Rental Application Fees

Fees for residential applicants are fairly common in most States, with some States having mandated rules about how a fee should or should not be applied, should or should not be refunded, and should and should not be disclosed, whereas other States pretty much leave the rules of the road up to the Landlord.  The basic premise behind a rental application fee is that the management of the dwelling unit wants to get reimbursed their expenses for the payment of receiving a current credit report as well as being compensated for the labor expense in so doing. 

There are, however, some very basic issues with rental application fees in the first place.  For instance, it should be fully disclosed to the rental applicant from the get-go as to how much the fee will be, what the fee does or does not cover, and options should be given to the applicant to mitigate the fee.  That is to say, it's unfair to the potential renter to go from place-to-place and have to suffer the expense of rental application fees again and again, especially if the applicant can simply provide the necessary information to the Landlord that will satisfy the background check that they are initiating.  Given that the general point of the fee is simply for the property management to get reimbursed for their actual expenses incurred plus a modest amount for "time spent" in doing so, and that the fees are not suppose to be a profit center for the Landlord, you would think that most Landlords would be delighted to display clearly the roadway that the proposed tenant needs to take in order to alleviate the time and expense of running a background report when the applicant is willing to provide such timely information themselves.

However, it seems to be in practical terms, that many Landlords purposely obfuscate the rental application process in such a manner that they actually do desire the rental application fee from prospective tenants because although they protest that it isn't something that they make money from, they do indeed, profit from these applications.  First off, they profit from any difference in what they are charged from a credit bureau as compared to what they charge the tenant; further they profit from whatever they charge from a necessary expense for time spent doing so, in the obvious manner that these house employees are typically paid by the hour, so whether they handle zero or ten applicants on a given day, won't affect the amount of money that they are paid, although it might well affect how their time is allocated on a given day, meaning that from a bottom line basis, it is the owner/upper management from said company that will primarily benefit from these fees.

The fact of the matter is that most people applying for rental property don't have an excessive amount of extra money just laying about, that they can readily afford to spend in simply applying for tenancy.  This means that in fairness to tenants, clearly display within all rental offices, should be the steps/documents that are required in order to successfully fulfill the tenant obligations so that, if desired, the tenant upon meeting these conditions, will not need to pay a fee.   Not only does that seem more than fair, as well as being far more efficient, it will remove the temptation from Landlords to wring from the hands of potential tenants, money that would be far better applied to actually tenancy of property rather than subsidizing the profit and overhead departments of Landlords.

Outsourcing and the lure of Money, money, money

In comparison to most of the world, the cost of labor is considerably more expensive in America than it is in most countries, especially in countries that are in their developmental phase.  Additionally, although labor unions have been in freefall in America for a number of years, there is still within America, some negotiation strength from unions as well as in general, the American worker has on the whole, more rights in the marketplace, in comparison to most of other workers around the world.  Although the International Monetary Fund ranks the United States as only the tenth highest in the world on a per capita basis, if you were to combine the population of all the countries that sit above the United States in per capita income, their population in aggregate would not even match the United States, meaning that America is in reality, the richest meaningful nation in the world.  Additionally, and most importantly, more than 2/3rd of the countries in the world do not have a per capita income of even half of the United States and many countries are considerably below that number.  This means, in short, that the United States labor costs, by definition, must be and are considerably higher than the majority of the countries in the world.

Although, CEOs and CFOs, directors and the like, want to desperately believe that they are the smartest guys in the room, any person with even an elementary level education, can easily tell the difference between a higher number and a lower one.  The fact of the matter is, that labor is a huge component, in most every business in America, and that the reduction of such, especially the reduction of such with little or no lost in skill-set or productivity, is something that most high executives desire.  The reason that high executives desire to put a lid on labor costs is quite obviously so that they will either directly or indirectly benefit when it comes to making budget, competition, quarterly stock numbers, bonuses, options, and salaries.

This means that when America makes it a policy not to punish or tax or prevent the outsourcing of jobs from America to foreign countries, you will get exactly the type of benign neglect policy that you might expect, which is that thousands upon thousands of jobs each and every year, are taken from American workers that are qualified and willing to do the work, and instead outsourced to countries that also have workers that are qualified and willing to do the work, with the fundamental difference between them being that the foreign workers are paid considerably less than domestic workers and that the foreign workers get the outsourced work.

I suppose those that believe in the invisible hand of entrepreneurship would applaud such a development as being a boon for America and its constituents, but in fact, the basic problem with this type of thinking is that it is more of a case of American companies exploiting cheap labor overseas, while eviscerating domestic labor at home, leaving those that formerly were employed, having to be taken care of by charitable as well as governmental organizations, while the bigwigs at these multi-national corporations reap the lion-share of these additional profits for their own aggrandizement while dragging the flag of our country into the mud of material greed no matter the true cost to its citizens.

Out-of-State Arrest Warrants

They do call this country, the United States of America, for a reason, and that reason is that the United States of America is a confederation of fifty separate States.  Although, over the years, the Federal power and might has continue to increase often at the expense of specific State rights, there are many instances to which State rights and laws are the meaningful sovereign power within that particular State.    For instance, bench warrants for arrests are issued all the time, typically for things such as missing a court-mandated appearance or for failure to comply with court-mandated orders, or such similar things, to which the charge must be answered within that particular States' borders and court system. 

However, like many things, there are exceptions to the general warrant for your arrest rule, and the very basic exception to the rule, is that an arrest warrant issue by one State judicial system must be executed within that State.  This does not mean that the arrest warrant is invalidated by simply moving from one State to another, but it does mean, that for the most part, should you have an arrest warrant, for example in Florida, but you currently are residing in Texas, that unless that warrant is for a specific crime that piques the interest of Texas authorities, they probably will not take any action against you in the State of Texas in regards to the particulars of your Florida arrest warrant.

It isn't that an out-of-state arrest warrant can't be acted upon outside the State it occurred in, because legally it can, what it does mean often though is that it won't be.  Basically, an out-of-state warrant can result in your being arrested and place in jail, pending rendition to the State that has issued the warrant, but in most situations this won't actually be done.  So whether you are unaware of an out-of-state arrest warrant or are quite aware of the warrant, the moving of your person from one State to another State, will, often in effect, preclude you from having to appear in court to answer said warrant.

