Hygiene, isolation, testing and pandemics

One might think that the sole superpower in the world, as well as it also being the richest nation in the world, would obviously be the most prepared for a given pandemic, but clearly this is not the case, whatsoever.  For instance, the United States actually consists of fifty different States, of which, each of these States when it comes to a pandemic seems to have a mind of its own.  The thing about pandemics is that the borders of sovereign nations does not matter, and certain the borders of States, matters not.  This would presuppose that the only robust way to deal with a potential pandemic is to have in place what the national response would be to such, and to thereby abide by it.

The time to get the right sort of response to a potential pandemic is at the very inception of it.  In consideration, that never has the world been so small, because of the huge amount of trade and international travel so done, it must be taken into consideration, that therefore no nation is an island unto itself; which thus signifies, that those countries that are most interested in dealing successfully with a pandemic must have in place, prudent steps to preclude or mitigate such, to the best extent so possible, without having any unnecessary or misguided interruptions to the daily lives and business of its citizens.

While within a given pandemic there are always going to be, at least, initially, some unknowns, and of which each pandemic is different in its own way; that does not mean that there aren’t sensible steps that aren’t applicable to each pandemic.  For instance, the United States is gifted with good, fresh water, which is necessary in order to properly help to soap up one’s hands and thereby to rid oneself of contaminants, of which, the proper teaching and thereby the following of good hand washing does reduce considerably the spread of germs.  So too, the wearing of masks as well as gloves for hands most definitely has its necessary place, of which, there are those specific masks and gloves which perform a stellar service in the protecting of hands and face from germs, airborne droplets, as well as inadvertent splashes, sprays, and splatter.  Additionally, a robust pandemic testing mechanism, that is both efficient as well as being inexpensive needs to be put into place as soon as possible, when a pandemic begins, for without such testing, it becomes problematic in being able to quickly separate the sheep from the goats, so to speak.  Also, and very importantly, the people that need to be specifically isolated during a pandemic, are always going to first be the infected, followed by those that are its weakest and its most vulnerable, as compared to isolating the entire general population.

As they say, a stitch in time saves nine, so then, this sort of sensible mindset is of the upmost relevance for the beginning of a given pandemic; for vigorous steps taken at the beginning of such, are sure to mitigate the effects of that pandemic; whereas, misguided, confusing, and contradictory steps are sure to make matters worse and often with tragic results, that need not be the result, thereof.  Those then, that will not prudently prepare for that which will surely happen will then have sown the wind, and thereby they will surely reap that subsequent terrible whirlwind.

Towards a more robust inheritance tax

In consideration, that the United States desires to represent itself as a meritocracy, and egalitarian in principle, then the least that the United States should do, is to live up to that creed, or thereby in full disclosure to forfeit that claim, once and for all.  There was a time from basically the inception of the “New Deal” to up to around 1980, when the United States was inexorably becoming a more equal society, in which the wealth of the superrich, though great, was not though insanely outrageous, and of which, the middle class back then was vibrant, strong, as well as something that was reasonably attainable for a great swath of Americans.  That, though, was back then, and certainly this is not the case today, in which the ultrarich have so much wealth and power, that it should be a source of embarrassment for any country so claiming that they are actually egalitarian and fair.

There are all sorts of taxes that could be imposed, and should be imposed in order to help level out the wealth field, and of which, one of the most reasonable taxes to be imposed upon anyone of substance that is an American citizen, is the estate tax.  The reason that this tax is an especially good avenue to implement for that government, of, for, and by the people, is that an estate tax only comes into play, upon the death of a given person and thereby affects their estate, only then; so that, during the time when they were alive, they were thereby fully able to enjoy the fruits of having lots of money; but after their death, this so became the opportunity for the government to reset what so needed to be reset, so that the people that are of the living, are thereby able to have fairly redistributed into their hands, a revigorated hope and opportunity.

Yet, what we so find, is that the estate tax, from the years 1942-1976, had an exemption of just $60,000, while also being subject to a maximum estate tax rate of 77%.  Whereas, in 2022, the exemption for such a tax so being imposed has been raised to the staggering sum of $12.07 million, and of which the highest maximum tax rate has been reduced to 40%.  Not too surprisingly, the amount of monies that could be collected, if the tax exemption rate of 1942-1976 was still in effect, but inflation adjusted, so as to become the amount of around $300,000, in conjunction with the maximum estate tax rate still being set at 77%, would demonstrate that the amount of monies so being collected from that estate tax would be substantially and meaningfully more.

The question that ought to be asked is whether this nation believes that the ultrawealthy should be permitted to pass on that wealth, with a minimal amount of taxation, from one generation to the next; thereby making America to represent what has previously been the European hallmark, of dynastic wealth and power. If so, nothing further needs to be done, for that is the way that it currently is; which signifies that in absence of a more robust inheritance tax, that those that have fallen behind, will fall ever further behind, and realistically that they have no hope or expectation that their lot will change or improve, anytime soon, in this the land of supposed opportunity.

