Unemployment: A True waste of Natural Resources

Governments all over the world, decry the waste of natural resources, but typically when complaining of such, they aren't referencing human resources, but material ones, such as water, food, and oil, amongst many others, but the real natural resource that is wasted the most, are human beings, of which there are far too many that are underutilized, underemployed, ill-educated, and ignored; in which many are placated by providing them with subsidies and benefits in order to survive but not to actually thrive.

The fact of the matter is that things get done because people and the tools that they utilize, labor.  That is to say, in any viable country of real worth, it is the people that are the engines of growth, and countries that have taken the resources of young minds, developed them properly in school, have reaped the benefits of having done so, especially because we have been wise enough to piggy-backed upon knowledge and the materials created by past humans and societies, and have built well upon it.

However, for true success, at its highest level, societies need to look upon themselves as being one big team, and if certain players, do not participate, cannot participate, or won't ever participate, than their lack of effort and their lack of desire to do so, drags down the overall effect of the team.  While it is great to have "superstar" people that can invest, work industrially, and come up with all sorts of wonderful devices, even the greatest superstar needs some sort of supporting cast, and those that are simply "deadweights" will drag down economic growth considerably.

If you think about it logically, it almost never makes sense, to provide over the long term to able body and able minded people, food and shelter, without creating a pathway that insists upon these people actually laboring for themselves at some point as real assets to their community.  So too, to have certain portions of the population to be so ill-educated that they are functional illiterate in the 21st century, for a country as rich as America, is beyond disgraceful, for a mind that is not developed, is truly a mind that has been wasted.

Sure, no doubt, people can be trained for certain professions, of which there are an oversupply of people already doing these things, but if you take a look around, there are always, things to be done, that will make this world and society better, for streets need to be cleaned, communities need to be safe, roads and infrastructures need to be repaired and properly maintained, so too, students need tutors, children need guidance, senior citizens need assistance, so basically it can be said, there is always work to be done, that is simply lacking for sweat labor, organization, and materials.

An idle mind, and a not fully developed mind are a waste of a great resource, so too, people that are capable of doing some sort of productive work, but do not do so, is also a waste, and the tricks that government plays by providing material assistance to those that are idle, underemployed, and unemployed are the wrongheadedness of believing that taking from some to feed and house others, resolves problems, whereas in actuality, it just papers over them, and to a large degree, does so poorly and inefficiently.  

The object of the exercise is in the absence of free enterprise providing the necessary opportunities and training for gainful employment, is for the government to step in and provide public work projects, training, and education that will create jobs and develop minds, so that we can utilize the entire body of America in a way that is fitting for a country that professes itself as the land of opportunity.

"Those who own the country ought to govern it" -- John Jay

John Jay was one of the eminent founders of this great nation, and this country's first Supreme Court Chief Justice, so his quotation most definitely should not be looked upon as something that was said, "tongue in cheek", but should be seen for what it really represents, that those that own the resources of this country, such as the property and industry owners, should be the ones that govern this country, for they are the ones that have invested their money and thereby their sweat equity into it, and therefore, it is strongly implied that those that do not own this country, by having no property, or industry equity, should not have a real voice in our government, for they are not the owners of it.

Now, just because the foregoing was said, doesn’t mean that this was the way that all founders thought, or even the way that America developed and became the great nation that it is, today.  However, take a look around, and read the signs, for there are as reported by forbes.com, 540 billionaires in America, of which, the President is, himself, a billionaire, and his cabinet, in aggregate is the richest cabinet ever assembled, with at least four cabinet members, having a minimum net worth of $100 million and on up to a worth considerably higher.

In America, its largest mega-corporation is Wal-Mart, with annual sales of almost $500 billion, with Berkshire Hathaway, Apple, and ExxonMobil, all having sales of $200 billion and above, in which, these companies have proved time and time again, that whatever that they want they get from the government in regards to tax set asides, labor union busting, favorable treatment in all of its many forms, tax holidays and the parking of tax monies into tax havens, and so on and so forth.  Yet, as large as these mega-corporations are, they are far smaller than the $700 billion annual defense budget passed recently by both houses, of which, it's unknown how many additional billions above this are also military-industrial defense related but because of security reasons, are considered classified information, and therefore not disclosed to the American public. 

All of the above, means, that despite their being democratic elections for our representative government, that somehow, whether the people elected to office  are Democratic or Republican, they aren't truly representatives of the people at large, for often they are instead part and parcel  of those that own this country to begin with,  for the rich having been getting richer in this country, and the very rich are so rich, that as reported by forbes.com, "…the individuals on The Forbes 400 hold more wealth than the bottom 64% of the country," this in a nation of 325,369,973 peoples, and just 400 people have more worth than over 207,000,000 Americans, combined.

It isn't a question as to whether those that own the country, govern it, for the proof is in the eating of the pudding, and the sheer massive divide between those that have it all, and the mass of the population that struggle day-by-day indicates clearly that the effective owners of this country govern it, exactly the way that they want to, for their interest isn't in seeing a more equal distribution of income in America, though they might talk and talk about such a thing, but instead their interest is in stringing along the American public with the song and dance that this is a country of meritocracy, of which, some are more successful than others, but the playing field is level and fair.

That may be the talk, but the truth is fairly obvious, the few own it, the few rule it, and the masses are just the hired help.

It's time for a real Baseball World Series

There are thirty Major League Baseball teams, of which, twenty-nine of them are located in America, with the sole exception, being Toronto, which is in Canada.  In the history of the MLB there has never been a team in Mexico, and the only other city outside of America, that has ever had a MLB team, was Montreal whose team was moved to Washington, DC in 2005.  The biggest event of the MLB season is when the respective pennant winners take on each other in a best of seven game series, known as the World Series.  The problem though, is in all honesty, this World Series isn't really a "world" series, but essentially an American series, with the sole non-American team, being Toronto, even though there are many other countries that do play baseball, other than America.

American baseball has done a fairly good job of being more inclusive, so beginning  in 2006 they created something called the World Baseball Classic, which is a baseball tournament involving sixteen different nations that is played during baseball's spring training, but the WBC, for the most part, is really itself just another glorified exhibition, of which, its primary purpose is to increase the viewership and popularity of baseball worldwide, but despite there being a country that is declared the champion of such, that country should not be considered to be a true world champion; in addition to the important fact that MLB consists of teams based in cities that play against each other, and those individual teams are really the foundation of who is or is not the true champion.