Of course, having a warrant for your arrest, is definitely a problem that should be addressed, and the removal of your person from one State to another, does not actually take care of the problem, it merely, sidesteps it.  So that, all things being equal, once you become cognizant of the arrest warrant, legal counsel should be engaged so as to rectify the situation in a manner that is most favorable to you, or at a minimum, to at least get a better understanding of what you are up against and the ramifications of it.

Most people are unaware of how bad missing a mandated court appearance or failing to adhere to court mandated terms can be to an individual, as often, the judicial response to these sort of matters, is to issue an arrest warrant, maybe not so much as to punish you, but in effect, to compel you to answer in a court of law to the charges that have previously been addressed against you.   The fact that the arrest warrant has been issued in a different State will often give you breathing room, but will not negate the warrant itself or its validity.

GPS and its Mighty Power

It use to be back in the day that when you wanted to get about from one place to another to which you might not be too familiar with the route to go, you would need to either consult a map or consult a friend beforehand, or God forbid, ask for directions at a gas station or similar when lost.  Nowadays, those types of things are best handled by GPS (Global Positioning Satellite) service which is remarkably accurate and a great assistance in finding your way from one unfamiliar destination to another.  A person can access GPS via his cell phone, a dedicated GPS device from Garmin or similar, or through an integrated device such as OnStar or similar.  All of these devices work quite well and their accuracy in dealing with a moving vehicle in real-time is absolutely astonishing.  That is to say, when you are driving your vehicle down a road, the typical GPS knows your location within thirty to fifty feet of your actual location, it also knows the speed of your vehicle in real-time with an accuracy which is quite impressive because it is constantly calculating the distance traveled by time spent traveling that distance.  This means, that the GPS is extremely accurate in knowing your position and therefore gives you adequate time to respond to its verbal directions when it comes to making a turn, in fact, some GPS systems, will actually emit a beep-beep sound when your designated turn is almost upon you, as well as if you miss your turn, the GPS within just a few moments will recognize this and will thereby re-route you.

All of this is to the good, and the fact that GPS devices are pretty much universal and affordable makes it even better.  In fact, GPS is so powerful, that if your car should breakdown in an unfamiliar area, or because of your panicked emotional condition, you aren't able to readily figure out exactly where you are, a call to a towing service with the appropriate GPS monitoring equipment will allow them to track your position by utilizing the GPS positioning of your cell phone.  While on the one hand that sounds phenomenal and a welcomed relief, on the other hand, that might raise a few questions as to how many other people or organizations have the same power to track exactly where you are at a given time on a given day. In this hi-technology age, this means that not too surprisingly, there are devices and application software readily available that can track your exact location through the GPS on your smart-phone.  The ability to do so comes down to having the right equipment and/or as simple as putting application software onto the subject smart-phone. This means, in effect, if you are a juvenile and you have a smart-phone that your parents or guardians may have applied this application to the smart-phone that you are using, without notification to yourself.  This means too if as part of your employment, your company provides you with a smart-phone that buried deep within the terms and conditions of such, and while using semantics that obfuscate the reality of it, your company may have granted themselves permission to monitor where you are at, at all times.  Further to all this, this means that if your significant other buys you a smart-phone, he might very well decide that as part of the gift of this phone to you, he might believe that he is entitled to apply an application onto the phone that will enable him to track you at all times.

In situations in which you are lost, or in unfamiliar territory, or your car breaks down, you will be grateful for the power of your GPS.  However, when you are being monitored through your GPS by a person or entity that has taken upon themselves, God-like powers, you will rue that a power such as this is in the hands of the unprincipled, rather than just in the hands of God Himself.

European Immigration to America: 1841-1860

In 1790, the state in America with the highest population by far was the southern State of Virginia.  However, by 1860, Virginia was surpassed in population by Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and by New York, in which New York had more than three times the population of Virginia by that time.   Further to the point, in 1840 the southern States that would eventually make up the Confederacy in comparison to the Northern States (while also including Border States that did not secede to the southern cause) showed that in 1840 those southern States were approximately 31.81% of the American population.  In 1860, when secession was first declared by South Carolina in December of 1860, these same southern States were approximately just 27.75% of the United States population.

While there are a lot of reasons why the southern States grew at a far lesser percentage than the northern States, one of the primary reasons, if not the primary one, was the massive immigration of Europeans into America from 1841-1860, in which approximately 4,311,465 Europeans came to our shores, at a time in which the population for the entire United States in 1840 was only 17,063,353 and primarily those Europeans immigrated in massive numbers to the northern States and not to the south.  In the coming civil war, those numbers would give the industrial north an impressive additional advantage over the south, an advantage that the north was able to successfully use to defeat the rebellion.

Although there are many logical reasons why Europeans migrated to the north as compared to the south, such as the fact that they often first arrived in more northern ports, most of the time, such as New York, the most basic reason that the north was the chosen destination over the south, has everything to do with the better economic opportunities that the north provided to these immigrants.  That is to say, in the north, land was both abundant, available, and cheap, in addition there were plenty of jobs at ports, in manufacturing, factories, mining, as well as the cities of the north having an infrastructure that was more adept at accommodating and sustaining these immigrants.

The fundamental problem that the south had in attracting immigrants was that the south was a society built upon slave labor and not free labor.  Further to this point, it was a society to which large landholders in the southern agrarian economy, had the vast majority of political as well as economic power, in which sharing such power and/or making it a policy to accommodate immigrants were not part and parcel of the southern way.  

People that voluntarily take the massive risk to come to a land over vast distances do not do so without having the internal fortitude to place themselves into a position to which they can achieve things that were not considered possible in their former homelands.  All things being equal, people vote with their feet, and those new immigrants that came here, came with a purpose and a deep desire to achieve great things by hard work and effort not only for themselves, but also to set the table for the advancement of their progeny and further it was these immigrants specific belief that the States of the north offered the better avenue as well as providing more freedom to do so.