False freedom and true freedom

The principal points of our Declaration of Independence as well as our subsequent Constitution, is to make known and to solidify that each person has the unalienable right to liberty and therefore self-determination, and that the intent of good governance, so of, is to assure that each one of those people, has that liberty.  Yet, though America has thrown off its chains of chattel slavery, there are still literally millions upon millions of Americans that in reality, aren’t really free at all.

It is hard to be free, when a given person does not make a living wage; it is hard to be free when a given person has no security in their employment; and it is hard to be free, when a given person has to depend to a large extent upon the largess of charity or governmental support programs, in order to make their way in the world.  Those that believe that simply, because a given person is not incarcerated, that they thereby are free, don’t seem to comprehend that the actual accouterments of true freedom, consist of a heck of a lot more, than not being locked up.

A truly free person, is an independent person, of which that independence exists because that person’s self-worth and value permits that person to make a good living and through that compensation that they thereby get by their labor, they are able to purchase the necessary things so needed to have a good and valued life.   There is a world of difference, between an independent person, and a dependent person, in which, for instance, each of us when we are so born, are absolutely dependent upon our parents for our nourishment, upkeep, and development; whereas, those that are independent, are those that are in charge and in control of those very same things.  So then, no matter how good, when it is good, that dependence might so be, those that are dependent have nothing more than a false freedom; whereas, those that are independent, always have that true freedom, for they of their own volition can choose what they will or will not do, while also understanding that choices so made, have consequences.

The best governance that any nation can provide for its citizenry, is the type of governance that creates the foundation so needed, to create vibrant and free-thinking minds that are interested in pursuing the internal calling that they feel inside; of which, this will subsequently bring to those people the most potential satisfaction and happiness, as well as also, in combination with others of like mind, leading to the greatest advancement of civilizations, for when great potential is actualized, society improves and gets better.

This thus signifies, that the greatest gift that any government can provide for its people, is in the aiding and abetting of the structure and the infrastructure that will help provide to all those who wish to avail themselves of such, the opportunity to become that which they always wanted to be.  That is to say, the best government, is that which doesn’t exploit, control or manipulate its citizenry for its own corrupt benefit; but rather it is one that encourages the liberty of the mind, the thinking outside the box, and the resolve that all are equally entitled to a life lived well.

Economic sanctions and blowback

In a truly moral world, economic sanctions would never be necessary to be directly imposed upon other countries, because if people, countries and institutions were upset, appalled, or distressed by the undesired actions so taken by another nation, then they would simply boycott the products so being offered by that nation, or terminate contracts and suspend trade with them, or reduce their expenditures to them, forthwith, or all of the above.  That is to say, if one nation is doing something that is morally suspect, such as an unjustified war against another nation, or terrorism, or genocide, or anything of this sort, and other nations, see this as being an affront upon humanity, no sanctions would actually need to be officially imposed, but rather through the subsequent business changes so taken by those other nations, the effect so of, would be clear and obvious.

The main problem with economic sanctions being imposed upon another nation, is that such is typically used as a very blunt instrument, along with it being also used as a deliberate tool to “punish” that nation, without often there having been a fair hearing, through a neutral party, to hear both sides of the dispute in question.  In other words, official economic sanctions are treated as a “shortcut” to let that other nation know, that they are wrong, that they are currently performing bad actions, and therefore that they are deserving of punishment.

To believe that somehow, that one superpower nation, should effectively be judge, jury, and executioner, throughout the world, is a very troubling mindset.  In reality, those that cannot properly make their case for sanctions against a particular nation, in a true court of law, in which each side, has their say; but desire instead to circumvent such by taking the law into their own hands, are stirring up a whole lot of trouble, without having taken into full consideration, that those that do not bother to try to comprehend how their sanctions will be perceived by the other side, as well as by neutral parties, have failed to acknowledge that every action is going to have a subsequent reaction.

After all, when one nation is perceived as being “holier than thou,” most other nations are going to take that point into full consideration, of which, they will themselves have contingencies in place, so that should they be painted subsequently as a pariah state, that they will still be operational and functional from a governmental level, without too much difficulty; especially in acknowledgement that there typically are other sovereign nations around, who are prone to seeing economic sanctions so being imposed upon another nation, as something worthwhile to be worked around.  Further to the point, the sanctioned nation, will more than likely, have a response that will hurt the nation so having sanctioned them, if not in the here and now, then at some point in the future, for those nations that are wise and circumspect, are those nations that will hit back, when they are in the best position to do so.

It is, rather easy to be a bully, when there is no one that has the power to effectively fight back; but nations rise and fall, and those that have suffered from unjustified aggression, exploitation, sanctions, interference, unfairness, and deception, are eventually, sooner or later, going to have their say.

The best public schools should be located in the poorest and most disadvantaged neighborhoods

The American public educational system is not only in a lot of respects, an embarrassment, but it also reflects that despite the massive amount of funds so allocated to educating its own citizenry, that the results thereof, are woefully poor.  The United States does not lead in any of the traditional categories that measure student knowledge such as reading comprehension, mathematical skill, or science.  Rather, despite the fact that the United States is the richest nation that the world has ever known, and also prides itself as being the “last best hope of earth;” it sits disgustingly in the middle of the pack when compared to a comprehensive list of other nations, and on its test scores it is distinctly behind countries such as Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom.

