Should military generals be held in high regard?

While the popularity and respect that military generals receive by the public, does vary depending upon the times and seasons, in general, though, military generals are accorded a fairly high respect in America, of which twelve of the United States Presidents to date have been generals, such as Washington, Grant, and Eisenhower.  The thing is though, when we take a good look at generals, it must be absolutely recognized, that generals, in times of war, are in the business of killing enemy combatants, as well as regrettably killing people, unintended or not, that are non-combatants but are in the area of conflict; in addition, to all the infrastructure that is destroyed, as well as jobs that are uprooted, and food, schooling, transportation, along with the regular course of common events being seriously disrupted.

As it has been said, "war is hell," but apparently that hell does not seem to be something that has ended, as wars are still being fought as a means of resolving conflict, which seems to be something that educated and highly cultured people should not be doing to one another.  For instance, murder, is frown upon in virtually every culture that could possibly be envisioned, and murder is a crime, that usually mandates a serious amount of incarceration, of which, you will find nearly nobody that is actually sane, being a proponent of murder as being okay, especially when such is defined as the "…the unlawful killing of another human without justification or valid excuse."  This implies that when it comes to war, that those that are doing and/or ordering the killing of enemy combatants are, by definition, on a very slippery slope, because at a minimum, every war has collateral damage of property and civilians, in addition to the very salient fact, that probably every war has the unnecessary killing of enemy combatants, which could be justifiably be seen as a form of murder.

Now, perhaps the main reason why so many generals are held in high regard, is that the orthodox narrative has often been carefully constructed to define the war under the aegis as being one of freedom, or of liberty, or of unity, or of justice, or of the defense of the people, of which, many times, there is truth in that, but perhaps not the whole truth.  However, that said, people are entitled to defend themselves, they are also entitled to liberate themselves, seek justice, and to disallow those that have lost at a fair democratic election, to seek to overcome such by going to the sword.  However, there is hypocrisy and a disconnect to actually believe that in order to have a peaceful, liberated and free society, that this can only come about by killing one's enemies; for while the sword is a rather persuasive enforcer, such enforcement carries a heavy price for he who wields it as well as he who succumbs to it.  On the other hand, reasonable people and cultures, should be able to find common ground, in which, if everyone actually had a seat at the table of decision and opportunity, then peace and goodwill should come in a manner in which the swords previously used in war are thereby turned into plowshares, for that is what a civilized culture must become, in order to truly endure the tests of time.

Should military generals be held in high regard?  The answer would appear to be situation specific, for there are those times when a great military general is needed out of necessity in order to sustain or liberate that culture, government, and people; but wars of aggression and of conquest, seldom are, and therein lies the most meaningful difference.

“It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere" -- Voltaire

There are those that are physically imprisoned and incarcerated within a facility that truly does control their comings and their limited goings; yet, despite the chains that these prisoners wear, some of them are more free than those that live on the outside, of which those "free" people have an abundance of choices that they could avail themselves of, but for whatever reason, instead choose to enchain themselves to things such as domestic misery, job anguish, weight embarrassment, and dreams annihilated.

While many a person, will claim that the chains that they appear to have upon them, are not of their volition, and not of their own choice, their behavior belies that story, for a person that truly wants to escape from their chains to the exclusion of all else, will not leave even the smallest of stones, unturned.  In reality, many people throughout their lives won't even bother to test their chains as to its strength and its possible vulnerabilities, but rather blithely accept such, because those chains represent their crutch which can be utilized again and again as their excuse for accepting their lot in life.

Additionally, there are scores of people that wear the chains that they have forged upon their body, as their own personal badge of honor.  They are the first to proclaim over and over again, but if not for these chains, or disadvantages, the world would be their oyster; and yet despite it all they have gamely soldiered on to do the best that they can do, even with this heavy handicap; never seeming to realize that the key needed to unlock those chains, has actually always been in their own hands to begin with.

The reason that so many people revere their chains, is the same reason why people like to avoid facing the whole truth of the matter, because by hiding behind excuses and stuttering words, they can appear to be helpless victims of an arbitrary world, when, in fact, more times than not, the control and responsibility of what does or does not happen, significantly rests in each person's own hands.  While it is true that some people are born with handicaps and chains upon them, it is also true, that through sheer will power and perseverance, those chains, or at least most of those chains, can be broken or mitigated.

Those that revere their chains, are the same people, that take some sort of comfort in vaguely complaining about the way things are, but without wanting to truly test the waters to effect change; because they do not wish to risk whatever creature comforts that they currently have, no matter, how modest; or their current known situation for something that is either unknown or would require real sweat labor. 

Each person forges or alternatively frees themselves from the chains that they have upon them.  Those that will not make a conscious and concerted effort to free themselves from the chains that bind them -- ultimately are, in their own way, slaves.  Those self-enslaved people do not wish for freedom, they do not wish for liberty, they do not wish for anything much other than whatever peace of mind that they already have.  These then are fools, for they have cheaply sold their souls and their life, for a little bit of something, when they could and should have had, oh, so much more.

"Dare to think for yourself" -- Voltaire

While there are a slew of countries in which it might well seem to be not such a good idea to think for yourself, in most places, and in even in those oppressive countries and oppressive situations, personal or otherwise, all people that have been gifted by their Creator with their own mind, should actually dare to think for his or her self.  After all, if you will not think for yourself, there are plenty of people as well as governments and businesses that will gladly do that thinking for you, but at the end of the day, at the culmination of your life, you, yourself, ultimately must answer for all that you have done and thought, for no one else, can answer for that bell that tolls solely for yourself.