Whatever Happened to Domestic Servants?

I suppose it's a basic mistake to try to get our history from British TV programs such as Upstairs, Downstairs, Gosford Park, or Downton Abbey, but within these programs there are some basic truths and one of them is that for a certainty there was a time when domestic servants were part and parcel of the privileged class in the United Kingdom.  So too, in a country that was once ruled by Britannica, the gilded age of America, had its domestic servants to attend to the upper class and their stately mansions.  As we look around today, domestic servants are still in existence in the States, but more on the basis of performing a specific job for a specific period of time, such as cleaning the house on every Tuesday, or basic gardening needs, or perhaps catering a specific affair.  It seems that in the present day, with the exception of households in which there is a large contingent of children, and therefore may have a live-in maid, that also doubles as providing childcare, and perhaps cooking, that live-in domestic servants have all but disappeared.

Perhaps that was the way it would always be in a country to which all are entitled to education and equal opportunity, but probably, it has much more to do with the fact that a lot of what domestic servants use to do has been replaced by technology or technological substitutes over the last few generations.  For instance, you hardly need livery stable help, to provide care and service for horses, if you no longer have any horses.  So too you don't need a full-time cook to provide meals for the household, if you have things such as freezers and refrigerators, stoves, ovens, and microwaves, nearby grocery stores, and convenient takeout or restaurants, that all make the reliability and flexibility of getting a good meal, something that is considered to be fairly routine.  In addition, indoor plumbing and hot water has replaced the need for servants to bath you, do your laundry by hand, or to replace your chamber pots as necessary.  Also, we find that modern electricity negates the necessity of having someone light the lamps or taper them as necessary, or provide us with personal fanning services during those hot summertime afternoons.  The bottom line is that while some of the things that domestic servants once did, are still desired, they aren't going to be often needed on a 24/7 basis, all because of the convenience and reliability of modern appliances in so many areas of our life that we now take for granted.

Most people probably don't think much about domestic servants, one way or another, that was then and this is now, but the closing of the door on the need for domestic servants for the very rich and privileged is also the closing of the door of a true ground floor insider gaining knowledge of how the superrich live, think, and conduct their affairs.  The rich are different, and somebody trusted, perhaps considered to be part of the family, needs to keep a check on them, because power unchecked is a threat to the people.

The U.S. 10-Year Treasury Yield

Governments need money in order to conduct their business affairs, and therefore bonds are issued to the general public as well as being available to other sovereign nations for investment. These individuals, investors, bond funds, and nations purchase these bonds based on their perceptions as to their overall value and their worth, and because the US Treasury market is open, liquid, and actively traded, the corresponding bond yields are reflective of the true perception by the public of its actual worth.   At the current time, the 10-year treasury yield for United States bonds is approximately 2.25%, which is, and has been, at generational lows for the past few years, in fact, you would have to go way back to 1947 to see rates that are comparable to what we have at the present day.

The fact that rates are low may be good, or it may be bad, depending upon which side of the fence that you are sitting on.  From a borrower perspective, low treasury yields, equate to significantly lower borrowing costs for the US government, which means that the US government payments to service this debt, has been reduced over recent years by billions upon billions of dollars and that as part of our national debt, the interest payments as a percentage of that debt, have fallen substantially.  Again, that is quite beneficial for the US government as it has consistently run up massive deficits over the last fifteen years, however, the counterpoint to this is that those entities that have previously relied on US Treasuries for their sustenance via treasury bonds, or money market funds, or savings account, have seen their yields been decimated, meaning that this investment vehicle is not providing the steady income stream that had once been so reliable.

There are many factors that influence the US Treasury rate, of which, the two most important ones are inflation and economic growth.  While the United States publishes all sorts of figures in regards to inflation and to its economic growth, regretfully, governments have a way of putting forth the numbers that favor the perception that they are trying to sell.  However, those that are in the know, vote by their actions and their investments as to whether they believe these "official" government numbers, and by virtue of the US 10-year Treasury yield being so low, clearly, those investors believe that inflation and economic growth for America are considerably lower, than a country pretending that we are in our sixth year of economic expansion.

Another point about 10-year treasury yields is that this is a world that is international in nature, so that, if yields are low in America, they may well be higher in other countries, which, in fact is the case.  For instance, Mexico's 10-year yield is at 6.07%, and Brazil's rate is at 13.65%, which appear to be rates that would entice the uninitiated, but both of these countries have real reasons for these rates, so that the net real gain for investing in these bonds may be ephemeral.  On the other hand, mature and stable countries, such as Japan and Germany, have 10-year yields that are at less than 1%, which makes the US Treasury rate look almost frothy in comparison and there lies the rub.  Almost a day doesn't go by, without some pundit pontificating about how the Fed is going to raise its target rate, and therefore US Treasury yields will rise, but in fact, even if this was to occur in the near future, US Treasury yields, would hardly budge, or if they did, it would only be transitory, because the truth of the matter is that the US economic conditions have much more in common with countries such as Germany and Japan than they do with Mexico or Brazil. 

The US economy suffers from both anemic growth as well as persistent deflationary pressures, both of which will keep US Treasury yields from liftoff in the short-term foreseeable future.

The Middle Class and the Rich

As reported by forbes.com: "In the four decades since 1971 the share of the U.S. population earning between two-thirds and twice the national median income has dropped from 61% to 51%."  That decline is staggering, especially so in a country that is neither a monarchy nor has hereditary titles, with ostensibly democratic institutions, independent judiciary, and still prides itself on being the land of equal opportunity.  According to theguardian.com: "Wealth inequality in the US is at near record levels according to a new study by academics. Over the past three decades, the share of household wealth owned by the top 0.1% has increased from 7% to 22%."  This would seem to imply strongly that there is a correlation that as the richest of the rich become wealthier, it has impacted the middle class so that this class is now shrinking at an alarming pace.