Obviously, whatever America is currently doing in regards to its public educational policies it is not working out, and therefore to keep doing what it has been doing, is not going to change the results, thereof.  Rather, it is time for America to recognize that fundamental changes to its educational facilities, teaching, and its mindset must be made and the sooner that this is looked at, implemented, and thereby accomplished, the sooner those test scores will improve.

The very first problem to address is that public schools in the United States are not equal, have never been equal, and per their current trajectory, will never be equal.  The best way to improve upon this, is to concentrate first and foremost upon the poorest and most disadvantaged neighborhoods, in a manner in which the public schools situated in those areas, would thereby be upgraded to become an oasis, for those that are the study body of those areas.  In other words, poor and neglected neighborhoods, typically lack the infrastructure that is part and parcel of what makes for a good community, of which, to expect that to change anytime soon, is pretty much, hopeless.  Instead, the government should make a concentrated effort to see that the best public schools in the sense of teacher/student ratio, the quality of the teachers, the quality of the infrastructure within that school, and the accouterments so necessary to aid and abet students in their studying, are prioritized and thereby provided specifically to those neighborhoods.

Those that have nothing, have literally nothing to hold on to, and aren’t in a good place to make progress, but rather are in the type of place in which their chances of ever generating the escape velocity to become something of import, are minimal.  This thus signifies that the most progress in regards to helping students that are not living up to their good potential is always going to come forth from those that are the furthest behind, which are primarily those students in neighborhoods which currently have inadequate public schooling facilities. 

No parent of any substance desires that their children go to a bad school, but many impoverished parents do not have any real choice as to the school, that their children will go to, for they have not the resources to move to an area that has better public schools.  Therefore, what this government needs to do, is to bring the good schools to the most neglected areas of this nation; and therefore, those students will surely reap the benefits of being in an environment which encourages them, motivates them, and invigorates them, so as to be that which they were always capable of being, but have been unfairly denied in obtaining.

That easy easy money

America likes to pride itself of the virtues of capitalism, believing that such is the best economic system, ever.  It would be one thing, if capitalism, really did represent competition at its finest, and if capitalism, in its effect, really made for the best economic conditions for people, as a whole; but rather as practiced at the present time in America, this is wholly untrue.

The main problem with what is called capitalism in today’s world, is that as currently practiced, such is no more than a bastardization of what capitalism should really represent.  There are all sorts of significant flaws with capitalism as exercised in America, of which, the first is that there is a significant lack of truly meaningful competition in virtually all sectors of the economy of America, such as, for instance, the defense industry, health insurance, airlines, food services, fuel, and home improvement stores, to mention just a few.  To a very large extent, these industries, have only a few big players, of which each have their spheres of influence, as well as a very good understanding one to another, of what, is expected from one another.  In other words, while on the surface, it might appear that they compete against one another, it would be more honest to say, that they are in de facto collusion or in coordination with one another, instead.

Secondly, despite the fact that the hi-technology world is relatively young, it has divided itself into segments in which there are truly dominant players and effectively nobody else to compete against them; of which, in those cases, in which some sort of upstart competition might take a bite of their dominant share, these young, small, and vulnerable competitors are typically permitted by the government to be bought out by the respective dominant player, at will.  So then, what we so find is that when it comes to search engines, social media, and the operating system of our personal computers, each has one main player, which thereby permits such to effectively boss the market to their exclusive benefit.

Thirdly, American companies have all sorts of patents, of which, the good purpose of a given patent, should be, to provide for those that put forth a major effort in regards to time, expenditures, as well as research and development, to reap over a reasonable period of time, the corresponding benefits of that effort.  Instead, what we so often find, is that patents for a lot of things, is really nothing much more than a selfish play to benefit the very few, at the expense of the many, without taking into fair consideration all the public knowledge, knowhow, and infrastructure so utilized to patent this “newfound” knowledge. 

Finally, there is our banking and credit system, which seems to be fundamentally based upon the loaning out of money to people and institutions at an appreciably higher rate than what that money so costs the lender.  What makes this business especially pernicious is that when times are good these banking institutions make money hand over fist; and when those same banking institutions make major errors they then get bailed out by the government, which really means, being bailed out by the taxpayers, which represents the same people that these banks have been exploiting for their own private profit.

As it stands, capitalism could indeed be saved, and could indeed be of real service to the people, but in actuality, because this government is wont not to break up those institutions that have too much power and too much money, what is occurring, is that never has it been easier, for those that dominant their particular market, to make that easy, easy money.