The country that takes most seriously baseball other than America, as well as having players that have transferred successfully to America, would be Japan, in which baseball is quite popular in Japan, and their season runs along the same basic timeline as America.  It would seem that the first test of who is the real world champion would be a contest between the best team in America v. the best team in Japan.  While logically, one would think, the games should be played just after the champion is declared in each of the respective countries, there is an alternative timeframe that the games could be scheduled, which would be during the All-Star break, in which the current All-Star break is four days, specifically, Monday through Thursday.

A good suggestion would be that the current champion's schedule be modified, so as to not have a scheduled game on Sunday nor on Friday of the All-Star break, giving that team a total of six days off, in which, they could then play a best out of five game series with the Japanese champion, of which, the first two games would be held in one country, with a one day break, and then the next three games would be held in the other country, in which the team that wins three games would be declared the "world champion".  Sure, this would mean that the current champion would not have a representative at the All-star game, but the All-star game is essentially just an exhibition itself, whereas this international baseball contest would have real meaning for true baseball fans. 

Currently, the "world" champion is simply the best in America, why not test their mettle against another country's team and see what happens in a contest of real worth.

Necessities and Necessities

In life, there are certain necessities needed to live, such as clean water, air, shelter, food, and assorted other basic needs that go with these, in which all these things are basically necessary to sustain physical life, which fortunately are in relative robust abundance in America, but these things though they are necessities, aren't the other necessities that a modern society must command.  That is to say, humans are far more advanced than mere animals, therefore because they have a mind, and hence the freedom to think, they recognize that there are necessities that exceed mere physical needs and have a lot in common with opportunity, fairness, and advancement.

America, for instance, is the richest nation in the world, yet, many parts of America, do not display that richness and that wealth, whatsoever, for there are numerous communities in which the people living there, suffer through dilapidated housing, no hospitals, forlorn schools and illiteracy, no job opportunities except of the minimum wage variety, minimal safety, unreliable transportation, exploitation, idleness, and are basically treated rather shabbily by the governmental safety net.

While these people, for the most part, have their physical needs met, in the sense that they are able to find food, water, and shelter, their unalienable rights to a real life, to unfettered liberty, and an opportunity to pursue happiness have been decimated.   This means, that in any country as successful as America has become, it indeed has an integral duty to see that all citizens of its country, are accorded real opportunity on a fair basis, to be true beneficiaries of its success, rather than, treated as if they don't really matter and are a nuisance to the state in all of its many guises.

America likes to measure its poverty rate, from a strictly economic standpoint, that is to say, if your income is a certain amount and your family is a certain size, than you are eligible for this or that augmented assistance, and while that indeed has its place, real poverty encompasses far more than just money, it has a lot more to do with making sure that each citizen of America, has a truly fair opportunity to be actually educated, creating therefore the foundation of fundamental knowledge as well as moral structure which will produce far more good and viable citizens for this great land, rather than to cast aside certain citizens, and then try to placate them for life, by giving them access to food stamps, or housing subsidies, as if those are the essential and only necessities of real life.

Life is for the living, and those that live, to really live, must, especially in this age of the mind, educate their children, and while America spends an inordinate amount of money on the educational infrastructure, huge swaths of Americans, are effectively functionally illiterate, ignored, and forsaken.  These people, and there are millions of them, need opportunity, and they need gainful employment, for without these things, they aren't really living, they are instead just one day closer to dying.   It isn't good enough to simply try to paper over everything with money or bureaucratic social systems, for those that are most oppressed amongst us, deserve better, they deserve their fair chance at the American dream.

On the creation of new countries

There are about two hundred nations, or de facto sovereign states, in the world, of which, most are internationally recognized as separate nations, whereas others such as Taiwan, with a population of just over 23 million peoples is considered by China to be "an inalienable part of China" and therefore a province of China, though twenty-two nations recognize Taiwan (Republic of China) as the legitimate government of China, instead.  Then there is the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) which is a self-declared state recognized only by Turkey.

The creation of new countries and the recognition of such is complicated, often involving bloody and long civil wars, in which the divisions that create the desire for a new nation state, are based typically on differences in regards to religion and/or ethnic identification, in which the opposing sides are not able to successfully come to a state of accommodation with one another, for a lot of reasons, which often involve justice and legislative laws having being constructed in a manner in which one group, is strongly favored over another, so much so, that the minority or the group that is out of power, has little or no say within their country, so that they are at best, treated as second class citizens, and at worse, purposely hunted down and killed by military forces  or paramilitary forces and/or forcefully displaced in a trail of tears.

So too, the separation of peoples so as to create a new independent country, can work out to benefit of both nations, as for instance, the United States and Great Britain, which is no doubt, the best example of such, whereas the division into different nations, such as North and South Korea, in which the peoples of each nation are essentially ethnologically the same, are separated fundamentally by ideological differences.  Then, there are peoples within nations that are without a country, such as the Palestinians in the Middle East, of which, after the creation of the state of Israel, in which essentially the Palestinians were displaced, they have not been able to create their own nation state, so that having no state, they have no democratic vote, and hence no real power of self determination.

It is important to recognize, first and foremost, that people that clearly identify with a specific religion, or a specific ethnicity, that live within a country that provides them with little or no power of voice or vote, have effectively been denied a basic human right, which is liberty.  This then leads to the rather reasonable call, especially when the situation is one of long standing, and appears to be intractable, that these people should and deserve to be free from the constraints that keep them in bondage to the country that they reside in, so that, there should be, a viable forum, that adjudicates these matters in a fair and equitable way, and in situations in which certain countries have a direct and vested interest in the outcome, those countries should recuse themselves from such decision making, rather than being a barrier to progress and fairness. 

Every person wants to feel that their homeland really is their homeland, because for those that do not have a country, they are effectively categorized as to be the orphans and bastards of humanity.

Incarcerated at Hard Labor

In America, most people aren't really that familiar with our justice system, let alone, the rules and regulations for incarceration, so things such as being convicted and then given as one's sentence "hard labor", seems to be something that used to happen back in the day, or is a myth, or really doesn't exist in America at the present time.  Right?  Yet, if you take a look at our Constitution the very seeds for hard labor are written into the 13th Amendment, which states: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted…" though this is somewhat mitigated by the 8th Amendment, which reads: "… nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." Yet, it's hard to take much encouragement from the 8th Amendment, for the death penalty, still exists in certain States of America, so cruelty, legally, seems rather subjective.

In actual fact, hard labor, is a condition that some must suffer under for being duly convicted in a court of law for their crime, which, to a certain degree, makes some sort of sense, for many Americans, believe that incarceration should have some degree of punishment attached to it, that is to say, inmates shouldn't be permitted to just lounge around all day, but should be mandated to labor, or to learn, or to do something of merit each day, which seems to be, fair and reasonable. 