Yet, despite this great and enormous freedom of being able to think our own thoughts, far too many people, live lives in which they apparently don't seem to cogently recognize that they are not only entitled to think for themselves but rather that they really do need to do exactly that.  Obviously, when we are born into this world, it isn't really possible to independently think for ourselves, because we are dependent upon the good graces of others to sustain us physically, emotionally, and mentally. Additionally, when young children begin to exercise their right to think independently, we find that often for their own good, they are shot down, because they do not readily understand the consequences of bad actions, such as playing with fire, crossing a busy street without looking, or getting into an automobile of a stranger.  Nevertheless, there comes a time in any child's life, when that independence of thought is absolutely mandatory or else that child will often live a life in which it is either one of conformity to the prevailing norms of its situation, or a life in which they have let certain others mold them, for better, or for worse.

While governments, businesses, people, and family, may mouth the words of the importance and validity of thinking for your own self, in point of fact, many of those institutions and people, do not welcome truly independent thought, because that often threatens their models and status quo.  That, however, is not your problem, in fact, rather, that is your challenge, so as to step up and to truly dare to think for yourself.    

This world is full of all sorts of people and all sorts of agendas, of which, it must be noted, that those that go with the flow, are the equivalency to all those non-thinking objects of the flowing river that do the very same thing.  Only someone that is alive and independent has the strength of character to go against the flow, and it is by going against the flow that demonstrates that at a minimum, you have thought for yourself.  This doesn't mean that simply being non-conformist is the best thing to do or even the right thing to do; what it does mean, however, is that you have a right to think for yourself, and that you should exercise that right, especially in all things that really matter.

Do you think for yourself?  If you are not so sure, then make it your point to instead of mindlessly agreeing to various things in the first place, to actually dare yourself to truly think about them, as often as you can, and you will find out rather shortly, how often you do actually dare to think for yourself, as compared to being a human automaton, which does not.

Towards the return of extended families

Extended families, that is families of multi-generations, along with cousins and other relatives, were the norm back in the days when farming and agricultural was the primary means of making a living; which especially made sense, because farming and agricultural tasks are very labor intensive, so that with an extended family a fair division of labor could be structured to take advantage of the experience of elders, as well as the youthful energy and  strength of youngsters, and the stabilizing influence of the married couple that helped shepherded all those responsibilities.

In today's modern world, while there are certain cultures that still live and encourage extended families, that appears for the most part to be far from the norm, so that it is not unusual for a given family, for example, of two or three children, to encounter as the children mature into adulthood and employment, that each of those previous nuclear family members ultimately getting their own place of residence, and then only getting together primarily on holidays or other family events, even though, more times than not, everyone lives basically in the same city and vicinity.  While to a certain degree this might seem to make a lot of sense, as well as seeming to be a natural rite of passage, it doesn't necessarily have to be, nor should it necessarily be that way.

For instance, there are massive advantages to living within an extended family, such as, an in-house babysitter being readily available, so too, will be an in-house tutor, as well as an in-house cleaner and organizer, in addition to an in-house elder care person to assist the aged, of which, all of these things being together are not only cost-efficient but very helpful; not to mention the fact that simply living all under the same roof, cuts down significantly on the redundancy of extra vehicles, extra houses, and extra utility bills, while also providing to others, the affection and respect, that money cannot ever buy.

Certainly, when extended families live all under the same roof, there are going to be times of tension and disagreement, but that is going to be the case in any situation, even in a house that houses just two people.  So too, an extended family is going to offer far less private space, but then again, the flip side of this, is that there will be a lot less loneliness and therefore probably less of a tendency to suffer from the ill effects of disaffected personalities, that have not an appropriate social support system that is there for them in their times of upmost need.

So too, it is wise to note, that most everyone that lives a full life, is going to cycle through the stages of that life, of which the inestimable Shakespeare states: "And one man in his time plays many parts, His acts being seven ages…."  This so indicates, that rather than old people being shuffled away to old people's homes and thereby forgotten; or young children completing their classes each day, only to be stuck with afterschool care of varying quality levels; or even parents, divorced or otherwise, stuck in dead-end jobs, frustrated aspirations, and bleak social prospects; what is really needed is an extended family structure which can help to alleviate that situation, because each person within that structure, brings some good to that structure, so that, rather than so many living lives that are bleak, dark, and piercing cold; more people will find that being around their extended family, provides them with happiness, light, and the warmth of a loving hearth, extended to all.

The true purpose of good government

The true purpose of any good government is to create an institution that is the appropriate and the worthy representation of the people, by the people, and for the people.  This means that laws and the structure of that government ideally should be set so that all have a seat at the table of opportunity; and that therefore those that are burdened are forthwith unburdened, and that those are weighed down by oppression are therefore unoppressed, and that those that are obstructed from a fair path to success have those obstacles therefore removed, and that those that have been denied a fair start to the race of life are forthwith provided with the tools and the conscious help by that government to overcome an unfair beginning, so that through this and the assistance by that government all are given a fair chance to excel.

The true purpose of any good government is not to favor the few at the expense of the many, nor is to allow those favored with being born into wealth and privilege, being provided with an unassailable economic and privileged lead over all others.  So too, the laws of that land, should not be essentially the best justice that money can buy, but rather should be justice equally applied to all, of which, none should be accorded to be in the position of being above the law, or undue favoritism of that law.

The true purpose of any good government is not for that government to allow businesses and corporations to essentially become of more importance than humanity, itself; by allowing those said corporations to essentially monopolize salient areas of important commerce by buying out or merging with (without even an appropriate debate or public discussion) competitors and all others that could possibly interfere with their profit; but rather that governments should and must acknowledge that the tendency of big corporations is to grow so large, that they become too big for any government to regulate and thereby to control, so that, these corporations instead do what is best for those corporations, under the guise that such is good for the people of the government that so represents them.

The true purpose of any good government is to educate their people so that they will not misunderstand their sacred responsibility to that government, of which, their first responsibility is to be the watchmen of the tower of liberty, freedom, opportunity, and the pursuit of happiness.  This means that those people must hold their government representatives accountable for their inability and their failure to protect the very values that make this a great nation, and to assure that this generation as well as all future generations are able to avail themselves of the opportunity to be born into the last best hope of mankind, and to do right by those that gave their last dying breath so that this would be that legacy for all.