Freedom of choice for women

While, in modern times, it has to be noted that in western nations, as well as in other progressive countries, that women have pretty much gained the same rights as men; yet, the pathway for women to achieve such, has had an awful lot of obstacles to overcome, and still, as of this day, women still don’t really have all of the rights of what men take for granted as their birthright.  One of those rights, that women, rightfully desire to have control of is not just their reproductive rights, but importantly along with that, to have control as to what to so do or not to do, when they so conceive,

Those that truly believe that life begins at conception, are certainly entitled to that belief, and to degree that they so desire to live that belief in their familial relationship they then have the full right to do so.  However, those that don’t believe that life begins at conception, should not be held in the thrall, of all those righteous busybodies, certain religious institutions, as well as other entities, including some governmental agencies and laws, that believe that these women should and must therefore be held to personal account for such; thereby signifying that these women are precluded from having a fair choice that should be theirs solely to make – superseded thereby by all those that believe that because life begins at conception, means therefore that the fetus within that women’s body, has rights, that all women must thereby respect.

When it comes to a woman’s body, it is ultimately the government that has to play fair with those that are women.  After all, no man can become impregnated, so what the law does or does not say in regards to abortion rights and wrongs, does not ever personally affect that man’s body; whereas, it most certainly does affect so, for a woman.  This would presuppose that any discussion about conception, a fetus, and a women’s right to choose, should in due respect to the fact that only women can conceive, signifies that this should be something that remains in the sole domain of women, and none else.  That is to say, judges have to properly recuse themselves in all sorts of instances, and of which, because males are not capable of getting pregnant, it therefore follows that a man, no matter how intelligent or enlightened, is not in a good place to appropriately judge the merits or demerits of conception rights for a woman.

Therefore, what the law should or should not be in regards to conception and one’s fetus, is something that should be legislated by, and decided by, those that are exclusively women.  That decision, no matter what was so decided, would reflect a determination made by those that have a real vested interest in such a decision, and more than likely, would be well reasoned, sensible, and fair.  For far too long, governments were run exclusively by men; so too, the justice so being rendered was also exclusively done so by men, of which, the end result of men dominated societies has been the history of this world, which consists of an awful lot of violence, injustice, deceit, and unfairness.  Here then, lies a chance to right a very serious wrong.

The rise of corporate dynasties

The first thing to acknowledge, is that corporations, are artificial creations of the state and thereby they should always be beholden ultimately to that which created its existence, in the first place.  However, even the most cursory investigation, demonstrates that corporations and thereby corporate power has never been stronger than it so is, today, and of which that corporate power reaches into every meaningful sphere of governance within America.  In fact, the argument could be made, that rather than seeing this country as being a nation of, for, and by the people; it is more times than not, the governance of, for, and by corporate power.

There are two very valuable things that corporations have, that human beings either lack, or will ultimately lose personal control of.  The first is that unlike human life, corporations as adjudicated at the present time, are perpetual in their existence.  That is to say, while there is a know creation date, for a given corporation, there is no set time or conditions thereof, in which a corporation will ever cease to exist.  In other words, the most successful corporations, do not follow in kind with the seven stages of mankind, as so written by the brilliant bard; but rather, the best corporations as they age, are able to not only adjust to the times, but rather than getting feeble, they often instead, get even stronger.  Additionally, when a given wealthy person dies, what they so had as material assets, are going to be subject to all sorts of applicable taxes, including estate taxes; whereas, because a corporation never dies, this thus signifies that this artificial creation of the state, is never going to be subject to estate taxes, and therefore the most successful and powerful of those corporations, will continue to grow their assets, and their footprint, year after year, only being subject to the vagaries of their particular business and the overall economy. 

All of this basically means that while we can rightly decry family dynasties, of which, that money, power, and assets are passed on from one generation to the next -- that somewhere along the line we seemed not to have recognized that as much wealth as a given family dynasty so has; it absolutely pales in comparison to companies such as Apple, which has a market capitalization worth of over $2 trillion, as well as having over $200 billion in ready cash and investments.  This so indicates for these superrich corporate behemoths that what they so want they are going to get, for the only entity that can conceivably hold a candle next to them, is their own government, which seems rather to be their enabler, more than anything.

Those that believe in good governance, democracy, representation, and the like, should be rightly concerned about the ever-growing amount of corporate power and influence.  Those then, that believe that what is good for a given dynastic corporation must be good for the country, are either delusional or fooling themselves, for many of those same corporations are only interested in one thing, above all, which is the making and the extracting of more and more money from those that they see as functionally their subjects and nothing much more.

Good governance and the rise of the black middle class

One of the things that the United States is very good at is putting together well-meaning laws as well as having well-meaning sentiments such as, for instance, that we are all created equally.  Of course, great sentiments as well as laws of good purpose aren’t all that valuable when these things are circumvented, ignored, misinterpreted, or unenforced. 

When it comes to fair play, we can usually count on private enterprise consistently only doing those things that are perceived as being beneficial to their company bottom line, and thereby the stonewalling of all else that might interfere in profit making, above all.  In other words, despite laws so made in regards to discrimination, fairness, and the like, private enterprise has a strong tendency to pretty much ignore such, unless they are under the microscope of some governmental agency or have previously had sanctions placed upon it.  Of course, this doesn’t mean that all private enterprise behaves this way, but in reality, those of private enterprise, consciously or subconsciously, consistently favors those that come from their same general milieu, as compared to all those that do not represent such.