There has been a lot of changes in America since 1971, to which some of the most significant, is the rise of technology and robotics, and so too the successful scaling up of so many businesses into truly massive international global enterprises, as well as the unholy alliance that we see so frequently between industry and government, that effectively crowds out other sources and companies that are not part of the privileged set.  All of the above, has trickle down effects so that the necessity of your 9-5 worker, has become more interchangeable, than ever before, because as the world has gotten smaller and has reduced or eliminated tariff and trade restrictions, so too job security within industries has definitely gotten more and more problematic.

The biggest corporations in the world are not really interested in employing the most people in the world, gainfully or not, they are far more interested in seeing that they meet or exceed their quarterly numbers, and if in order to do so, this necessitates the removal, dismissal, or replacement of workers, so it will be.  To the rich the middle class is like a gigantic mine to be mined until it is depleted and used up, and when finished, they will have the lion's share of the profits and the benefits. 

The rich use the middle class in two basic ways.  The first is as their beasts of burden, to ride them as long as they have usage for them, and to discard them when their economic utility is less than their output, so as to be displaced with either younger workers at a cheaper wage or even better, with machines.  The second way the middle class is used, is to sell them the illusion, that if only if they work a little harder, get their stock options at the right time and price, make the right moves in the right way, that they too can climb up into the rarified airs of staggering wealth.  It helps that for the most part, the middle class believes it, but like that carrot on the stick in front of the horse, that keeps the horse going ever forward, the middle class has found over the last few decades, that the brass ring is a game that is often rigged from the outset.

A thing in motion has a tendency to stay in motion, so the rich will continue to get richer, and the middle class will continue to crumble.  The rich are not fools, they make sure to provide all the necessary toys and distractions to keep the middle class basically satiated and passive, along with championing any of those few that make the jump into the elite, but no make no mistake about it, the rich only tolerate the middle class because at this time it is more profitable for them to do so.  However, their long term interests are direct and to the point, the middle class of America must be eradicated, so that there will simply be those that are privileged, and the balance of the population will be there to serve and to protect their masters from any harm.

The Crime of Being Poor

America in its institutions and in its judicial system, clearly believes in the old adage, "out of sight, out of mind", as it imprisons day after day, thousands of civilians, for simply being poor.  Not too surprisingly, dong so for these unfortunates rapidly creates a downward spiral because once any individual is taken before the criminal justice system, he is no longer free, no longer able to meet family, school, or job commitments, as well as not being able to pay bills or other debt obligations, and ultimately will have placed upon his person, either the conviction of a criminal infraction, which will effectively marginalize him from gainful employment, or will at a minimum, have suffered massive inconvenience and have an arrest record attached to his name.

It should not be a crime to simply be poor in America, yet the indigent that have the audacity to be out on the public streets, are often treated as criminals, and have pressed upon them by legal authorities, the crime of loitering, or vagrancy, or panhandling, or any other crime that the municipality police can foist upon them.  It isn't necessarily that the police are the bad guys, although often they are, and it isn't necessarily that the justice system is corrupt, uncaring, and discriminatory, although often it is; it boils down more to the fundamental practice that "undesirables" are okay and fine, as long as they are not out in the public and thereby making certain businesses, families, and other folks, nervous.

The thing about loitering, vagrancy, panhandling, littering, outstanding warrants, an inability to pay traffic fines or other monetary or similar violations, is that placing a person behind bars and making them be a cog within our justice system, does not in most instances, provide true justice to the person being held, nor does it provide a real service to the community at large.  The poor in our streets are all our brothers, and deserve better than being essentially branded for life as incorrigible, unstable, unworthy, and dismissed as if they are vermin.

If a person with some money or someone having access to money, is picked up on one of these minor offenses which necessitates an arraignment and the posting of bail, he will after some major inconvenience in dealing with the criminal justice system, and having his freedom taken away from him, be released back out into the public, if it is a non-weekend in probably less than twenty-four hours, through making bail, or through his own recognizance, or perhaps even have the charges dropped, but in the meanwhile, during those twenty-four hours, he hasn't been able to take care of obligations at home, or go to work, to which his unexcused absence may necessitate termination, but at least upon release he is now back on the outside which enables him to have more options to rectify things.  A poor man, on the other hand, that cannot make his bail, or isn't issued freedom on his own recognizance, will be stuck in jail, for perhaps a considerable period of time, for some minor offense, that should never have necessitated jail time to begin with.

The criminal code book is endlessly long with so many tributaries, twists and turns that just about anything that certain designated undesirables do can be construed as being some sort of crime.  What this really amounts to is that if you are poor and are engaged by the police, your freedom and your choices will often be left in the hands of the police officer that is dealing with you.  Often times, police agencies have cute little sayings, such as "to protect and to serve"; recognize this reality, that the police most times when they deal with the poor aren't there to protect you, nor will they gladly serve you; in reality the police will often do exactly what the powers-to-be have told them to do to people like you.

MADD – Misguided Mission

MADD stands for (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) which was started back in 1980, after a mother lost her daughter to a driver with repeated drunk driving violations.  While the incident certainly qualifies as tragic, and perhaps justice at that time was too lenient in regards to punishment and penalties for those that drove while obviously impaired, the pendulum has swung far to the other side in the present day.  First off, “drunk” drivers are an obvious target to attack, since there are reliable scientific means to measure the blood alcohol content of a driver, however, just because a scientific instrument measures the blood alcohol content of an individual at .04% or .06% or .10% does not mean that the driver is actually impaired, even though the supporters of such a system want to sell you the illusion that this is true.  While there does come the point when a person’s blood alcohol level is so high, that there is a fair “presumption” that that driver is impaired, that number will vary considerably from person-to-person, based on a number of factors such as: their age, their psyche, their fatigue, their driving skills, and the time period of the test in relation to when the drinks were consumed.  In addition, there are a multitude of other reasons why some people could be impaired while driving far exceeding someone who is legally labeled as a DUI by State authorities, such as: medication, illegal drugs, temper, bad peripheral vision, bad depth perception, faulty side mirrors, fundamentally bad driving habits, cell phones, texting, radio, DVD, children, eating, applying makeup, fatigue, distraction, and just about anything else one can think up that would take away good concentration while driving. 

