care about “two sides”? Are they just interested in the “bottom line”? Could it be that so-called “information” is just a “profitable” way to sell commercial time?
Is all the “talk” about “pure journalism” just self serving talk by the talking heads? Are they incapable of discerning the “differences” or are they “controlled”?
How often have you been able to consider “two sides”?....No, not the phony “Left” vs. “Right” programs where each side is expected to take an opposite point of view for the purpose of creating controversy. They are just “opposite” for the purposes of creating controversy. Neither side is logical or reasoned. They are just “opposite”. ......Another way to sell time!
What would it take for the “same” person to give two logical, well reasoned sides to a story? Would the public react favorably or would the public be confused? Is the public “one sided”? Is the public unable or unwilling to reason for itself?.... Has anyone truly tried? ......Is there any hope?
Without two sides, I feel the information I’m receiving is either personally opinionated, with a vested interest, or, made for commercial acceptance. I’m losing my faith in the information that’s being made available.
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to be truly informed....
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to be truly understood....
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to make informed decisions....
I’m in “trouble”.
The author is fully aware that many people read a newspaper and even more watch T.V. news and the so-called “Talk Shows”. After all, the paid-for commercials are “related” to the number of people “tuned in” So much of these programs are for “entertainment” ( rather that information or facts)
Query: Are there truly “two sides” to every argument?
Is there such a lack of respect to the reading and listening public that hearing “two sides” is ridiculous?
Does the source of the information have a vested interest, so that hearing “two sides” violates the purpose and intent of the information given?
Could there be an even more malicious side to the information given as “neutral news”? Could there be an insidious side to “influence” rather than to “inform”? Could “misinformation” be used to guide a point of view? How would you know? Is the “media” more powerful than an individual? Could an “individual” be so misrepresented by the media that he is forced to “give up, unable to fight effectively”? Is this the “malicious side”? Is this why the media is called “The Fourth Estate”?
Do the people involved in writing and delivering the information realize they are NOT “two sided”, NOT “neutral”, NOT merely “reporting”? Are they so unaware as to be NOT even qualified to report the facts?
Do the “owners and investors” care about “two sides”? Are they just interested in the “bottom line”? Could it be that so-called “information” is just a “profitable” way to sell commercial time?
Is all the “talk” about “pure journalism” just self serving talk by the talking heads? Are they incapable of discerning the “differences” or are they “controlled”?
How often have you been able to consider “two sides”?....No, not the phony “Left” vs. “Right” programs where each side is expected to take an opposite point of view for the purpose of creating controversy. They are just “opposite” for the purposes of creating controversy. Neither side is logical or reasoned. They are just “opposite”. ......Another way to sell time!
What would it take for the “same” person to give two logical, well reasoned sides to a story? Would the public react favorably or would the public be confused? Is the public “one sided”? Is the public unable or unwilling to reason for itself?.... Has anyone truly tried? ......Is there any hope?
Without two sides, I feel the information I’m receiving is either personally opinionated, with a vested interest, or, made for commercial acceptance. I’m losing my faith in the information that’s being made available.
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to be truly informed....
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to be truly understood....
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to make informed decisions....
I’m in “trouble”.
Query: Are there truly “two sides” to every argument?
Is there such a lack of respect to the reading and listening public that hearing “two sides” is ridiculous?
Does the source of the information have a vested interest, so that hearing “two sides” violates the purpose and intent of the information given?
Could there be an even more malicious side to the information given as “neutral news”? Could there be an insidious side to “influence” rather than to “inform”? Could “misinformation” be used to guide a point of view? How would you know? Is the “media” more powerful than an individual? Could an “individual” be so misrepresented by the media that he is forced to “give up, unable to fight effectively”? Is this the “malicious side”? Is this why the media is called “The Fourth Estate”?
Do the people involved in writing and delivering the information realize they are NOT “two sided”, NOT “neutral”, NOT merely “reporting”? Are they so unaware as to be NOT even qualified to report the facts?
Do the “owners and investors” care about “two sides”? Are they just interested in the “bottom line”? Could it be that so-called “information” is just a “profitable” way to sell commercial time?
Is all the “talk” about “pure journalism” just self serving talk by the talking heads? Are they incapable of discerning the “differences” or are they “controlled”?
How often have you been able to consider “two sides”?....No, not the phony “Left” vs. “Right” programs where each side is expected to take an opposite point of view for the purpose of creating controversy. They are just “opposite” for the purposes of creating controversy. Neither side is logical or reasoned. They are just “opposite”. ......Another way to sell time!
What would it take for the “same” person to give two logical, well reasoned sides to a story? Would the public react favorably or would the public be confused? Is the public “one sided”? Is the public unable or unwilling to reason for itself?.... Has anyone truly tried? ......Is there any hope?
Without two sides, I feel the information I’m receiving is either personally opinionated, with a vested interest, or, made for commercial acceptance. I’m losing my faith in the information that’s being made available.
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to be truly informed....
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to be truly understood....
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to make informed decisions....
I’m in “trouble”.
The author is fully aware that many people read a newspaper and even more watch T.V. news and the so-called “Talk Shows”. After all, the paid-for commercials are “related” to the number of people “tuned in” So much of these programs are for “entertainment” ( rather that information or facts)
Query: Are there truly “two sides” to every argument?
Is there such a lack of respect to the reading and listening public that hearing “two sides” is ridiculous?
Does the source of the information have a vested interest, so that hearing “two sides” violates the purpose and intent of the information given?
Could there be an even more malicious side to the information given as “neutral news”? Could there be an insidious side to “influence” rather than to “inform”? Could “misinformation” be used to guide a point of view? How would you know? Is the “media” more powerful than an individual? Could an “individual” be so misrepresented by the media that he is forced to “give up, unable to fight effectively”? Is this the “malicious side”? Is this why the media is called “The Fourth Estate”?
Do the people involved in writing and delivering the information realize they are NOT “two sided”, NOT “neutral”, NOT merely “reporting”? Are they so unaware as to be NOT even qualified to report the facts?
Do the “owners and investors” care about “two sides”? Are they just interested in the “bottom line”? Could it be that so-called “information” is just a “profitable” way to sell commercial time?
Is all the “talk” about “pure journalism” just self serving talk by the talking heads? Are they incapable of discerning the “differences” or are they “controlled”?
How often have you been able to consider “two sides”?....No, not the phony “Left” vs. “Right” programs where each side is expected to take an opposite point of view for the purpose of creating controversy. They are just “opposite” for the purposes of creating controversy. Neither side is logical or reasoned. They are just “opposite”. ......Another way to sell time!
What would it take for the “same” person to give two logical, well reasoned sides to a story? Would the public react favorably or would the public be confused? Is the public “one sided”? Is the public unable or unwilling to reason for itself?.... Has anyone truly tried? ......Is there any hope?
Without two sides, I feel the information I’m receiving is either personally opinionated, with a vested interest, or, made for commercial acceptance. I’m losing my faith in the information that’s being made available.
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to be truly informed....
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to be truly understood....
I’m beginning to doubt my ability to make informed decisions....
I’m in “trouble”.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)