The true purpose of any good government is to be true and faithful to those people, to do right to those people, and to understand that the duty of any good government is to have the courage and might to do that duty, to the end of time, come what may.

The value of public opinion and public sentiment

The laws and the Constitution of any republic, or any democracy for that matter, are only as good and are only as effective as the public is willing to accept these things.  That is to say, for example, when a federal law is on the books, in which the vast majority of the public, does not readily support such a law, as in the draconian laws directly against those that utilize marijuana medicinally or recreationally, then the federal law will either be selectively enforced or even not enforced whatsoever, because a government that purports to be the government of the people, by the people, and for the people, has a sacred obligation to actually answer to those people.

This means that no matter what a given Constitution stipulates, or what established law has decided upon, that public opinion and public sentiment most definitely is germane as to whether those laws, in application, are going to be adjusted to that opinion and that sentiment.  This indicates that those that make the laws and those that enforce the laws, must recognize that laws that are not supported by the people, need to be looked at very carefully, for some of those laws are bad laws, and probably were bad laws when they were first written and thereby enforced.

It must be remembered that the Constitution itself is the supreme law of this land, of which, to disobey this Constitution or to circumvent that Constitution, arbitrarily, or wantonly, would in its effect, undermine that Constitution along with its abiding power and relevancy.  Rather, the Constitution, itself, has created the conditions for Amendments to that Constitution, so that while slavery was once the law of the land, this ultimately was abolished through the Constitution's 13th Amendment.  So too, voting rights were once limited to those that owned property and were white, but this too has been amended, to include all adults of 18 or older, of either sex.  In this, public opinion and public sentiment, changed to the conditions of the day, and that Constitution thereby changed with it.  That is to say, there is truth in the words that Victor Hugo, stated, “No force on earth can stop an idea whose time has come."

This implies, though, that fair and just ideas that have not yet won over the public, more often than not, are going to be fair and just ideas that will not see the light of the day, because without public opinion and public sentiment that favor such, they often do die upon the vine, for the lack of that support from the people as a whole.  So too, those that have a vested interest in seeing that certain laws do not change, despite a public demand that they do, are often able to hold the dogs at bay for an extended period of time, primarily because the law once made, is often hard to unmake.   

This indicates that when the inalienable rights of the people are subsumed by State or National governments that to retrieve back those very rights for the people is an exercise that can take an extended period of time, of which, ultimately, it is often only through a grassroots effort of unrelenting public sentiment and pressure that the people can succeed in getting the very thing that should have been theirs to begin with.

Robocalls: neighborhood spoofing

Telemarketers want to use every trick in the book in order to get potential clients or more likely, potential people to take advantage of, to answer their phone calls.  Because of technology, more telemarketers have turned to software that allows the caller ID that shows up on a person's phone to display the same first six digits of that person's phone number, meaning that the first three numbers of the robocall match their area code, and then the next three numbers match their local exchange, leaving but the last four numbers as being unique.  This, to the uninitiated, often looks like a call is being place to them that is local, and therefore could be a friend or a business or a medical facility with a legitimate reason to call, and hence gives the aura of legitimacy to what is in actuality, a robocall, made to entice the person on the other end of the phone to answer the phone, so a marketing pitch or its equivalency can therefore be made.

The above is known in the industry as "neighborhood spoofing," which fairly reflects what it is, which is basically a robocall pretending to be somebody from the neighborhood, thereby giving that robocall apparent legitimacy.  On the surface, this would appear to be something that shouldn't be legal, because firstly the number as being displayed on the caller ID is not the number that the solicitor is actually calling from, therefore clearly marking this as an act of deception.  Secondly, and further to the point, since the first six numbers match the intended target, this means that only the last four numbers of the solicitor caller ID are totally unique, of which there are only 9999 possible combinations of those numbers; signifying that there is a very good chance that at least some of the time the caller ID as listed, actually correlates to a real person or organization, that has that phone number, but has not made that robocall.  That would seem to be false impersonation of someone else's identity, and additionally, depending upon what was said or done per that phone call, would suggest that a wholly innocent party could get in trouble with the law, because their number showed up on someone else's phone, in which the number in question that called, has initiated or done something over the phone which has infringe upon that other person's rights.

In point of fact, things are said over the phone all of the time that upset people, even to the point that the person insulted wishes to take retaliatory action, so that, in theory, someone that is very upset, could look at the caller ID, and then through the power of the internet and third party services, be able to retrieve what appears to be the physical address of that person's caller ID; thereupon get into their car and travel a short distance to that person's address since they are in the "neighborhood," and then when confronting that person, verify that the caller ID is accurate by calling that number, and upon hearing the other person's phone ring, come to the very logical conclusion that this is the party that upset them, and therefore this is the party that will pay the price for having done so, even though, that person is actually innocent of making the robocall, of which all of this has happened because the innocent party's phone number, unbeknownst to them, has been hijacked via some sort of software robocall.

Remember that people do all sorts of stupid things, so that robocalls that occasionally use another person or organization's number is exactly the type of stupid thing that will definitely get somebody hurt.

What's not good for America?

The Dow Jones Industrial average is the most widely quoted stock index number, basically recognized by even the average American, and the stocks that make up the Dow Jones Index are a fair representation of the industry leaders of business enterprises in America, of which, most of those components of the Dow Jones Index, are household names.  The massive size and worth of these corporations are something that most people are really unable to fathom, with WalMart, for instance, having yearly sales of approximately $500 billion, and the market capitalization of the thirty stocks of that Index as of September of 2018, totaled nearly $7.5 trillion, in an economy for America that of 2017, had a yearly Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of $19.5 trillion.