The problem, though, with hard labor, is that there should be a clear and precise definition of what hard labor actually means in effect, and there should be a hard line as to what the authorities are or are not allowed to do against recalcitrant inmates compelled to hard labor, and what that labor is or isn't allowed to be In the first place.  For instance, as might be expected, prisons are primarily run in a manner that the outside world, that is, the general public, doesn't have a real good idea of what is actually happening inside of the prison, and those that supervise our prison institutions, for the most part, aren't going to make the safety and treatment of prisoners their top or primary concern, which means, in effect, that hard labor, can and will look or degenerate into a modern-type of slavery.

This means, that those subject to hard labor, that are cleared by medical professionals to work out in the fields, and don't do so, will be punished for it, not by corporal punishment, though, doubtless this does occur, instead, they will lose prison privileges such as visitation rights and will be subject to solitary confinement for their disobedience, amongst other possible punishments or privations.  Those that do actually labor, as part of their term of imprisonment, typically won't get paid for it, and for the most part won't be protected by any of our numerous labor laws, because they aren't legally employees of the incarceration facility, which gives the incarceration authorities pretty much carte blanche to do whatever that they may with these prisoners, especially since they are the ones in control of that narrative.

While there is something to be said for making those that are incarcerated, to perform some sort of labor, even hard labor, these convicts, though, are still human beings, and no legitimate governing authority, should be permitted to abuse or mistreat them as if they were animals, or chattel property.  Those days should be long pass, and should never be revisited again.  The state in all of its many forms, has a responsibility to under all of its circumstances, to treat people, even incarcerated people, as fellow human beings, still entitled to all of their basic human rights, to do less, then, is cruel and it isn't right.

American Household Debt

As reported by thenewyorkfed.org: "As of September 30, 2017, total household indebtedness was $12.96 trillion."  This is the highest household indebtedness in the history of the United States, even higher than its previous peak in Quarter 3 of 2008, in which the only possible mitigating factors to take away from this debt level, is that on an average total debt per indebted household, today's average at $134,642.86 is lower than 2008's average of $142,122.44, in addition to the fact that though inflation has been low over the last decade, the value of money still has declined.  The reason then that the aggregate indebtedness number presently is higher, even though the average household debt is lower, is because there are more households in America than there were a decade ago.

This above household indebtedness is calculated by the amount of debt that the average household has for credit card loans, student loans, auto loans, and mortgage loans, in which as reported by studentloanhero.com, the average credit card rate for those that are assessed interest is 13.61% APR, the average mortgage rate is 4.10% APR, and the average auto loan rate is 4.79% for a new car.  In regards to the interest rate charges for mortgages and auto loans, these continue to be at or near historic lows, though the future trend, based on the desire of the Federal Reserve to want to "normalize rates" is for these to go up in the near future.  As for credit card rates, creditcards.com reported that as of November, 2017, the "national average APR stayed put at 16.15 percent," so that rate has already begun its move up.

The problem of debt for households that have it, are manifold, starting with the sheer amount of debt that must be paid in a timely manner per the conditions of such a debt, regardless of circumstances, so that losing one's job, ill health, incarceration, divorce, car repair, and other unexpected expenses or events, can take a given household that was doing just fine, and turn things upside down in just a manner of weeks, perhaps never to recover ever again.  Additionally, for loans that are not fixed, in which, the present trend is for interest rate charges to go up over time, higher interest rates, mean higher minimum payments that are necessary in order to stay current on a given loan.  So that, if it is a struggle to maintain one's debt today, higher interest rates, will make that struggle far, far worse.

In addition, take a look at the categories of basic debt in which people need the following things: a house or place to live in, which is mortgage debt, a car or vehicle to drive in, which is auto loan debt, higher education to get ahead in life, which is student debt, and things such as food, clothing, and healthcare, which often need credit cards to procure, which is credit card debt.  The main reason why there is so much debt in America is not really because Americans on average are such spendthrifts, but fundamentally because Americans on average do not earn enough income that enables them to earn a living and live, without going into debt.

The most basic problem of debt, is the service of that debt, that is to say, with the exception of some credit card teaser rates, which set a 0% interest for a period of 12 months or so, all debt, costs the consumer money, that is to say, to borrow money now, will cost the consumer money over not only the short term but over the long term, until such debt is fully discharged, if it ever is fully discharged.  So that $100,000 borrowed today for a mortgage, for instance, at 4.1%, will cost over that thirty year span $173,951, not $100,000, and if that mortgage rate is 6.0%, the cost would over that thirty year period be $215,838, so the rate of interest that a borrower has to pay, is a very significant factor, along with the fact that whenever money is borrowed, the borrower must pay in total, more money to the lender than they borrowed in the first place.

This very high average household debt, represents on a fundamental level, that the borrowers of the money, do not currently have the funds to purchase the things that they need, so they borrow money to do so, in which, a significant portion of these people will not ever fully and successfully discharge their debt, but will essentially, like the Federal government and its national debt, continue to kick the can down the road, until such a time as they cannot.

American declining Savings Rate

The main reason why people go to work is to make money in order to make a living, pay bills, and to have some money set aside for future needs and events.  In today's society, pundits like to point out how the unemployment rate has come down significantly since the "Great Recession" so that in October, 2017, it had dropped to just 4.1%, which is considered to be an unemployment rate that is even below the natural rate of unemployment, but the proof is in the eating of the pudding, and despite low unemployment rates, the savings rate in America, is far below historic norms.

In 1960, as reported by nerdwallet.com, America's personal savings rate per that year was 10%, in which, personal savings is defined as a given person's income less personal outlays and less personal taxes, of which the amount remaining is for investments and such, designated as savings, and this number is calculated as a percentage against that personal income.   This means, for example, a person that earns $40,000 but has outlays of personal expenses and taxes of $36,000, leaves that person with $4,000 as their disposable personal income, equating to a savings rate of 10%.  It was not until 1979, that America's personal savings rate dropped below double digits when it was just barely below such at 9.8%, while also in 1983 it slipped to 9.4%, this left 1984 as being the last year of a double-digital personal savings rate at 10.7%, in which, since then in over twenty years, it has not hit 10% or better, and in the new millennium its highest rate was 7.6% in 2012, with the 2016 rate being just 4.9%.