The main problem with organizations such as MADD is that rather than going after specifically people that are truly a menace to others out on the open road and that should have their driver privileges revoked, they instead focus their attention on people that for the most part, are no danger and no menace whatsoever.  This means that thousands of good citizens have their lives and their financial affairs negatively impacted each and every year, because the empowerment of MADD in conjunction with State authorities have set up a symbiotic industry that benefits State budgets, State courts, police organizations, attorneys, and other interested parties, on the backs of good taxpaying citizens, all under the guise of performing a proper civic duty.  The money that comes from these drivers that have for the most part, not been in an accident, nor harmed anyone or anything, but simply been cited for having an arbitrary amount of blood alcohol in their bloodstream is a bonanza for those that receive it, but for those that are compelled to pay into it, it is often a real misery, which, in some cases, means termination of employment, restrictions of employment opportunities, and often times in essence the equivalence of carrying the scarlet letter “D” for the balance of their lives.

MADD isn’t really about going after the few drivers that are habitual offenders of driving while under the influence, but instead is more about empowering the State to have more control over the people, to let them know that the State has little or no interest in justice or fairness, but wants to impress upon its citizens the command, that they were born into this country not to be free, but to obey.

Halfway Houses: A Better Alternative

Halfway houses have been given that moniker because they are seen as the halfway point from incarceration to being released back into public society, and as such are an opportunity for prisoners to re-adapt themselves to functioning well in society.  The basic hope and reason for being for these community correction centers is to cut down on recidivism and to also save the community coffers some money from the cost of incarceration of these criminals.  Halfway houses are often run by non-profits, but they also may be run by Federal, State, or local authorities, and even by large and small private corporations specifically dedicated to this particular industry.   Consequently, because there are so many different entities involved in halfway houses, the quality, safety, usefulness, and expense of halfway houses will vary considerably from community to community.  However, the overall concept of halfway houses in a country to which way too many people are incarcerated for way too much public monies spentand for way too many crimes that do not necessitate incarceration in the first place is sound, the execution behind it, may not be.

When it comes to our criminal justice system, the United States should be ashamedof itself that it locks-up such a high percentage of their population, often for "crimes" that are either non-violent, or substance abuse, with non-victims, and for nothing more than overall poor decisions, that should not necessitate the penalty of incarceration.  Often the point of sentencing criminals to prison is punishment, as well as to simply get these certain people off the street, but in neither case, has appropriate justice been served.   The concept of halfway houses is to provide an alternative that is far less disruptive to the criminal himself, but also less damaging to society as a whole.

A halfway house should be seen as an opportunity for someone that has made what society has deemed to have been a poor decision, and to help correct the situation in such a way, that both the public as well as the offender, benefit.  This means, that rather than the halfway house being the stopping point between prison and freedom, it should instead, be the starting point for certain individuals that qualify, as an alternative to incarceration in the first place.  That is to say, for example, if a person is convicted of a victimless crime, but is either current employed, or has had a history of steady employment, that it would serve the public more good to see that person continue with this employment, than to wrest that away from him, by making him serve his time in prison. 

There should be in this country, far more alternatives to being locked up from the get-go, especially considering that the cost of monitoring an individual in a halfway house or similar, is relatively inexpensive, and because too, technology has never been better to track someone through monitoring devices such as ankle bracelets and the like.   The United States has increased the percentage of the amount of its citizens incarcerated at a staggering rate over the last few decades; it is time, to look for something more becoming of a nation that claims to be the beacon of freedom and justice.

Drug Testing for Employment

A basic tenet of freedom is whether your body and your mind is your own, or whether indeed it is the government's or your employer or anyone else's that believes that they are the masters of your domain.  In order to survive in this material world, there is a necessity to work, and whereas at one time, generations ago, this was an agricultural nation, filled with family farms, sole proprietors, and the like, in the modern age, most people that are employed, are employed by a company that they are not owners or principles of and therein lies the rub.

If we were to presuppose that all drug usage, specifically illicit drug usage, was always pernicious, dangerous, debilitating, and with no redeeming value whatsoever, it certainly would make sense for corporations and government agencies to act as "our brother's keeper" in wanting to see that we did not fall upon evil ways but in fact, that supposition, in of itself, is deeply flawed.  However, leaving that aside, if we were to presuppose that illicit drug usage, by its very nature, upon detection of such, means always and without exception that you are either mentally and/or bodily impaired to such a degree at that present time that the performance of your dutiful work would always be negatively impacted and would be in fact, damaging to others within the corporation or would have material adverse effects upon the byproducts of the corporation, that also would be something clearly to avoid, but here too there is an assumption made which is false in its very premises.

The fact of the matter is, your drug usage, may or may not be debilitating to the company, depending upon a multitude of circumstances, to which it can be succinctly stated that rather than drug testing being a means to provide a safety umbrella for the company, its products, and its customers, it is reallya means to discriminate specifically against certain members of the public at large, so as to encourage the employment of certain preferred members of society vis-a-vis other members of society, nothing more, and nothing less.

One of the most common drug test usages, is testing applicants before they are employed or as a condition of being offered a job for employment at a given company.  This, on the surface, makes no logical sense, as the person being tested, cannot possibly be able to adversely affect anyone or anything within the company, as they currently are not even employed by said company.  This pre-screening, however, does what it is intended to do, which is to chase out those that do not fit the culture of said company. 

Then there are companies that reserve the right to drug test employees for reasonable suspicion, which adheres onto these companies police-like powers in which they are, suppose to objectively observe as to who isn't and who is subject to such a reasonable suspicion.  What this means in reality, is that the company now has given themselves the power to specifically target employees that are considered to be undesirable, and to use the mechanism of drug testing to either terminate them if they fail, or to serve as a fair warning that they are being watched.

In summary, drug testing is really a means to separate the sheep from the goats, to reward those that adhere to some arbitrary State standard, and to punish those that either are not cognizant of the rules, unable to game the system, or in general, lead a life that is consistent with believing that their body is their own.