The above surely indicates that these companies that make up the Dow Jones Index are dominant corporations, in which most of these companies don't just do business in America; but are international in scope, international in employment, international in sourcing and significantly dependent upon international markets for their continued growth and continued profitability.  So too, because the amounts of money that are involved are so consequential, corporations of that size, make it their point to position themselves favorably with all regulatory agencies, governmental officials, and edicts of all stripes.  Additionally, corporations are essentially not in the gambling business, that is to say, their abiding preference is for laws as well as rules and regulations to be in accordance with their preferences, because they are in business to do business, and their size seldom gives them the flexibility to turn who and what they are on a dime, therefore they never welcome unanticipated and undesirable changes.

This so signifies, that the largest corporations in America, are not interested whatsoever in a true democratic process, though, they don't mind the veneer of one, but rather would ideally like to deal with an imperial presidency, that will issue executive orders, in addition, to quid pro quo deals, that benefit each party.  So too, corporations with the best lobbyists that money can buy, make it a point to structure deals with important legislators (local, State, and Federal) in order to benefit unfairly from laws as well as the rules and regulations that are thereby passed to benefit those said corporations.  This, quite obviously, is why we often find that the biggest and most profitable companies are somehow able to get tax set asides that favor them at the expense of any that would try to compete against them, because those corporations have reached the right people that will broker the right deal for them, empowering and enriching them even more.

None of the above is good for America, because as more economic power is concentrated into fewer and fewer hands, this thus creates industries which are essentially monopolies, or duopolies, or simply industries that essentially collude with one another without fear of legal action; so that the masses of the people in America, end up getting short changed from having to pay more for what they buy, from suffering from less real choice, in addition to laboring at jobs which often don't pay them a fair or living wage, and because of the tragic decline and thereby the lack of influence of unions, most Americans no longer have a seat at the table of meaningful decisions.

So too, when the biggest corporations and the government at the highest levels work hand-in-hand with one another, you don't have a democracy, you don't have a republic; instead, you have the makings of totalitarianism, and the snuffing out of liberty in America.

What do you really own?

People have a strong tendency to want to compare themselves to other people, especially those of the same age bracket, those of the same neighborhood, those of the same school, and those of the same employment.  One of the more common ways to compare oneself to another, is not so much to compare bank accounts or liquid assets which is often considered to be providing to someone else way too much actionable information and may also be considered to be rather gauche, but instead to list the more obvious and tangible things that a person owns, which often would be their home, followed by their vehicle, and possibly a little discussion about their educational achievements.

The problem with a discussion about property that people claim that they own, is that, often times, those that say they own their home, or that they own their vehicle, or believe that they quite obviously own their diploma -- is that from a very realistic and practical level, more people than not, do not really own those things.  That is to say, those that claim that they own their vehicle, are really only those that have free and clear title to that vehicle, in which all others that have a car loan, therefore have a lien holder to the car that they claim that they own, so that, if they fail to make their payments or become delinquent enough on their vehicle, they will learn the difference between someone that really does truly own their car as compared to someone that is making payments upon their car, for the lien holder has the right to confiscate that car for the buyer's failure to adhere to the terms and conditions of that loan.  Further to the point, those that claim that they own their own home, but yet have a thirty year mortgage to that home, must surely recognize that the actual owner, especially if they should fail to continue to make their payments on time, isn't really the occupant of that home, but actually the lending authority that issued the home loan, for they are the lien holder to that home, and the home represents their collateral which is the salient reason why a mortgage loan was issued in the first place.  Finally, all those students that built up a lot of debt getting their postsecondary degree, believe that they own that degree, and while that is technically true, so too do they own the debt that allowed them to get that degree; so that, this unfortunately means for a high percentage of students that their diploma actually has entwined to it, that student debt, of which, the owner of that debt, has incredibly strong rights to the payment of that debt, that not even bankruptcy  of the recipient of that diploma can discharge that debt from.

In reality, the three biggest debt instruments that a significant amount of people own are mortgage debt, car loan debt, and student debt, which respectively represent in order, $8.88 trillion, $1.129 trillion, and $1.5 trillion that are all owed to the debt holders.  So then, what do you really own?  For, in reality, those that are in debt, don't own those things, though many of them, wrongly believe that they do.

You are the master of your senses

All of us have senses such as sight, smell, and sound, of which many people don't seem to comprehend that they are the masters of those senses and should not allow themselves to be enslaved by their senses, for the mind is the builder of all things, and the mind is the master of all senses.  Yet, many people believe that if they are hungry, they must eat, and if they are sleepy, they must sleep; but as logical as that might sound, it should not be accepted as dogma and fix, for it is not.

If you truly believe that your body is supposed to be your master and you further believe that you have an obligation therefore to obey it, or behave as if that is true, than every time that your body demands something, you will, as much as you are able, give in to it.  The mistake in doing so, is to allow the physical to dictate to the mental, and therefore to allow the physical to rule the mind, and those that vacate their good mind and their common sense for the physical and its senses, time and time again, live within a construct of which whatever their senses want, that is what they will get, without consciously considering the consequences or the rightness or wrongness of those actions.

Those that allow their senses to predominant over their mind are the very same people that will often find that the decisions that they make are ultimately inimical for them and for society at large.  That is to say, those that take items without thinking about whether they should take those items, are acting upon their sense impulses, so that, more times than not, this ultimately leads to taking something that clearly does not belong to them, which is an act of thievery.  So too, those that give in to lust, will, more times than not, eventually find themselves in a situation in which they have allowed that lust, to encroach upon others or upon common decency, to their dismay and ill consequences.

The senses that we have are necessary in order for the physical body to cohabitate and to exist in a physical world and in a competent manner; but those senses in whole, are akin to a wild horse, and it is our responsibility to put a saddle and a bridle upon that horse, in order for that powerful animal, to behave per our commands, and per our dictates, so that the horse and the rider become united in purpose.    Our senses should appropriately be under the control of the mind, for it is the very mind itself, utilized properly, which separates the animal kingdom from sentient human beings.