As for our government, whether that be Federal, State, or local, we do so find, that in many cases, though, not all, that there is a great deal more of fair play being in effect.  The primary reason why government often seems to be a better fit for those that are not of the favored race, has a lot to do with the fact that those that are its governmental leaders, have a solemn duty to actually try to follow not only what the law so says, but the very intent of that law; as well as also believing that by leading by example, and thereby providing fair opportunity, where previously there was a lack of such, is beneficial for the whole of the nation.  So too, governments are not typically driven by any sort of profit motive, but rather are driven by getting necessary things done, on behalf of the people.

What we so find then, that it is governmental jobs and therefore governmental employment, above all, that has been the biggest initiator of helping to create a vibrant and successful black middle class.  While it is true, that typically working for the government will not get any particular person rich, it does on the other hand, provide a decent salary, job security, a clear pathway for advancement, good healthcare, and more often than not, a strong and vibrant pension plan.  Each of those attributes of public service, are extremely beneficial for those so being employed in those public sector jobs, because they can thereby count on having not only job security, but also a decent wage, healthcare, and a pension, to rely upon.

Those then, that threaten the need or the justification for governmental jobs and the corresponding incumbent expenditures that have done so much in helping to secure middle class status for blacks, as well as for lots of other folks, should recognize that until such a time as private enterprise does its necessary part to do the same, that the best enabler of continued black middle-class success, is going to remain that government, of, for, and by the people.

Discretionary power and justice

The American jurisprudence system, should be a system, in which all are treated equally under the law, and of which therefore, wealth, power, position, or lack thereof, should be non-factors in such justice so rendered.  In fact, of course, in America, there is the justice system as applied to the weakest and least powerful amongst us, and there is the justice system as applied against those of power, position and wealth; of which, the difference between these two justice systems, is immense, unfair, and unjust.

Then there are the laws so written, of which, there isn’t a single person, institution, or entity, that actually can comprehend or ever effect each of these laws, without error, without contradiction, or with absolute consistency.  In fact, the more laws so written, the more confusion that there so occurs, as well as the more opportunity for those that are clever, or have money, or connections, to circumvent the good intention and purpose of well-intentioned laws.

All of the above serves to indicate that as much as we might desire for our justice system, to exercise no discretionary or arbitrary power, whatsoever, that because the law and the interpretation of that law, is not always so cut and dry, then that just isn’t going to ever happen.  Additionally, judges and the justice system actually want to have their individual impact upon what is so being adjudicated, as opposed to the mere opening up of a very thick book, finding the relevant law that so applies, and then simply applying it, without any further ado.

This thus indicates that judges within the justice system, not only need to have some degree of discretionary power, but such discretionary power has its good purpose in existing.  After all, as much as some people want to believe that a certain crime, should always have a specific sentence, the fact of the matter is, that each situation, no matter how similar it may well be to something previously adjudicated upon, that it always has its own peculiarities, which should be taken into consideration, in ordered to render fair justice. 

While there are all sorts of people, including lawyers, that decry the inconsistencies so demonstrated between one sentence to another in regards to what appears to be the same basic crime, and of which, the thinking is that such discretionary treatment in sentencing should therefore be eradicated or reduced considerably, they don’t seem to properly comprehend that to take such discretion away from the judge, which would thereby simplify such justice, in order to make such justice seemingly consistent, wouldn’t in summary, make necessarily for fair justice.  That is to say, the same sentence for everyone in regards to similar crimes, without taking into due consideration, the full circumstances of that crime, and the people involved in it and impacted by it, isn’t just.

It would be well to remember that in every single step of those so accused of a given crime, there is always discretion so being rendered, to wit, by the police officer who has made the initial arrest, to the bail so set, to the charges so determined by the prosecutor, to the plea bargain so being offered, and/or the trial so set, and then the sentence so being rendered.  In each of these steps, discretion has been used time and time again; so then, to ignore all that, and simply then, to make it so that the judge must strictly follow the sentencing guidelines as dictated for that crime, is an injustice.

Russia is not now a communist state and never has been

There are plenty of people that believe and further that propagandize that Russia is a communist nation; but in fact, Russia, under any of its former names, has never been communist in principle.  The thing is, that communism is supposed to be a classless society in which all property is own in common, and each member, so of, gets what they so get, according to their respective needs.  There isn’t anything within Russia, that has ever resembled a classless society and clearly the general public, in reality, owns only a small portion of the wealth of Russia, and for the most part, that general public has effectively little or no say in regards to any meaningful public policy and therefore the governance of that nation.  In short, Russia is pretty much a totalitarian state, of which, the privileged few reap all the benefits, and of which, the policing arm of the state keeps the general population of that nation, in its thrall.

For those that love Karl Marx, and his philosophy, it must be stated, that Marx would not recognize Russia as being communistic at any point in its history, and by virtue of the fact that Russia had decades to effect communism, but never accomplished such, or even ever put into place any of the necessary steps to do so, reflects that Russia was not ever communistic. 