All of these above numbers are the averaged American savings rate, in which, obviously, there are people that exceed that average and those that do not.  Businessinsider.com then broke down American income groups into five equal quintiles, in which the bottom two quintiles had an average savings rate of a paltry 0.12%, or virtually nothing.  The middle quintile had an average savings rate of 11.1%, whereas the fifth quintile had an average savings rate of 23.6%, in which the top 5% savings rate was 37.2%, and the top 1% savings rate was an astonishing 51.2%, in which, remember, the savings rate is a person's income less personal outlays and personal taxes, of which, in the decades of the 1950s through the 1970s the highest personal tax rate for high income earners was around 70%, signifying that today's superrich don't pay close to that amount in taxes, let alone expenses, allowing them to easily accumulate more and more money.

The reason that the savings rate matters so much, is that when one retires, or is unable to work anymore, or to find gainful employment, than that person must live off of their Social Security benefits, or their 401K, or their pension, or any of those equivalencies, along with any monies that has been saved up.  When you have 40% of the population that have saved essentially nothing, then you have a massive social problem of a significant amount of people that will not be able to make ends meet without permanent governmental assistance.  Yet, clearly, there is money that is being made in America, and clearly there is money being saved in America, but that money has since 1985 been more and more concentrated within the rich and the wealthy.

The decline of the American savings rate from double-digit growth, to today's single digit stagnation, despite unemployment being low, signifies that the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer, while the divide between the two is getting larger.  In addition, the fact that the bottom two quintiles of Americans have no savings whatsoever, indicates, that the middle class is being inexorably decimated, with more and more people each year becoming essentially wards of the state, having at one time, been part of the middle class through a previous generation, but now, instead, are an integral part of the lower class, with the trend between rich and poor getting wider and wider by the day, and the middle class struggling valiantly just to hold their own.

Welfare for the rich v. welfare for the poor

There are many pundits and people that rail against general welfare programs that provide lower income and impoverished people with benefits such as food stamps, housing assistance, an earned income tax credit, health insurance such as Medicaid, and supplemental aid, as well as everything else local, State, or Federal, which takes money from the government and its taxpayers and doles it out seemingly somewhat indiscriminately to people as grossly unfair and imprudent.  Those that complain the loudest may indeed have legitimate points that they make, for government "hand-outs" are rife with fraud, bureaucracy, incompetency, and inefficiencies, in addition to the fact that none of these programs ever appear to get smaller year by year.  Yet, all of these benefits are in their intention, provided to those that have little or nothing, in this the richest nation the world has ever known, in which, this government and its people have a duty to take care of those that have little or no part of the American dream, but live instead, its nightmare.

On the other hand, far less talked about, is the massive welfare for the rich, that is to say, not specific individuals, but the corporate entities that the government, for whatever reason, has stepped into on behalf of the connected to prop up, subsidize, forgive, extend, and help to the tune of billions upon billions of dollars.  For instance, banking institutions appear to be the most favored group to have received financial help from the government, repeatedly, and therefore its taxpayers, in which at critical points, for example, the Savings & Loan crisis, of the 1980s through the 1990s, ultimately resulted in the closure of over 1,000 Savings & Loan institutions, with Wikipedia.com reporting an: "…estimated cost of the crisis to around $160.1 billion."  Then, during the banking crisis and meltdown of 2007-2009, the Trouble Asset Relief Program (TARP) as well as the separate bailouts of behemoths Fannie Mae and, Freddie Mac, in addition to institutions such as AIG, General Motors, and Chrysler, came to a staggering total as estimated by propublica.org of $625.7 billion dollars. 

These bailouts of institutions are primarily for the benefit and specific  stabilization  of those particular institutions, of which, the American people as a whole, have no or little voice in the matter, so that these entities are thereby labeled as being "too big to fail" and consequently, are immune to bad business decisions, and can therefore pay exceedingly well its executives and management teams, so that when times are good they will mint millions upon millions for themselves, and when times are bad, they know that they can stick the government and its taxpayers with the full bill for their imprudence of monetary assets, which is exactly what has transpired.

This means that certain big corporations in this country, are often able to work hand in glove with the government, so that, their bad decisions are bailed out, in addition to being favored in the first place by their government sponsors; whereas, the people that are born into abject circumstances, are thereby stuck with poor housing, poor health options, pathetic schools, and are made to essentially beg, hat in hand, for their government benefits, of which, what they receive from their government is just enough to live another day but never enough to allow them the opportunity to actually live, so that there is a massive divide between those that profess a belief in the "free" enterprise system that provides these favored few with an economic safety net, tax benefits, and fat salaries, contrasted against those that are considered to be the refuse of this country, tired, poor, and wretched.

Driving Under the Influence (DUI) Auto Insurance

According to statisicbrain.com 1,500,000 drivers are arrested annually for drunk driving, and the consequences of that arrest, can be rather dire for that driver, depending upon the laws within that State, as each State has its own protocol in regards to DUI offenses.  So too, each State has its own car insurance which all drivers are mandated to have, with the sole exception being New Hampshire.  When a given person procures car insurance, they are able to select the coverage that they do or don't want or do or don't need, subject to State sanctioned minimum coverage, in which, presently, no State of the Union, offers something akin to DUI insurance, but they should.

In the procurement of insurance, most people purchase insurance, hoping to never utilize it, but grateful to have it, when they do end up using it for their home or car or personal injury.  The fact that so many people are arrested for a DUI in a given year, would imply strongly, that having some sort of insurance to help mitigate that DUI arrest in the sense of being able to secure the car so that it will not be impounded, nor be subject to exorbitant fees if so impounded, or to get the car off of the street in a timely manner, so that it will not be damaged or be the cause of a vehicle accident, or to secure a person's personal effects, such as house keys, cell  phone, and various other items, so that, those having to spend mandatory time behind bars for a DUI offense, know that their personal effects are not being held by the police, but are being secured by an independent 3rd party all have their benefits.

The very first thing that would be necessary about DUI insurance, is the fact that when a consumer opts in, this would not reflect that they are going to be now insured at a higher insurance rate than they would have been for the same auto coverage, if they had not picked the elective DUI coverage as an add-on.  In other words, the auto insurance company will not be permitted to make a judgment that a person electing for DUI coverage is somehow a more dangerous driver, instead it will be mandated by the appropriate State insurance agency regulation administration, that DUI insurance is a separate elective insurance and therefore separately priced.

In regards to auto insurance companies, they are in the business of pricing insurance so that they are able to make money, so that, having a new elective service for DUI insurance, which, depending upon the rules for DUI arrests within a given State, would cover things such as transportation of the driver, resolution of the vehicle, transportation of the passengers, keeping of personal effects, and so on and so forth, would be dovetailed to meet that State's specific DUI constraints and sold as such to consumers. 