Those that are overly sense dependent, live lives in which their satisfaction and happiness is constantly fleeting, for the senses are never satiated, but for a moment, and even a great physical body, will over time, ultimately slow down and degenerate to the utter frustration and hopelessness of the one that is sense dependent.  On the other hand, those that have successfully mastered their senses, recognize that they are ultimately not the physical body, in fact, they are cognizant that they are not even dependent upon the physical body for their existence; but rather, comprehend fully that their essence is beyond physical limitations, beyond even time and space, for they are eternal, temporarily housed within a physical sphere, but ever free of its sense rules and limitations.

The waste that really matters

There is all types of waste in life, in which, many people are rightly concerned about the unnecessary waste of natural resources and efforts have been made to better recycle waste; but as important as that might sound, the waste that really matters is not so much the waste of resources, though that waste has importance in regards to sustainability, but rather the waste of lives, and thereby the waste of opportunities never taken or pursued.

The most important resource that any country has, is the individuals that make up that country, so that, to waste that talent but not providing as many as possible with a good education, with a good family structure, with safe and fair housing, with a fair and good opportunity at these things, alongside a clean environment, is to waste that human resource.  America, because it is known as a nation of immigrants, should be well aware, that talent can come from any origin and anywhere; for great scholars, successful business executives, and incredible artistic talents, have come from all sections of the globe, of which, some of these people have come here under the most humble and modest of circumstances, but have ended up by achieving wonderful good for this country and its people.

This means that every life in America, should be looked upon as an opportunity to develop fully and as much as possible the talents that each are gifted with, for to do less than that, is a waste of those lives, and a waste of opportunity, because often the difference between those that succeed as compared to those that fail, is not so much because one is innately more talented that the other, but rather that one received all the accouterments that would lead to success, while the other was denied virtually all those very things needed in order to succeed.

America is the world's richest country, it is also the biggest economy in the world, of which, many people that live outside America, believe, quite wrongly, that everyone in America must therefore have a very good and a high quality life.  In fact, it could be argued and should be argued, that America should have the lowest poverty rate that the world has ever known and that not a single person or family should be below the poverty rate, for the New Deal as envisioned by FDR and the Great Society as envisioned by LBJ was essentially for that very purpose, but, in effect, this has not occurred.

The failure for America having millions upon millions of its citizens that are ill educated and therefore functionally illiterate, in addition to all those that are denied fair housing as well as fair opportunity, as well as a justice system that is wholly prejudicial to the poor, and a nation that disappointingly still suffers from systemic racism despite Constitutional laws precluding such, can be laid at the feet of many people, politicians, as well as a capitalism system that is functionally corrupt. 

This waste of human resources is the greatest waste that America should be justifiably ashamed of; especially for a country that claims that it is the beacon of liberty for the wretched refuse of the world and that its golden door offers free and liberating passage to the tired and the poor of which all of this is just a damn lie, for this America wastes its most precious resource, time and time again, which is its people.

The police state lockdown

Americans love to believe that their country is a beacon of liberty, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness, but in reality, it is not any of those things in the 21st century, as citizens have again and again, ceded their rights, or had their rights ceded from them, so that, in effect, America is a police state, in structure, but not however a police state all of the time and everywhere; at least, it isn't, not yet.

While there are a lot of ways to create a police state, America, uses the most basic one which is to take an event, typically, real and at least somewhat germane, and manufactured into a case in which the citizens, for their "safety," need to be on lockdown, and that the police in order to "protect" those citizens are given carte blanche to conduct their business any way that they see fit, for as long as they determined that they need to, or are instructed to by those that actually commandeer the policing arm of the state.

Further to the point, a lockdown is only as good as the personnel and equipment so provided, of which, American policing agencies, alongside of American military forces domesticated to perform actions as instructed by authorities beyond judicial reach, have not only as much weaponry as they could reasonably need to draw upon, but also enough personnel and infrastructure to do so in a very comprehensive manner, for an extended period of time.

If one looks at recent lockdowns such as in Boston, Charlottesville, Baltimore, and Ferguson, the lockdowns themselves did not a single thing to actually catch the perpetrators or to resolve the very reason for the unrest or civil disobedience within those cities and often times exacerbated the disorder even further.  What the lockdown did do, though, was make it very clear to those that lived within those areas, that their lives were no longer under their own control, and that the permission to go about their business or to conduct their business, was done only under the express permission of those in charge of that lockdown.

Unfortunately, the rather sad thing is from a law and order perspective, lockdowns actually work; that is, a lockdown means that far less crime is committed such as murders, rapes, robberies, and thefts, with the only crimes going up being those crimes committed directly or indirectly against the authorities in charge of the lockdown.  This means, that those that want the masses to be under control and under guard at all times, are the biggest proponents of lockdowns, because lockdowns do not happen in their neighborhood, and will in all probability not meaningfully impact their business or their source of income. 

What lockdowns accomplish, and the very purpose of the increase in police state lockdowns, is to keep the masses in their place, all under the guise, that this is necessary for their protection, from enemies foreign and domestic, and that lockdowns that are done often enough, and in particular are done on a massive scale, will, in all probability, be eventually accepted as the "new normal" by the middle class of America, who will have traded their freedom, choice, and liberty, for safety and security, never seeming to realize that they have betrayed America and its ideals, by being complacent to the American totalitarian military-industrial police state.

The unvarnished truth

Most people have a very strong tendency to see themselves in a more positive light then they really are; not necessarily because they have blinders on, but more often, because they are far more generous in forgiving their own sins and faults, as well as seeing their intentions in a manner that reflects favorably upon them.  Perhaps, in its own way, this is good, but only in the sense that mankind has enough oppression and heartache to deal with on a daily basis, that to overburden one's conscience, may indeed be a burden that is too heavy to handle in everyday life.  Yet, truth is truth, and those that take something that isn't really truth and pretend or actually believe that it really is truth, have deceived themselves, for no real good purpose.