The greatest disappointment that Russia so represents in today’s world, is that, despite the fact that Russia arguably has the greatest amount of wealth so contained within its natural resources in the world, and of the fact that historically it has had great artists, great literature, great scientists, and great inventions; that what we so find is that despite all of that historical greatness as well as all of its vast natural resources, that Russia in total, has to be looked upon as having accomplished surprisingly little of merit over the last 100 years.  For instance, Canada, represents, in a lot of respects, a nation that has similar demographics to Russia in the sense of its large land mass, as well as also having an abundance of very valuable natural resources; yet Canada’s per capita Purchasing Power Parity GDP is nearly four times as great as that of Russia.  The fact that Russia fails so poorly against Canada, reflects a nation that is mismanaged, along with that nation seemingly being incapable of providing the necessary infrastructure and wherewithal to improve the opportunity as well as the lot for the whole of its people.

In reality, what we so find in Russia, is that despite their revolution successfully deposing and thereby replacing the Tsars that once ruled the roost, that the upshot is that in its structure and in its governance, that Russia, in modern times, is essentially by its actions and in its authority basically more in accordance and in harmony with what it was back when it was under the domain of those same Tsars.  In other words, by any objective reasoning, Russia today has far more in common with the Tsars, then it has with what communism is supposed to actually represent; signifying indeed, that to label Russia as communistic, now or in the past, is both misguided and wrong.

The gospel is meant to liberate the poor and the oppressed

There are all sorts of political parties and slogans, that preach to us about uplifting the poor and vulnerable, some sincere, and some not. There are also all sorts of organizations that have been established to lend a helping hand to the poor and vulnerable, some that do a commendable job, and some that do not.  Additionally, there is an awful lot of talk, often from good people at heart, about helping those that are the least amongst us, of which the results thereof, have sometimes been good, and sometimes not.

The thing is that the gospel as propagated by the Christ, is clearly meant to uplift those that have been marginalized by society, and the gospel, properly understood, is always the message that God cares about each and every one of us, no matter what; and because we are surrounded by so many that have been hurt, dismissed, disadvantaged, and cheated, it is vital that these unfortunate people, are provided with the necessary means to improve their lot.

The message of the Christ, is not that the traditional status quo will be turned upside down, so that, the rich and powerful will be vanquished, and thereby the poor will triumph, but rather it has all to do with the fact, that those that are enthralled to this material world, are often those that are the most lost; whereas, those that are powerless and weak, often see through the lies and deceptions of this world, for they know the way that this world is cannot be right, because there is so little justice or love within it. 

We see that those that are weak and defenseless are at the mercy of those that control the show, of which, it would seem that for these poor people, that there isn’t ever going to be an opportunity for these oppressed persons to ever have their day.  However, truth be told, humankind’s perception of what they so see, is blinded by their typical ignorance of their not comprehending what life is all about; for this world is a perpetual proving ground, and those that are the forsaken, the forgotten, the disenfranchised, and the abused, are in their essence made up of the exact same substance as all those that have all the advantages; therefore, signifying that those that are so blind so as to not comprehend that we are all created equally and therefore equally valued by God, are clearly on the wrong path.

It would seem that most everyone that takes on the mantle of Christianity, desires to do so, in a manner in which such conforms to their belief of what Christ so represents.  The thing is though, that Christ in everything that He so did and said, was the defender always of those that were perceived by the establishment as being the misbegotten of life.  Christ came not so much to save the unsaved, though, He did such; but mainly Christ incarnated to defend with dignity those that were left defenseless, powerless, and abandoned by human society.  So then, it is important to know Christ’s message for what it really is, which is that God is ever present to help uplift those that have no champion, and those that preach that not, are the actual ones that are lost.  

The higher retail prices in low-income neighborhoods

There are myriad problems with living in a low-income neighborhood, of which, one of the more salient of those problems is the fact that the choices to buy food and other household goods within that local neighborhood are often rather limited, and of which, despite the fact that the rent has to be a lot cheaper for those businesses in that neighborhood, the pricing and quality of goods so sold, is typically meaningfully higher than it would be in a comparable neighborhood of a higher socio-economic level. 

The first thing to understand from an economic level is that higher prices for goods so being sold in a particular local distressed area, does not necessarily equate to more profit and better gross margins for that company.  For instance, mom and pop stores, don’t have the pricing power that a Walmart or similar has, so that the cost of those goods being bought and transported to them is often going to be appreciably higher, and that higher cost, often logically translates into a higher selling price.  Further to the point, in a neighborhood marketplace in which frequently there is plenty of unused business space in low-income areas, the fact that other companies aren’t coming in to conduct business there, presupposes that even with, in theory, the higher sale prices being asked for goods, this doesn’t necessarily equate to higher profits, or else, those businesses would have already located there.