The value of such DUI insurance for the consumer would be the value of reducing their expenditures for things no longer in their control, for having been arrested for that DUI, so that, extra fees, impoundment, and penalties, would be mitigated by a third party insurance company taking care of this, on behalf of the insured.  Depending upon the price of this add-on insurance, and how heavily it is advertised, people will pay for it, especially when they see the potential benefits of having such, should they ever be arrested for a DUI, as 1,500,000 are yearly.

The visual coverage of war and the incursions of war

We receive our information in all sorts of ways in today's world, from the printed word in magazines, newspapers, and books, to social media, to news stations online and on the internet, mainstream or not, in which, all of this combined helps us to visualize the world at large.  In particular, as the saying goes, "a picture is worth a thousand words", and in reality, a picture or video, in and of itself, without even any vocalization or detailed description attached to it, does often convey a short story to the recipient or viewer of such.  This does mean that images matter, and that video matters, and when it comes to war, these images and videos are of immense value and he who controls it, is therefore in the driver's seat of controlling that narrative.

America is an empire, of which most Americans are either blithely unconcerned about it, or simply don't recognize the length, depth, and the breadth of our military and its military or shadow-military campaigns that America is involved with on a continuous basis, from wars that have not been officially declared by our congress but are wars nevertheless, against countries such as Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan, to covert incursions or special operations forces engaging in battles in which as reported by thenation.com in regards to 2015, "…US Special Operations forces have already deployed to 135 nations," which is an absolutely staggering amount of nations to have deployed to in one calendar year.

While there are always going to be independent, foreign, and mainstream reporters, filing and submitting reports to the American people, of what is or what is not going on in battles around the world, the fact of the matter is that in America's wars, incursions, invasions, stealth attacks, and covert operations of all types, no one reporter, no one organization, or no entire group of reporters or no entire group of organizations, is going to know everything that is going on, because there are too many "hot" points to know everything about it all.  That said, the military, though, in all of its many manifestations and departments, essentially knows what is going on in fairly significant detail, but a meaningful portion of that information is classified or obscured in such a manner that the general public and therefore the American people are not permitted to actually know, and certainly not permitted to know on any real-time basis.

All of this leads to the point, that in a fast world that consists often of sound bites, of which pictures and video, have never been more prevalent in telling a story of what is really happening around the world, that, when it comes to our military adventures, the military knows that when they are able to control the taking of and the dissemination of such photos and videos, that they are able to control the narrative in such a manner, that our military engagements aren't view from the standpoint of fair access to what is really going on and what is really happening from a worldview humanitarian standpoint, but instead is viewed primarily from an American-centric  viewpoint which is deliberately prejudicial in such a manner that the real human impact of what is occurring against other nations and their people is minimized or obscured.

That is, think about it, where do the pictures and videos come from, in regards to our military adventures of all stripes, for if you believe that they come from truly independent reporters, that are able to gain full access to battlefields, as well as covert and special engagements, all permitted without restrictions from our military, and that therefore they are able to snap pictures and roll video at will, you are mistaken.  The official access to our battlefields and covert operations by those recording such, are essentially controlled by the military, and those that do not present the visual storyline in accordance with the military desires, will lose their privileges, so that the storyline, in effect, the pictures and the video, are absolutely masterminded by the military, itself, to the best of their ability and influence, and their influence is massive, for the military in all of its might, has a yearly budget of nearly $700 billion dollars, and the mainstream media, has little issue with being "patriotic" if the money is right.

The war to end all wars is….

The war to end all wars is not possible, for you cannot end anything that is wrong in and of itself, by doing that very same thing, no matter, what justification is claimed in order to do so.  While self-defense in any of its many forms has its place, seldom is such self-defense limited to true self-defense, rather, in most cases, self-defense is proclaimed, but in action, it is not actually self-defense, but merely another form of war, mislabeled and misidentified by the practitioner as self-defense.

So too, this means that those that believe that certain crimes must be punished by killing that person in cold blood by utilizing state resources, as if this act of state sanctioned murder, though not called that by the state, is somehow justified, is absolutely senseless.  You cannot end murder by the act of murder, just as you cannot end thievery by being a thief, nor can you end hatred in any of its many forms, by being hateful, and so on and so forth.

The very things that are wrong right now by some agent to do, cannot ever be corrected by doing in essence the very same things as long as it is sanctioned or justified somehow by the state, as if this will put everything right, for it will not, it might end a particular bad deed at that time, but it will not fundamentally and morally correct the causes of it and it is not an appropriate answer to wrong actions. Fundamentally, you cannot produce peace by the sword, or justice by the hangman's noose.

The reason that so many people don't believe in the type of justice that is not retributive justice, is because they don't believe that turning the other cheek, or that non-resistance to evil, or that the giving up of one's cloak, could possibly be the correct response to wrongdoing in the real world.  That is to say, they might agree with Christian philosophy in a house of worship, or while watching a movie or while reading a book with that narrative and theme, but the actual return of good to evil is more akin to a fairytale, as this world is filled with very bad people that will stop at nothing, and, therefore have to be dealt with forthrightly.

As you might expect, when it comes to judging oneself, most people are rather generous towards themselves and their loved ones, and far less so, when dealing with others, especially when those others don't look, respond, or act the same as they do, making it rather easy to judge them from a supercilious vantage point, but that sort of judgment is flawed, for having not lived in another person's shoes, you really don't know much about that person, and certainly not enough to be ethically permitted to render judgment upon them.

In reality, the time to turn your swords into plowshares is not after you have killed off all of your enemies, but when you recognize, that you have no enemies in the first place, for if you can take your enemy, and turn that enemy into your friend, than you have gained a friend, while losing an enemy, and that fundamentally is the very thing that needs to be accomplished in order to bring lasting peace and justice to this world.

The real purpose of good government

On a fundamental level, the birth of our new independent country was meant to be the birth of a country that would recognize by the operation of its government that the legitimate purpose of that government was to forever secure our unalienable rights which include life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, gifted to us by our Creator, and that this country would be in its structure, a county of the people, by the people, and for the people, and not a country that was controlled by a select few or ruled in such a manner as to deny its very people their God-given unalienable rights.

Many people say that the nature of any good government is to provide safety, security, jobs, education, infrastructure, welfare, justice, and so on and so forth, and while these things may all be worthy attributes of good government they are in and of themselves just attributes.  What is important, more than anything, is to have a government that knows what it should be on the most principle of levels, and if that is right, the result of such will also be right.

A good government, must at its foundation, be about the discovery and dissemination of truth, for if the government does not know what truth is, or desires to deceive the public, or to hide important information from the public, or does not care to find out the truth of the matter, than this government, will not be a servant to the people, but will, in its essence, be structurally and operationally wrong.