In point of fact, mankind does not challenge itself enough to verify that what they are doing, thinking, and accomplishing is actually of real import, but rather, too often, mankind simply does things because that is the way that those things have always been done, or they have been taught that way to get things done, or simply because that is the way that they want to get things done.  All of this, misses the very point, which is, there is nothing more important than actually doing, thinking, and accomplishing things correctly and for the correct purpose, of which, this takes appropriate forethought, in addition, to the strength of character to change things, even things of long standing, to align to what it really ought and should be.

Rather, far too many people, justify what they are and what they are doing, so as to make themselves look better than what they really are; as if fooling their fellow sojourner, signifies that they also have fooled their Creator.  Unfortunately, this sort of outlook, is debilitating, for all those that bend right and truth to their selfish version of those things, have not actually changed right or truth at all; but have created a construct in which they falsely believe that they have done correctly, but have not, and further, deep down in their conscience, they know that they have not.

The bottom line is that those that do right and are right in their purpose, welcome wholeheartedly the unvarnished truth to be in their midst, for this is exactly what they are about.  On the other hand, those whose purpose has the aura of right but are not right, most certainly fear the exposure that the unvarnished truth will display about them, and to clearly face that truth, is often something that will ultimately humble them in a manner that they previously have never reckoned with.

There are many people that believe or profess to believe that all they want is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, of which, the truth of the matter is, they want that truth exposed only for others; for when that scintillating spotlight actually turns and thereby does shine directly upon them, exposing the shocking truth of who and what they really are, this will have them scurrying for the shadows just as fast as they can run, for in reality, they cannot handle the unvarnished truth about themselves.

When you are in the right and the established law is in the wrong

The majority is not always right, our parents are not always right, our teachers are not always right, our politicians are not always right, our justice is not always right, and established laws written and applied are not always right.  Most people, intuitively understand this, just based upon the fact that there was a time when it was orthodox thought that the earth was flat, or that the earth was the center of the universe, or that blacks in America as ruled by the Supreme Court had "…no rights which the white man was bound to respect," and so on and so forth.

However, just because an established rule or law is wrong, doesn't mean that it is necessarily right or even appropriate to try to enlighten the rule makers or law makers of their error.  In fact, doing so, depending upon how minority a position that one is in, could lead to one's death for heresy, blasphemy, being an enemy of the state, or whatever crimes that those in authority wish to paint an inconvenient dissenter with.  That is why, children, even when they know that they are being dealt with unfairly or unjustly, and know for a certainty that their parents are materially wrong, are often careful not to assert that they are right, because the punishment is in all probability going to be worse, for the fact that they were insubordinate, disobedient, and rebellious, for it takes a big person to swallow their ego and thereby admit that they are wrong, when they have already gone on record that they are right.

The bottom line, is that while truth ultimately triumphs over falsehood, and right supersedes wrong, when those in power or in authority, are the very ones that adjudicate truth, falsehood, right, and wrong, then the end result is that all those that challenge those authorities for being wrong and false, are going to feel some real heat for exposing those in that authority for being wrong.  This then means, somewhat unfortunately, that it isn't good enough to just be right, but rather that it is absolutely critical to win over influential others that are on the wrong side, to the acknowledgment that they should definitely consider amending their position, because, in many cases, numbers and voices working together, are the very things that matter most and are often mandatory to effect change.

To a very large extent, established law is unmovable, so to succinctly point out their errors isn't going to do much of anything, because established law actually doesn't care all that much about whether they are in the right or in the wrong, and even appealing to the better angels in established law's character, won't do much of anything either.  What does matter, though, is getting enough people of influence and of power to move the needle in the direction that will overcome that wrong, and in order to do that, the prevailing sentiment must be won over in order for that to be accomplished.  For, being right, when the established law is wrong, is a frustrating construct, because established law is much more about power, then the seeking for that which is right, and those that are in power and are in the wrong, will willingly cede little or nothing to those that are in the right.

Every person is guilty for failing to do all the good that they could and ought to have done

Most people, when looking upon their own lives, like to believe that overall they are good, and certainly believe that in most instances and interactions that they have done good.  To a large degree, this is self-serving, since most people have a strong tendency to believe the best about themselves as well as their intentions; whereas, they can be rather harsh in regards to other people regarding their actions along with their supposed intent.

None of the above really means much of anything, because a fair judgment has to be made and can really only be made from a party that has no "skin in the game", that thereby impartially renders a fair decision, based on the information so presented and displayed.  In these cases, all those that believe that they are good, or sort of good, should, in fact, get very, very nervous, because actions, intents, words, omissions, commissions, background, and everything else of relevance has a material impact upon a decision so rendered, and most people, well-nigh all people, will probably be found to fall far short of being all that good.

For instance, choices are presented to us all of the time, of which, for many a person, more times than not, a selfish choice is made, which does not make that selfish choice necessarily evil; but rather, there is a strong tendency for selfish choices to be deliberately selected because it is beneficial for the self, with some slight recognition that by having done so, it has come at the expense of another decision which would have done some good for another.  Therein lies the rub, for though it might be said, we haven't directly done wrong to another, so too, we haven't directly done right to them, either; even though, we could have done right for them, but have consciously chosen not to.

Indeed, it is a very hard thing, to actually do all the good that we could do, and certainly a very difficult and challenging task to try to attempt, let alone, to accomplish.  Yet, it must be asked, for the question is reasonable, ought not we to do all the good that we can, if we believe that our purpose in life is to make this world a better place for us having been here?  If the answer is no, then quite obviously, you cannot be that good of a person, because those that deliberately do not do all that they could do, to be good and to do good, are clearly living within a construct in which a pretty good effort is good enough, and typically those people that believe that pretty good is good enough, live fairly comfortable lives in which primarily they don't want to see their peace and quiet disturbed.  That though, is the very problem, for the more that people have, the greater is their obligation to do good for others, because those that have the wherewithal as well as the opportunity to affect positive change but turn their backs upon doing so, should have and ought to have done so much better for others.