Compulsory National Service

John F. Kennedy ranks as one of our favorite presidents, especially of the modern era, who stated in his 1961 inaugural address, "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."  This quote states that each of us, has an obligation to perform some duty or some sacrifice on behalf of our country, which considering the virtues that America represents to its citizens, doesn't seem to be an unreasonable thing to require from its people.  To date, there is no compulsory national servicer required in the United States, but in an era, to which there is an elite in this country, who may not ever put their hand to the plow but still are able to live high on the hog, as well as their being an underclass in this country that may not ever be gainfully employed, it might well be the most democratic thing to see that these peoples, as well as all others, can meet at the common ground of national service to their country.

The length of time for community service, could be set at six months, which in length of time, hardly seems a great burden, and this service would be compulsory to be served between the ages of eighteen to twenty-nine, with the flexibility to divide the time served into two separate equal sessions, so as to perform such a duty, if desired, during the summertime, between the conclusion of one year of college, and before the beginning of the next year, or similar.  Even though the obligation to all citizens would be a national requirement, in fact, it would be best to have the flexibility of that service to be accomplished either through national, State, local, non-profit, or religious organizations in its aspects.  That is to say, the point is for each citizen to serve their nation, to which, they can do this in a manner that is most acceptable to themselves and their particular inclinations.  This means that the service provided can be as simple as being directly related to the community at large, or be something that is international in nature, and all things in-between.

People love to talk and admire how free our country is, but freedom, comes with a price attached to it.  The freedom that too many of us take for granted, cost this country, blood, sweat, tears, and sacrifice, and this freedom would not have happened without those noble men and women that performed their duties on behalf of not only their generation but for generations to come.  The obligation that today's generation has to the past as well as to future generations, is to do and perform the duties and the obligations that one citizen has to its country and to its people.  While words may have their place, it is actions that move the world, and a six month obligation to this country, would not only benefit our country and its communities, but will do more to build character, devotion, and appreciation in its citizens, than anything else you might learn in your high school classroom.

Civil War Executions for War crimes against Humanity

At the conclusion of our Civil War, most Americans would be surprised that in its aftermath, only two confederates were executed for their war crimes.  The infamous Henry Wirz was executed for his war crimes against the prisoners held in Andersonville, of which he was the commander of.  The only other confederate executed after the war, was the notorious Champ Ferguson, a sadistic confederate guerilla, who took the lives of civilians, Union sympathizers, and Union soldiers, often times done in cold blood.  As for the confederate leadership, such as the President, Vice-President, governors of the rebel states, judges of the rebel states, generals of the confederacy, colonels, and so on down to the lowliest private, none of these other men were executed, not a single one. 

Not only were with the exception of two men listed above, no other confederates tried and upon duly being convicted, subjected to execution, not a single confederate was ever convicted of treason against the United States of America.  While it is true, that confederate president Jefferson Davis, as well as General Robert E. Lee, in addition to some others were later indicted for treason, all in the end were granted a general amnesty by President Johnson in 1869.  For the most part, rebel soldiers were allow to return to their lands upon their defeat, and upon taking a loyalty oath or receiving a pardon they would become, once again, fully invested with all the material rights of the citizenship of America.

This meant, in effect, that the rebel states were able to instigate and sustain a bloody and destructive four-year civil war, that cost many men on both sides of the conflict their lives, their health, their livelihood, and their possessions, and upon defeat, to be taken back into the fold of America, as if in essence, that they were prodigal sons. 

The magnanimity of the United States to their former compatriots was absolutely astonishing, and a credit to the graciousness and wisdom of the United States of America.  Lincoln's belief was that to subjugate and to punish the South further, would serve no useful purpose, and would unnecessarily delay the reunification of the United States of America; an important step in making the USA, a country that in no way or form, that Europe would ever be able to threaten or conquer by war, as well as making our country more prosperous in its trade with foreign nations.

Lincoln stated in his second Inaugural Address, just a month before the end of this great civil war, that: "With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."  Unlike so many other politicians, Lincoln meant the words that he spoke, and to the credit of this great nation, even after Lincoln's assassination, the country for the most part, made good on those words.

To take the life of another man is not necessarily a difficult thing to do, because mankind has created weapons that do those deeds quite effectively.  To take a man that is your sworn enemy, and to make him your friend, by not destroying him when you have him in your possession to do so, demonstrates maturity, charitableness, agape love, and hope in a better future.

This is the legacy of showing mercy to our erring brothers.

1 Corinthians 6:12

We read in 1 Corinthians 6:12: "All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any."  The above is one of those intriguing witticisms brought forth from Paul's wisdom to the Corinthians, and although it addresses in particular bodily sins, it also can be seen in a much broader manner.  The most basic thing about those professing to be Christians, or believers in Christian theology, is that man's nature aches so often to bend the rules in such a manner as to be able to justify certain things in this world, without fear of penalty in the next.  But, however, not too surprisingly, this type of thinking is flawed at its very foundation.

Another point that is very important about 1 Corinthians 6:12 is its assertion that as human beings with free will, all is permitted unto us, but in wrongly asserting that that freedom has no bounds, you will find that in the end, you will be the creator of your own shackles that preclude you from the joys and grace of beneficial eternal life, much to your chagrin. 

We find too that on the other hand, 1 Corinthians 6:12, is a backdoor way of saying that by virtue of being created by God, that we are entitled to as our Declaration of Independence states, to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  But unlike our Declaration of Independence, this declaration from Holy Scripture, gives us fair warning that although we are masters of our fate and of our decisions, that like a chess match with a grand master, we may quickly find ourselves outclassed and in a heap of trouble, should we decide that ultimate wisdom lies within ourselves, rather than at the temple of God.

So too does 1 Corinthians 6:12 send a clear warning to all tyrants of the world, that each of us, is gifted by God with the free will to be about our business in our mind, in our body, and in our spirit, and that there is no tyrant on earth, that has been given by Divine hand, the scepter that makes them the supreme ruler of ourselves.  In fact, all, both low as well as high, must ultimately bow to the Supreme Authority that rules all nations and all worlds, and that unlike legal legerdemain that works so well for those crafty souls in earthly matters, there is no legal escape clause that will allow one to skip away from true justice and fairness from He who makes no error, and knows us better than we know ourselves.