A government does not and should not be in the business of indoctrinating its citizenry, though most do, but should instead, be desiring to create a band of citizens that recognize that the discovering of truth and then living up to that truth is the very basis for good government in the first place.  This is why the most important question to seek the answer to is to figure out why and for what purpose we are here to begin with, and the answer to that question, takes principled reasoning, and should be thoroughly discussed and considered.

There is no higher value than truth, and that truth may very well be inconvenient, and may very well upset institutions of long standing, but inconvenient or not, upsetting or not, those that know the truth but purposely do not live up to it are doing themselves a disservice; and if it is the government that does not live up to truth, than that government is illegitimate morally, ethically, and in reality.  For it is the government, that should structure itself so as to purposely desire to impress upon its citizens that the pursuit of truth, is the most important pursuit of them all, and that thereby one has no greater duty than to acknowledge this truth, and should therefore by their actions and accomplishments deliberately do so.

The real purpose of good government is to be an ever present help in increasing the good of that society, and in order to best perform such, that government must as its template, live truth, and thereby then do its best to affect this to its citizenry, for that is its duty, to be that good neighbor, to steady the ship, and to bring home all, safely.

National debt, demographics, and growth

The United States is ranked third in the world in regards to its present population, estimated to be 324,459,463 as listed by worldometer.info, the two countries that have a higher population than America, are China at #1, and India at #2, in which India will in the next few years surpass China as the most populous country in the world.  To get a picture of how much larger, the population is in India as compared to the United States, India's populated as listed by worldometer.info is 1,339,180,127 peoples which is  more than four times the population of the United States.

Not too surprisingly, both China and India are on GDP growth rates that are absolutely crushing America, of which, some of the  reason why this is so, is because their population is so much greater than ours, in addition to a lower GDP point to spring off from, as well as the fact that their demographics are superior to America.  That is to say, GDP growth is strongly correlated to both population growth as well as the actual demographics of the people that reside within that nation, especially in regards to their age as well as their educational achievements.

America, has not had an annual GDP growth rate greater than 3% since 2005, and doesn't appear to be on track to exceed 3% anytime soon, if ever, again.  Whereas, back in the 1950s, America, had four years in that decade in which its growth rate was at least 6.9% or better.  One of the biggest difference between now and then, is that the demographics of the median age in America was considerably younger in the 1950s so that in 1960 as listed by statista.org that median age was  29.5 years, whereas in 2016 it is now 37.9 years.  In regards to India, their median age in 1960 as listed by statista.org was 20.3 years, and in 2015 was at 26.7 years, making India even younger than America was back in its heyday of real GDP growth of the 1950s and 1960s. 

The significance of having a young population entering the workforce of India, is that these workers are just starting to begin their careers which puts a downward pressure on labor costs, as well as the fact that they are healthier and more energetic than older workers, along with the reality that younger workers consume more products and goods per capita than older people, because they want and have a need for more products and have a stronger desire to work hard to get them.  Since 2009, India's slowest GDP growth rate was 5.5%, whereas its faster growth rate was an astonishing 10.3% in 2010.

The reason that GDP growth matters so much is that America has taken its national deficit which use to sit just under $1 trillion dollars in 1981 to over $20 trillion dollars in 2017.  This national debt is so large, that it equates to an individual taxpayer debt of over $150,000 per taxpayer.  That sort of debt can only successfully be discharged through real economic growth and America neither has the growth, nor the demographics to do so, therefore, America is on the path to discharge that debt only through any of the various forms of default, such as repudiation, inflation, or the re-pegging of its currency to some other medium, which would create civil unrest and strife at an unprecedented level, unless America, is somehow able to create the growth needed so as to enable a pathway to address their huge debt overload.

This pathway can only come through the growth and active encouragement of immigration, fortunately, America is a country, that the best and brightest young foreign minds have prominently as one of their top choices to immigrate to, if not the top choice of many, so that, in a country that is the third largest in land size, there is plenty of room to grow, plenty of food to eat, and plenty of higher educational facilities to attend, so that, it is time to lift up our lamp and to re-open our golden door to take in all those yearning for freedom and opportunity.

Getting along with others

If you look at the traits that people utilize to get along well with others, virtues such as empathy, consideration, respect, and tolerance, would be some of the notable attributes that those that do this well often have.  On the other hand, traits such as selfishness, obstinacy, immaturity, and jealousy are basically not the attributes that are the characteristics of those that want and do get along with others.

When you take a look at children growing up and their dealing with others, the basic characteristics that parents really don't need to teach their children is how to be more selfish, more aggressive, more sullen, and more disruptive, because many children already have enough of each of these characteristics in the first place.  Instead, parents want their children to get along well with others, so that they will share, they will be fair, and they will be more inclusive, all things that make for not only better children, but also a better world.

The fact that it is almost universal that parents when addressing  their  children's behavior, wish for better behavior from their children, would seem to indicate strongly that the very things that we wish for from our children, should be the very things that adults should be about in their own lives, for it isn't good enough to preach tolerance to youngsters if we are not tolerant ourselves, it isn't good enough to encourage children to control their temper, if we can't do the same, and it isn't good enough to impress upon children the value of thoughtfulness, if we are impulsive in our actions.

The very lessons that children need to learn must be the lessons that we ourselves have learned well, or else we are poor exemplars of what we should be as the parental authority to our children.  It is somewhat amazing how parents can clearly see what children are doing wrong with other children, such as being unnecessarily mean and selfish, and wish to see that corrected, but somehow aren't able to see themselves in the exact same light when they do the very same things in their own lives.

As good as childcare can be, as good as teachers can be, as good as a given household can be, children need to be taught the best appropriate behaviors, and further, in order to demonstrate that they have actually understood the lesson, they must be given the opportunity to make the right decisions with their peers in real life, and when they are successful in such, receive acknowledgment of such, and when unsuccessful in such, the lesson must be redone and redone, until it is done right.

Of course, some children are going to fail at some tasks, but parents and other parental authorities are far better off trying to improve such behavior now, before it becomes absolutely ingrained, than ignoring such, and just hoping that it will disappear over time, which, it might.  The bottom line, though, is that behaviors developed in childhood, good or bad, often develop into good or bad habits in adulthood, in which these habits once rooted are hard to dislodge, which is why parents and parental authorities must do their best to train up a child in a manner that will consist of the characteristics of a good person, today, while striving also in their own lives to be that better person, themselves.