Hope and hopelessness

People wonder why there is so much hate, violence, and disorder in society, of which, the most obvious answer is that those that have  lost all hope, are going to express themselves in a multitude of ways, of which some of those ways are going to be by being hateful, violent, and creating disorder.   The thing is that as long as a person has a reasonable hope that better days lay ahead, then they are often willing to put up with an incredible amount of privations; or if they believe that their duty to others, such as loved ones, stipulates that they should sacrifice themselves for their future betterment, then they will do so; but absent of those factors, those without hope are not often going to make for good and productive citizens or people.

Any society that is structured in a manner which is unfair, corrupt, deceptive, and utilizes all the myriad forms of violence and oppression against the mass of its citizens, are in their way, killing hope; and by killing hope, they are creating the environment in which things will not get better, but will, in fact, get worse.  In order for positive change to take effect within any society, that society must believe that changes will be made which will provide them with hope, and thereby this hope replaces their former hopelessness.

One of the more significant reasons why people turn to drink and drugs, is that they are unable to face themselves as what and how they appear to really be, and thereby turn to those substances in order to silence the mocking voices in their mind, or as an escape from their life which is most often characterized as being brutal, disappointing, and hopeless. 

A country and a society that wants to be a true exemplar for the world, has got to be a society, that offers hope to all of its citizens, or as many of those citizens that can be successfully reached, and a lot of that hopefulness, comes from a society that truly does provide a fair deal, equality of opportunity, good and safe housing, good schooling, and the absence of a stifling police state.  The whole point of government in the first place, is not for that government to protect and favor the few and elite at the expense of the many and common, but to see that the playing field of life is leveled to such an extent, that all have a reasonable chance at the starting line of life.

The most hopeful society is a society that is inclusive, caring, transparent, open, and determined to be something that is of substance; whereas societies that are exclusive, non-caring, opaque, closed-minded, and parasitic are not going to be good and hopeful societies for most of its people.  So too, those that are in relationships or situations that are destructive to their hope, are in relationships and situations that are inimical for their good development, of which, the hope crushers of life, should be seen for what they really are; the very epitome of those that destroy the life force of others, so that those others will not be able to ever be hopeful.

There are no drunks in Heaven

There are no drunks in Heaven, of course, most fundamentalists instantly agree with this, because they wrongly believe that there are no drunks in Heaven, because all the drunks are actually in Hell; of which, it must be said, there are also no drunks in hell, or heroin addicts, or cocaine addicts, or sex addicts, or any addicts of any kind, are neither in Heaven or hell.  The thing that needs to be understood is that the reason there are no drunks in Heaven, has naught to do with drunks, but rather it has everything to do with the physical body, for the realm of where our soul dwells, has no physical body, and drunkards, as well as all other addicts, without a body, no longer have that addiction to those substances of their previous earthly plane.

This means that for everyone, upon death, all of their physical infirmities will no longer exist, because they are now outside of this earthly realm; so too, those of fine physical form, that died for whatever reason, no longer have that physical form as their identifying marker, because, in essence, we take upon earth, our physical bodies in order to experience material life on earth, but once those bodies die, then we return to what we really are, which is an existence without physical form, which is therefore no longer subject to material laws, or material time, but exists outside of both time and physical form.  

All those that have had substance abuse problems or temper problems or other issues within their existence on earth, will not, however, magically have those core problems and character flaws corrected upon their death; but at the same time, they are no longer enslaved to those negative passions.  This then presents departed souls a renewed opportunity to reform themselves in such a way, that they can make it their mission to help to build and to aid in the bringing forth the enlightenment for others that too have lost their way; for the very purpose of our existence on the earthly plane in the first place, is to make that plane a better place for our having been part of it, and until such a time that such is accomplished, then no life, is wholly completed.

There are plenty of people that try to escape their earthly existence through substance or other abuses, never seeming to realize, that this is not a constructive way to accomplish anything of value, and that problems that are not faced and resolved in this material life, will still have to be resolved, mitigating circumstances or not.  In the drama of life, the structure is such that challenges are issued, and it is in the overcoming of those challenges that the prize is fairly claimed.  Those that depart from the straight and narrow, through drink or salaciousness or whatever, will find that all that meandering and wrong turns has taken them far away from their true purpose and their proper destination, and will have to, work diligently to find and to scrap their way back to where it is that they should be in the first place, and true clarity of thought is needed in order to do so.

More stocks should pay out bigger dividends

Investors and institutions invest their money into stocks for all sorts of reasons, but certainly the primary reason for most everyone, is to make or to earn money on that investment.  When it comes to stock investment, common stockholders seldom have much of a say whatsoever as to what a given Board of Directors or the Executive office, will or won't do; however, there are fundamental ways to protest one's dissatisfaction with the current state of things, of which, one of them is to pay more attention to the dividend payouts, if any, and the amount of such to stockholders.

The reason that dividends should matter to investors is that as shown by advisorperspectives.com, the total returns for the S&P 500, "… with a 20 year holding period dividends account for some 60% of total returns," which is an astonishingly high percentage and demonstrates the incredible value of stocks that do provide dividends, of which, it is estimated that in total, only about 40% of the stocks publicly traded currently offer dividends.  However, the thirty stocks that represent the Dow Jones index, which are considered to be a fair cross-section and fair representation of the most valuable stocks representing the U.S economy, every one of those stocks, currently provides a dividend.

Every public company has both income as well as expenses, of which, those corporations that are profitable, have a conscious choice to make as to whether to pass on to their shareholders in the form of a dividend, some of those profits, throughout the year.  The advantage for a stockholder receiving a dividend is that the money received represents real income, of which, people will utilize those dividends to help make ends meet, or to increase their assets, or for additional investments, and so forth, of which, all of this happens, without the stockholder having to do a thing, other than to maintain their ownership of that particular stock.