Finally, for those that like to play the blame game, to which all their problems and all their complaints can be laid at the feet of others, recognize that 1 Corinthians 6:12, applies particular well to you, whether you wish to own up to it or not.  All of us, each one of us, are masters of our fate and captains of our own ship.  Fortunately, in every situation, in every experience, God's hand is there, to guide us, to console us, to strengthen us, for He cares deeply about His lost sheep, and wishes all to come into his fold.

What Happen to Independence in our Declaration?

Back in 1776, the representatives of the United States of America, in a general congress, appealed to the Supreme Judge of the world in their petition against the British crown, to which, the outcome, after seven years and many battles was for the United States of America, to become a free and independent people created in a new birth of freedom as a country.  Since that time, many things have occurred within our nation, some great, and some not, to which, given the present state of America, it can be asked as to whether we as a people currently live under the principles of our Declaration or whether, instead, we live under some sort of reduced and pathetic subset of such.

Our Declaration of Independence made many specific accusations in regards to the king of Great Britain and his tyranny against the colonists.  In looking at today's world, a list could be submitted that too would show a long record of usurpations and injuries to the people.  For instance, the Government has set aside a Supreme Court of nine unelected justices, nominated by the President to the Supreme Court for which the President makes it his policy that said nomination is in agreement with the political party that championed the President as their candidate.  This means that rather than these Supreme Court justices being free of ties and impartial, they are in fact, chosen for their political ideology, and further, their decisions, as a matter of course, are binding on all States and citizens, to which it is the Supreme Court that makes law, overrules law, re-interprets law, and thereby consistently overturns and replaces law of long-standing popular favor of the people, because these justices are in effect, the law.

Furthermore, this Government has created a powerful and permanent military force that is both a drain upon the public weal as well as making it Governmental policy to influence, disrupt, or get involved with wars with foreign principalities whether covert or overt.  Further, the military has explicitly or implicitly become intertwined with domestic police forces and spy agencies so as to place the people as a whole, in imminent danger of living within or being subject to an effective police state, which subverts, contravenes or endangers all of our Constitutional rights, as well as our life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

Additionally, the coin of the realm, is controlled not by the States or by the people, nor even by the Federal government, but is instead in the hands of certain powerful and unelected banking establishments.  These banks control and set the interest rates that will be charged to borrowers, the supply of the money, and the intended inflation rate of the money issued.  Their power is so great that recessions and depressions are at their command, so as to enrich the few at the expense of the many.

Then there is the taxes imposed under the people under the semantic term of "voluntary", a word that if taken at his face value, would mean that the people have a choice as to how much that they wish to voluntarily surrender to the Government in payment of tribute, but in actuality, this is not the case at all.  The tax code is, in fact, deliberately byzantine so as to favor selected persons within America and is effectively structured in such a manner that those citizens simply trying to adhere to democratic law pay considerably more than their "fair" share.

These are the conditions of our life that we are subject to.  Our master is no longer the king of Great Britain, who when he ruled us, ruled us from abroad and with a somewhat tolerant hand.  Today, our master is omnipresent, omnipotent, and insatiable to which we are the huddled masses, tired and poor, yearning for re-admission through the golden door that once admitted all.

Water and Water Pressure

If you live in a traditional one-story home, you probably aren't too amazed how water gets around the house from one sink to another, or from one shower to another, it seems on the surface to be pretty darn easy, even though on a basic level, water still has to travel to that sink, as well as to travel up the pipe in order for it to come out at the spigot, which necessitates some sort of water pressure in order to accomplish all this, but the overall vertical rise is relatively tame throughout.  However, for a multi-story apartment or housing complex, the issues of water and water pressure gets a lot more complicated.  First off, water follows the law of gravity, so that its natural course is to flow in the same direction as gravity directs to go, which is typically downward.  The water to your home usually comes from the city and in order for that order water to reach you; it must be pressurized so as to flow through the city's pipes and into your dwelling. Once there, your home will have to have its own pressurized device and/or pressurized reducing valve in order to create a happy medium between the Pounds per Square Inch (PSI) of not being too low and thereby the water not flowing with enough power throughout the home, or too high, and having thereby too strong of a water flow, which, if too strong for too long, will prematurely age the pipes and could later be the cause of expensive and damaging leakage.

Most of us take it for granted, that water just works throughout our house, and don't really appreciate the value of having water readily available at a pressure that is comfortable to take care of the tasks that water does, such as being used with the toilets, shower, laundry, dishwashing, and watering, until something goes horribly awry.   The fact that water flows so readily throughout our homes and works so reliability is a testimony to man's mastery of the science and physics of the operation, because without running water, the conditions within our homes would quickly deteriorate into something being quite intolerable.

Often the city water that we utilized each day resides in a water tower up on a hill, making it easier by the virtue of gravity to distribute the water throughout the town through the piping that lies beneath the ground, as well as reservoirs being used throughout the city to store the water for future usage and/or to be pumped into water towers as needed throughout the day.  All of this we take for granted, because the engineering behind it has allowed mankind to move water from place to place seamlessly, and not only that, to distribute the water to individual homes in such a manner, that without even really thinking about it, we are able to control the water at our homes, by merely moving the faucet handle up or down, or left to right, and viola, water flows out, as if by magic. 

Trans-sexuality, Really?

In today's world, medical doctors can perform all sorts of successful surgeries through their skills, knowledge, and powerful medicinal drugs, but just because something can be done, does not necessarily mean that it should be done.  To the point, elective sex-changing surgery, especially for those that are not of legal age, should be carefully looked at and monitored in such a fashion so as to hold accountable, those that are responsible for making such decisions, which once made, have consequences which cannot easily or ever be undone.

We live in a world to which every generation has had a certain small percentage of people that identify their sexual orientation more closely with the sex that they are not biologically part of.  This isn't that unusual, for some people it can come about by parents that were hoping for one sex for their child, but received the opposite, yet decided to bring up the child as if the child was the opposite sex.  For others, it is just a phase that they go through during adolescence or even beyond, where they are trying to identify themselves, and experiment with clothing or makeup or pretending to be something that they biologically are not, and over a period of time, they typically grow out of this phase.  Then there are still others that are adamant that they are a female, even though biologically they are male, and they cannot get that concept out of their mind.