Police initiated contact of the general public

Governments like to keep track of all sorts of things, for all sorts of reasons, and the U. S. Department of Justice, is one of those departments that does exactly that.  In their report, of 2011, dated September 2013, and revised on October 27, 2016, bjs.gov reports that: "In 2011, over 62.9 million U.S. residents age 16 or older, or 26% of the population, had one or more contacts with police during the prior 12 months," which is an absolutely staggering number of contacts by the population with the police, of which, those contacts are broken down into two basic categories:  street stops and traffic stops.   A street stop is defined as: "…contact involved being stopped by police on the street or in public, but not in a moving motor vehicle."  An absolutely fascinating part of this study deals with the perception by the person being contacted as to whether they believed that the conduct initiated by the police indicated that the "Police behaved properly", in which the absolute lowest percentage of those feeling that they the police behaved properly were street stops of black people at the abysmal rate of just 37.7%.  On the other hand, in comparison, in regards to traffic stops blacks indicated that the police behaved properly at 82.7%.

Clearly, this study also shows a substantial difference between the perception that the police behaved properly between street stops and traffic stops, in which "A higher percentage of drivers in traffic stops (88%) than persons involved in street stops (71%) believed the police behaved properly during the stop."  That street stops have a substantially lower amount of people that believe that the police acted properly is especially disappointing, because unlike vehicle stops, in which the officer because of being behind the subject vehicle and with car windows often obscuring the officer's view of the driver, a given officer may not easily be sure of even the sex of the driver or the race of such, until that driver is pulled over.  On the other hand, street stops, allow a given officer, to have in many instances, a view that will permit them to at a minimum know the sex of the person being stopped, and many times the race of that person, before that contact is actually made, so that when blacks indicate their dissatisfaction with street stops, it is implied very strongly, that they have deliberately been targeted by the police to be stopped, based primarily upon their race.

In any event, the amount of citizens contacted by the police either through street or traffic stops, at over 62.9 million U.S. residents, is a phenomenal amount of people that have such contact in a given year, in which, some of those people contacted by the police, won’t just have a conversation, or won't just get a lecture, or won't just get a warning, but will get a traffic ticket, or will get searched, or will have their vehicle searched, or will have to deal with police threats or police physical force, including lethal force, or will get arrested.  While it is conceivable that stops initiated by police are received by such, as a courtesy and as the proper and due consideration one gets from a department that ostensibly serves and protects the public, the real point to take away from this, is that this is not contact initiated by residents to the police, but contact initiated by the police at an absolutely astonishing rate of incidents against millions and millions of people in 2011.

In point of fact, when the police contact anybody, the police will as a matter of course, have on their person, a lethal weapon, along with their arresting authority, so that, those that are contacted, whether guilty of a traffic violation or not, guilty of jaywalking or not, typically are not going to see such contact as being an experience that they were looking forward to, though they may well appreciate the professionalism displayed by the officers just doing their job in a competent and courteous manner.  That being said, it is well to remember, that being able to travel the roadways of a given city or town, via a vehicle or walking, without undue interference by the policing arm of the state, seems not to be a given or the norm in this country that professes liberty and justice for all.

The Non-establishment of Religion in our Constitution

The First Amendment to our Constitution was ratified in 1791, in which it states in part: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”  This Amendment was essentially the first of its kind in any written Constitution, for it took away the possibility of the power of a coerced religion established by our national government to rule over the people, but instead made the commitment that the national government would not established any religion upon the people, and that, the people, themselves, had the right to freely exercise their own volition in regards to their religious preference.

At the time of this Amendment, there were several States of the Union that had within their own State, an established religion, such as Anglican in Virginia and New York, and Congregational in Massachusetts, but there were also States that had no established religion such as Georgia, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey.  Though some of these States did have an established religion, such a religion was not national in scale, and all of these States eventually dropped such, in which after the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, the validity of an established religion within a respective State was null and void.

What made the proclamation that this country would not establish a national religion, so special and so profound for its time, was first off, England, itself, had an established state religion, as well as most other European countries had essentially merged the power of the state with the power of religion, so that the people were effectively under the hand of a combination of state and church, which saw them as subjects to be controlled rather than as free people to be liberated in their lives and viewpoints.

The United States believed that when it came to religious liberty, that the most important part of such was for the individual to be able to make their own choice of whatever religious faith that they so desired, or even, to have no faith, not because America believed that religion was bad for people, but because America believed that to compel people to have a certain faith as dictated by the power of the national government, was a violation of one's freedom of choice, one's freedom of belief, and one's freedom of exercise to believe or disbelieve in whatever Higher Power that a given individual gravitated to, for that belief or unbelief is an individual matter between that person and his Creator, and not therefore something that the national government should infringe upon.

The greatest value of this non-establishment of a national religion is that America, more than any other nation, openly embraces the free exercise of an individual's choice of religion, which has allowed this nation to openly embrace faiths of all different flavors within this great country, which is why America has such a great diversity of faith, but also such a great diversity of people, so that it is truly a melting pot of different people, of different cultures, and of different faiths, that are joined together under a national Constitution that permits all people to have liberty and to pursue their own happiness for the good and betterment of those same people.

Low Interest rates, low growth

We live in historically different financial times in the sense of the cost of money, in which, before the financial crisis of 2008, the cost of money that is the interest cost of loans for mortgages, for personal loans, for brokerage margin loans, and for business loans, was appreciably higher than it is today.  On one hand, that sounds great, for the cost of money makes a big difference as to whether a particular business investment or its equivalency on a personal level, makes financial sense, and all things being equal it is far easier to pay back a loan at 1.75% than at 10.75%.  This would imply that a low interest rate environment should increase business investment, which should, in kind, increase business activity and thereby heat up the economy with higher growth.

In point of fact, America has not had growth greater than 3% since 2005, indicating without a doubt that low interest rates, in and of itself does not increase economic growth.  In addition, to the fact that America has suffered through a low growth atmosphere for over a decade, it has also had very low inflation in which the last time inflation was 2% or higher was in 2012, of which the Federal Reserve believes that an inflation rate of 2% is necessary for steady economic growth and for full employment, of which, their biggest fear, is outright deflation, for when products get cheaper by the month, than the economy can quickly devolve into not just a recession but a depression, because people and businesses are less inclined to purchase things now, since they can thereby purchase them later, at a cheaper price. 

The fact that inflation is low indicates that low interest rates, which should be adding liquidity and higher purchasing capacity, somehow does not.  This then means that low interest rates does not necessarily produce either a higher growth rate, nor does it necessarily produce a higher inflation rate, even though these lower interest rates, surely makes it easier to those in debt to manage their debt, since their corresponding interest payments have been reduced by lower interest rates on things such as: mortgages, car loans, business loans, and even credit card debts, but since economic growth remains low, this implies that within America, there is a significant amount of debt, that despite lower interest rates, cannot ever be successfully managed or discharged.