So then, while on the surface, it might seem pretty common place that there is a perception of price gouging being suffered by the residents of low-income neighborhoods, this typically really comes down to them ignoring the fact that the cost of doing business in those low-income neighborhoods, including security, “shrinkage,” safety, insurance, and so on and so forth, is appreciably higher, most of the time.  This would seem to more than imply, that residents of low-income neighborhoods would typically be far better served by having an anchor store, such as a Walmart, which would bring in not just more competitive prices and a more comprehensive amount of goods, but also would serve to bring in more retail stores, because of the traffic that having a Walmart or similar, generates.

Additionally, from a business perspective, perceptions matter, and when businesses don’t feel all that welcomed, or don’t feel all that comfortable in where they are doing business or proposing to do business, then the best and the brightest of them are going to hesitate to locate there, and instead it’s often going to be a lower echelon of business enterprises that will take a gamble, so to speak, in a low-income neighborhood.  All of this is pretty much saying that those that are residents of lower-income neighborhoods need by their own volition, to basically put forth a better effort to attract businesses to their neighborhood, which typically means doing their part to beautify and to improve their neighborhood, as well as seeking legislative help, tax set asides, obtaining money earmarked for local development and improvement, and so on and so forth.

It is a shame when good people that are seemingly stuck in a decaying and forsaken low-income neighborhood can’t seem to catch a break, not even with a retail store that serves them well; but in a capitalistic society, it’s almost always about the money, and the demographics of doing business in low-income neighborhoods makes for a rather sad tale, and those that have little or nothing, just end up paying what they have to pay, even when it costs them more.

Fair parole boards are a necessary part of justice

Most people that are convicted of a crime, are at some point during their incarceration, eligible for parole.  No doubt, those that are incarcerated, care deeply about how they fare at a parole hearing, as this involves directly their ability to secure some degree of freedom, even if such comes with the confining structure of parole conditions.  One would think then, as part of any individual being incarcerated that there would be at some point, after their conviction, so fully disclosed to them, more than once, what behavior does or what behavior does not help them in regards to having a better opportunity of being successfully paroled; for when an individual has an avenue to future freedom, it is invaluable for them to know the rules of that road; and of which, this is also beneficial to society, in the sense of having more of those previously incarcerated that are thereby better prepared to re-enter society as a good member of it.

Again, parole hearings are very important for not just the person so up for parole, but also for society, because when a given individual is incarcerated, the object of the exercise as prisons were original envisioned, is to try to rehabilitate the prisoner; rather than seeing a prisoner as someone that deserves some sort of perpetual and thorough punishment. This means, that prisoners should not only be provided with the opportunity to learn a given trade, or to attend some sort of educational classes, but that they also need the opportunity to reset their thoughts and thereby their actions so as to be in better conformance to what a responsible citizen so represents.

Most of those that make up the prison population are not those that come from a privileged place, for those types of individuals are always the exception, and never the rule.  Rather, it is those that have been forsaken, abused, dismissed, and have typically suffered through having lived in an enclave of poverty which has offered them little or no positive role models, as well as a poor educational system that have pre-conditioned a significant number of those people to fail, in addition to having left them with characteristically not having the necessary accouterments that would enable them to achieve orthodox success.

The bottom line is that in America in regards to the percentage and the amount of its own citizens that are incarcerated, it leads the pack by a lengthy margin vis-à-vis other western nations in this dubious category, and of which, it is better late, then never, to help correct that which needs correcting.  The one thing that prison provides for those that are in it, is plenty of time, as well as an organized structure -- that would seem to represent then an appropriate time to help those that have taken a wrong turn, to right themselves.

When the parole boards that provide to those so incarcerated a fair process of what the pathway consists of so as to successfully be paroled and are consistent and just in their judgments, along with those institutions that do the incarcerating actually demonstrating some sort of vested interest in seeing that prisoners are given a fair chance to become rehabilitated, and, in addition the prisoners applying themselves in doing their own part to become something of positive worth to society -- then we so find that when these things are combined, that this in total, is what represents merciful justice.

The United States truly broke the mold for governance

In 1776, the colonists, declared their Declaration of Independence, from Great Britain.  Of course, that mere declaration, wasn’t in and of itself, going to do the job, as to achieve such would still necessitate several years of warring battle against the greatest power in the world at that time; but ultimately, those thirteen colonies were successful in overthrowing that which had precluded them from their legislative representation, fair taxation, and freedom.  Subsequently, the United States would ratify its Constitution, and become through that Constitution, thirteen States united into the United States of America.   The form of that government, so created, would not be a monarchy, nor would it be a dictatorship, but instead it would be a republic; thereupon making the United States the first modern republic of any appreciable size.

The fact that these thirteen States, were subsequently able to somehow come to the accommodations so needed to institute a union of those States, as compared to the European continent, which had separate countries, which were often at war one against the other, is to the lasting credit of the wisdom, and the compromises so made in order to accomplish this necessary step.  That said, it is true, that the United States, did so subsequently suffer a very bloody and tragic Civil war, but the ultimate outcome of that war, led to a stronger and more united country than it had been so before.  After all, it was many decades, after our Constitution, before people would self-identify as first being a United States citizen as contrasted to be a Virginian or similar.