Another thing to consider about dividends for companies issuing them is that, dividends can be suspended or reduced, as need be, per business conditions, so that, companies, recognize that, if necessary, they can reduce their expenses, by reducing their dividend payout.  Of course, many companies make it a point not to reduce their dividends at all, and rather try to actually modestly increase them each year, recognizing that stockholders truly do appreciate consistency and reliability.

Of course, there are plenty of companies that could pay out dividends that do not, or could pay out bigger dividends but do not, of which, the most common excuse for not doing so, is that they need to take the money earned and instead such must be prudently re-invested in the company; but that is often belied by the staggering amounts of liquid money that companies such as Apple has, with an estimated $237 billion of cash on hand, of which, they could easily reward their stockholders with bigger dividends, but have not done so.

For those that invest in common stocks, there are only two ways that money will be made, and that is through stock appreciation and the other is through dividends received.  The thing about stock appreciation is the money "made" is the proverbial money made on paper, whereas dividends are real money received by the stockholder and as that bird in hand, should not be discounted in its importance or its value, and therefore should be the focus of any good investor.

Economies expand faster because of credit issuance to worthy recipients

Most countries are very concern about their economic growth rates, in which, impressive positive and improving growth rates equates to employment, wealth, and stability; whereas, lack of growth, or uneven growth, leads to unemployment, poverty, and instability.  This thus means that countries spend an inordinate amount of time trying to manage their economy, as well as their interest rates, along with virtually every facet that a government believes that it needs to have an impact and an influence upon, all under the assumption that these governmental decisions will lead to higher and more consistent growth rates, and to better prosperity.

Yet, despite all of this knowledge and all of the analytics, economies still suffer through booms and busts, of which, some of these cycles, are especially enervating, leading to a significant swath of the population thereby losing their jobs, their homes, and their joy, when those seemingly inevitable recessions and depressions hit.  While there are all sorts of theories and studies in regards to how to best grow an economy, as well as to help smooth out the economic ups and downs within economies, none of this has actually been proven to work in the real world for even a generation, let alone, for generations.

Perhaps, the most significant problem that governments have is the fact that they are unable to recognize that the biggest contributor to the downfall of economies is actually mal-investment; in which monies and energies are put into industries, companies, and people that are not worthy recipients of that money.  Further, to the point, the cost of money being borrowed, most definitely plays a material role as in whether a particular company will or won't be successful, for if that company is fundamentally sound in its business, but its debt load is too heavy, than that company will often fail or become unstable, because it does not have the ready capacity to pay back what it owes.

In point of fact the best way for economies to grow on a consistent basis is to provide credit issuance at a fair rate to those that are worthy recipients of that credit, whether these entities are governmental, non-profitable companies, individuals, or for-profit corporations.  This signifies that before credit is issued, whether private or public, that due diligence is necessary in order to allocate these funds into areas of most worth, as opposed to monies being loaned to those that are simply well connected,   or projects that are favored in order to unfairly benefit specific entities, at the expense of the general public.

After all, there are millions upon millions of ideas and projects that can be funded, for mankind's imagination and reach is well-nigh unlimited, but not all of these ideas and projects are actually a good idea to fund; and the misallocation of that investment, is a double loss, because that money is placed into the hands and areas that should not have it, as opposed to the hands and areas that should have it.  The decisions that governments and companies make most definitely matters and the best decisions for economies are those decisions that place the faith and credit of those issuing such into the areas that are beneficial for the public at large.

Afghanistan: War without end

The highest law in this land is the Constitution, of which, the President of the United States, has the explicit duty to protect and to defend that Constitution, but apparently those words are just words, because, the only body in America, that can authorize and thereby declare war, is actually Congress; but yet, America has been in numerous non-congressional authorized wars and is today, still at war.  America would not be at war with Afghanistan if it was not for the Imperial Presidency that marches in lockstep with the military-industrial complex, and furthermore, it does not apparently matter as to the party of the President in power, for President Bush declared war on Afghanistan in 2001, of which, he served two terms, whereupon President Obama came into power, and also served two terms, and fought the very same war, and now President Trump is in power, and the war with Afghanistan has still not ended.

In point of fact, at a minimum, 50% of Americans, could not point out where Afghanistan is on a map, mainly because Afghanistan is more than 7,000 miles away from America, and furthermore those same 50% plus more, could not succinctly give the reason as to why we are at war with Afghanistan, unless statements such as "to get the bad guys" are considered to be an informed answer.  The fact of the matter is that Afghanistan is absolutely no threat to America, and wasn't a threat to America, back in 2001, when war with Afghanistan was first declared.  Afghanistan, itself, has a population that is less than the population of California, as well as being a little bit smaller in area than the State of Texas, yet, in seventeen long years, America, alone, or with its coalition partners, has not defeated Afghanistan.

All of the above, serves to prove the point, that the reason that this endless war remains endless, is that it's good for the military-industrial complex, and also because pretty much all that occurs within the borders of Afghanistan is effectively ignored by the compliant mainstream media, which thereby allows that military-industrial complex to pretty much do whatever that they so desire, without any consequences or negative feedback.  So too, wars are always a good excuse to keep the population somewhat unnerved, and in this case, the sanctioned orthodox position is that amorphous terrorism can strike America at any time, at anywhere, so that the population must recognize that measures must be taken to defeat the enemy far away from our shores for our sound protection.

The true bottom line, though, is Afghanistan never was a threat to America and America therefore really does not need to bother with Afghanistan, especially in consideration that if Afghanistan really wanted to strike back, it would in all probability, try to strike back against western targets in Europe or possibly to attack Russia, which are much easier objectives to try to strike at, rather than America, because this landlocked country, would be hard pressed to effectively reach America by any means of sustainability or impact.

The fact that Americans are fighting and dying and getting wounded in Afghanistan, is an absolute disgrace, because those lives as well as the effected lives of all Afghanistan citizens are essentially being wasted so that the military-industrial complex can make their blood money.