In addition, how money and where money is issued in the first place, makes an appreciable difference to the economy in whole, that is to say, if money is given directly to those that are struggling the most, they will spend it, because they lack ready money in the first place.   On the other hand, if loans are provided  at incredibly cheap rates to mega-corporations and individuals that have stellar credit ratings, that money, might trickle down to those of lower socioeconomic levels, but has a strong tendency with all of that great wealth of cash available, to not so much be invested in the growth of America, proper, but will be speculated in worldwide stock and equity markets, for if it costs less than 2% to borrow, there is a strong tendency to passively make money through such equity markets with well managed risk, rather than to invest in factories and labor domestically, especially when the perception is that the people in whole, while having the desire to purchase, don't have the money or loan capacity to do so.

The end of the Middle Class

What makes America great isn't that we have the richest of the rich in this country, and certainly isn't because we have a seemingly permanent underclass, but that the country evolved into having a vibrant and robust middle class, so that, for many Americans, that is, the majority of Americans, the dream of owning one's own house, and having enough assets to see them through their entire lives, and to thereupon to  leave an inheritance to their children was part and parcel of being an American, or so we thought.

However, despite the fact that America is by far the richest nation in the world, that money no longer gravitates to its great middle class, but instead is being siphoned  off from the middle class by the upper class which has never been richer and never been more exclusive than it is today.  The rich are truly richer, whereas the poor are pretty much as poor as they have been, but it is the mainstream middle class that is being hollowed out and is in the process of being eviscerated within this nation.

The thing that is vital to remember is that having a middle class of the breadth and scope of America hasn't really been the norm in previous civilizations, it is more been the exception than the rule, in fact, it's fair to say, before America existed, the middle class was relatively small and limited to professions such as lawyers, doctors, clergymen, and local shopkeepers, with the upper class consisting of those that were large moneyed property owners, well-placed merchants, the ruling class, and factory managers.  The middle class came about, more by happenstance than by design, so when America became more prosperous by its trade, built more things, became more complicated and coalesced into major cities, with the needed infrastructure of roads, shops, transportation, education, and the endless desire to pursue the better things in life, this produced over a period of time, a middle class that encapsulated that in its entirety, so that, it could be said that this enormous rising tide did indeed lift all boats.

But, alas, that was then and this is now, and the times they are a changing, in which, the most obvious changes are right straight in front of us, for despite the fact that there are more two-income families than ever before seen in America, many of those two-income families are struggling just to maintain their status as middle class, for globalization while offering many positive things from a purchasing standpoint, is indeed a dual-edge sword, for the very things that can be built here, created here, and reproduced here, can all be done abroad, at a lower price point with foreign labor and then imported back to America, which is of enormous benefit for those that own the production of such, and an enormous problem for those that seek employment domestically, for their jobs are not only outsourced, but have been replaced too with robotics, leaving just the crumbs, of reduced pay, of reduced benefits, and reduced standards for those that labor.

The Pew report defines the middle class as: "earning between two-thirds and double the median household income," so that:  "In 2015, just under 50 percent of American adults lived in middle-income households. That’s down from 54 percent in 2001 and 61 percent in 1971."  Yet, during that same period of time, America in aggregate has gotten richer and richer. Rather sadly, during this period of time those representing the lowest household income have grown from 16% in 1971 to 20% in 2015, indicating that America is clearly a country that is dividing itself more and more into the very rich and the very poor, in which the percentage of both are on the increase, reducing significantly those that are classified as middle class.

It is well to remember that trends that are in motion have a tendency to remain in that same motion, so that those that believe that the middle class will soon mount a comeback aren't reading the tea leaves correctly, for the way that businesses are presently constructed, in a country in which profit is so often the driving motive, is that cheaper labor means bigger profit, and in a world that has gotten appreciably smaller, the labor outside America undercuts the American middle class.

Five Justices to Rule it All

America's national government is divided into three branches, of which in theory there are checks and balances of each branch so that no one branch is all powerful, but these are just words on paper, and then there are the actual actions of these branches in reality.  The Supreme Court or the defenders of an activist Supreme Court have done a wonderful job of basically convincing the American people that the Supreme Court has the Constitutional right to not just interpret law and thereby be limited in what it does and accomplishes, but to actually make new law, sometimes profound and national new law which supersedes the legislative branch as well as the will of the people, along with make the executive branch essentially of no import, except for the fact that the executive branch  is the branch that nominates Supreme Court justices, indicating, that because we have two major parties, that the Supreme Court, consists of men and women that have specific party leanings which most definitely affects the ideological decisions that they make.

There are many Supreme Court decisions that have shook the very foundation of Constitutional government, of which, fundamentally the reason that these decisions have such import, is that they wrest away from the States their own specific laws and their own specific precedents, so that the new law of the land is national and not governed by local or State policies.  For instance, in Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S, ruled in 2015, took what had been a State rights' issue of same-sex couples and the right of marriage, and made it instead a national issue, that overnight stipulated in every State of this Union that same-sex marriages were the law of the land, guaranteed by the Due Process and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.  This decision, effectively stipulated that when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in1868, that somehow it applied to same-sex marriages, which inexplicably had been overlooked by our counterparts in the 19th century.

Another profound decision which once again interfered with State rights was the Roe v. Wade (1973) decision, which ruled that States that restricted or banned abortions were in violation of a woman's right to privacy in which the Supreme Court basically made up their own rules about how privacy and abortion were to be treated on a national scale. 

The Supreme Court has also weighed in on draft dodgers and conscientious objection, as in the Muhammad Ali case; the Bush v. Gore Presidential election recount, decided essentially on party ideological grounds, and the legality of separate public schools, based on race in Brown v. the Board of Education of Topeka, and so on and so forth, of which, some of the decisions are brilliant, some are not, but many of them are overreaching, overbearing, and infringe upon the legislative and executive branches, and most disturbingly, infringe upon the voice of the people, as if these Supreme Court justices, are a law and a wisdom unto themselves, which essentially is exactly what they are in impact.

Again and again, the mass media, blithely goes along and even encourages the Supreme Court to act the way that it does, never seeming to realize that if one branch can be not only the boss of its own house, but can boss the legislative and executive branches, making this Supreme Court, effectively the final say of their activist interpretation of a "living Constitution" than this government is not a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, but instead has devolved into a clique of nine special men and women of which if five of them wish the law to be one way, and four do not, than the five will make that new law, that will be imposed upon the people, for better or for worse, in which, that Constitution, is treated not as the law of the land, but as a document that can be made to say whatever those five wish it to say.