For better or for worse, it has never been easier to "transition" from one sex to another, but do so, is still not an easy process, as it involves, psychological counseling, hormone therapy, testosterone or estrogen as the case might be, and for younger patients, puberty-blocking medication.  All of this, over and above the actual surgery itself or the money involved, have consequences to anybody's body, and the younger that the patient is, the more serious the ramifications of taking these medications can be physically, emotionally, and psychologically.  The fact that teenagers that are not yet of legal age are even eligible for this type of intensive life-changing surgery is deeply disturbing because most teenagers of that age do not yet have the capacity or the wisdom to understand the consequences of such a decision, nor do medical staffs, themselves, have the data to know all of the possible ramifications or consequences of doing so.

Through it all, one very basic thing is missing, and that is a lack of understanding why anyone would insist upon being of a different sex in the first place.  While those requesting such an operation have their viewpoint, as do medical staff and other professionals, they all seem to be missing the boat completely.  If you study nature, you will see that nature is an endless litany of birth, death, and re-birth, over and over again.  So too this is true for humans, however, we are taught in Genesis 1:27 that: "God created man in His own image…"  That image that is created from God's mind is not a physical image, but is instead our immortal soul, which when it chooses to incarnate here on earth, has the choice of being either male or female.  So that, if one then through interminable cycles consistently incarnates as a female, life after life, and then suddenly decides, without proper cosmic attunement, to become a male, it then comes as no surprise that having done so, that that individual, will possibly have a hard time adjusting to this new sexual identification. 

This then is the real nub of the matter, our over-identification of the physical to the detriment of the spiritual.

The easy way is to just say "Yes"

For a significant amount of people, there is an over tendency within the personality, to say "yes," almost without thinking about it, to issues in which with any reasonable reflection, a more reasoned or qualified response would have been seen as more appropriate.    The main reason that so many of us say yes, in certain situations, is that we want to get along with others, we don't want to be seen as difficult, and thereby by saying yes, it demonstrates that we're a team player, even if in reality, we are not.

Each of us wants to be loved, and to love, so that there is an inherent bias to want to please and to placate others, in the hopes that, by doing so, the same consideration will be shown to us.  While that may be true to a certain, modest extent, politeness, empathy, and listening, are not the same things or make up the same characteristics as acquiescence.  It is said that one's "no", should mean "no," and thereby the corollary should follow that one's "yes," should mean "yes", and this further signifies that when one says "yes" but really does not mean it, that one has been false to one's self.

It is well understood that the easy way and the simple way in certain conditions is to say yes, because we often don't want to be the ones that are holding things up, and/or the ones that are rocking the boat.  But in point of fact, if saying yes is wrong, and you know that, you have done yourself as well as the other a large disservice.  Too many times we are afraid that we will lose someone, lose their respect, lose their friendship, and lose their validation, by not giving in to their demands or to their wants, but when these things conflict with who or what we are, it is our duty to stand up for our principles, and if by doing so, this means a breach between two parties develops, then perhaps that party was not so worthy of our respect and admiration as we previously thought.

It is important to get away from making snap affirmations to requests or to things, to which, the issues being brought up, required a more thoughtful or nuanced response.  If you think back upon your own life, certainly it will be easy for you to remember many times, when you got your way, and many times when you did not, yet you know, for a certainty, that in hindsight, not all the times that you desired your way, would it have been prudent or the better path for you to have had that granted.  This means in some cases in which you were absolutely adamant that you needed a yes answer, and did not receive it, this was, in fact the correct course of action, and now belatedly recognized by yourself as wisdom.

True wisdom comes not by going with the flow or by saying yes, without thought, but by doing right, as we are gifted in seeing the right, to which sometimes the best answer is not the easy one, but the more difficult and necessary one.

Life + Five Years

One can readily understand that when someone receives two life sentences as logically being the commission and conviction of two separate offenses to which in each case, the criminal has been convicted and sentenced to life, so that, if for some reason, the convict is able to overturn one of the life sentences, he will still have another life sentence to contend with.  So too it is fairly easy to understand that life without parole, means exactly that.  Then there is the punishment of life imprisonment plus five years or plus twenty years and on the surface, that sounds absurd, but in fact, it makes sense as seen in the first example, in which the person being convicted for life, has that term imposed upon him, and if for some reason that conviction is overturned or served in such a manner that the man can now successfully appeal for parole and is granted it, he still would have an additional five years to serve for another crime that he has been duly convicted of.

Once understanding that, another question comes to mind, as to why doesn't the justice system simply allow the man to serve the second sentence of five years concurrently with the first, especially if the second sentence is something that is not of such a serious nature as to have necessitated a long and lengthy prison term in the first place?  It hardly seems like a just punishment to have a man serve thirty years in prison for the commission of a crime, and then only after those thirty years, have to serve even more time, for some other crime, even though he has been in prison for the last thirty years.

It our justice system is so insistent that a man must have two non-concurrent prison terms than it would make more logical sense that the convict serves the lighter sentence first, before having to serve the later one.  Their argument against this, I suspect, would be that the lighter sentence may allow that convict to serve his term in a prison system that would treat him "better" than the lowlife that he really is, since his initial servitude would be based specifically on that specific crime and sentence. 

Being that as it may, it is a travesty of justice that a man would not serve his sentence for a crime that he has committed, until thirty or even more years have passed after being convicted of such a crime.  If the purpose of having convicts be imprisoned is both for rehabilitation and for a just punishment, having a criminal serving a lesser sentence after having being paroled from his previous life sentence, should be seen as a violation of the Eight Amendment against "cruel and unusual punishments". 

The justice system should be allowed to convict a criminal for two or more separate offenses, that have two or more separate sentences, but after that conviction, the order of service of those sentences, should be mandated as the lesser sentence being first, and the sentence with the greatest punishment being last; unless the State decides that they wish to begin and to end with the more severe punishment, in which case the lesser sentence(s) must be served concurrently.