The de facto motto of these United States is considered to be E pluribus Unum, which is, “out of many, one.” This motto is indeed what the United States so became, for to take so many diverse interests, as well as sectional differences,  and therefore the natural conflict of one State to another so as to overcome  each of these obstacles in a manner in which, these so became over a period of time not stumbling stones, but stepping stones, leading therefore to one national currency, along with there being no imposts or duties so imposed for goods being traded from one State to another, or closed borders between one State to another, made thus for a unified nation.

The two other main forms of governance that we see throughout the world, are monarchies and dictatorships, of which, the people within those nations are thereby subject to the whims and dictates of those that are its leaders, which signifies that these governments do not typically offer either the same type of individual liberty so valued by Americans, nor in a lot of cases the true enfranchisement of the democratic vote, or republican representation, so of.  In other words, in America, the people have a voice and the vote, along with each of these being protected by their government as their right, whereas in many other nations, these are hollow promises, and nothing much more. 

Each of us then, should be appreciative that our government as so created and envisioned, is one of, for, and by the people, which makes it ours to own, and thereby ours to do right by.

The importance of integrity and honesty

The true test of any philosophy is how a given person reacts when they are placed between a rock and a hard place.  After all, it’s easy to be honest when being honest has no possible penalty or downside to it.  So too, it’s easy to demonstrate integrity when doing so, involves no possible loss of face or any individual harm.  The true test for anyone, that claims that they are honest as well as being a good person, is that when compelled to exhibit such honesty, of which, this will surely, in this instance, cost them personally, or alternatively this will hurt someone that they deeply care about, is whether they then uphold that honesty or not.

We are instructed at a very young age to tell the whole truth, which makes it rather strange, that so many people when taught to tell the whole truth about something, hesitate, before they respond, as if they are considering their options, which, in many a case, they are.  Once anybody, decides that they want to spin the “truth” in a way in which they exaggerate or leave out or change information in which they believe that by doing so, they have done what they felt they needed to do, then their cause of upholding whole honesty has been absolutely lost.

So too, many people, in order to do what they believe will help their cause, want to purposely distort information in their favor, so that they then come across as the “white hat,” so to speak, and the other side is then invariably painted as the “black hat,” which is made often worse by also distorting what the other side represents, to thereupon make the contrast between the two, much starker, and therefore the decision to be rendered by a neutral party, unquestionably clear.  The thing is that there are few people or institutions that are completely right, all of the time; as well as there being few people or institutions that are completely wrong, all of the time.  The point of the importance of holding every individual accountable to the whole truth, is that in life, there really aren’t any shortcuts, and those that will not willingly own up to complete integrity, are doing so, primarily because they desire to deliberately take what appears to them to be the easy path, instead.

The reason that integrity and honesty are so important is that in essence, by being less than honest, we are being deceitful, and that deceit is often so done for our own benefit, and clearly that benefit comes at the cost of those that are not in on the deceit.  To fool others, is typically not all that difficult, and in many a case, isn’t all that risky, at all; for other people have their own priorities and concerns to deal with, and often don’t have the time or the inclination to check every action or every statement so made by someone else for its veracity.  Nevertheless, though, those that lie and are dishonest, have a strong tendency to perpetually be looking over their shoulder, whereas those that are on the straight and narrow, have not only no need to, but they also are able to keep their eyes focused upon that which is solely worth winning.  There are, all sorts of ways to run the race of life; those that do so with integrity will always get to their destination sooner, for that which is straight is the shortest distance; and that which is crooked as well as often doubling-back, is not.

In the United States a national quarantine is not so easy

Even though, to a very large extent, the hue and cry of “States’ rights” have been soundly defeated by the national government, we find that when it comes to a potential national quarantine that the national government, does not apparently have the power to enforce their will and therefore to circumvent or to trump States’ rights in regards to such.  This doesn’t mean that the national government would not ultimately prevail, what it does mean though is that the national government, does not presently have the capability to simply assert its will in regards to a potential nationwide quarantine; though, of course, under exigent circumstances, or martial law, in all probability a national quarantine could indeed be enforced upon the whole population in short order.

To a very large extent, the fact that fifty different States and the localities within those States, have their own rules and regulations in regards to that which has been identified by the national government as a pandemic, is the sort of thing that is very messy, at best.  After all, the borders from one State to another, typically are completely open and certainly have not been set up to control traffic going to-and-fro; not to mention, that there are all those other means of transportation that can be utilized to travel from one State to another.  So then, in reality, to enforce a nationwide lockdown really would depend upon the general public buying into the emergency, or else in order to bring this into good effect, this would invariably mean a whole lot of conflict, in which undoubtedly some of that conflict would be violent.

Americans have a strong tendency to want to assert their independence and freedom, without seeming to understand that every freedom so claimed as one’s own, necessitates some supporting sort of duty, in turn.  Additionally, there are those contingencies that require a national response and a national consensus within a very short period of time, and when there are fifty different States coming from potentially fifty different directions, then coming to some sort of reasonable resolution within a very short period of time, isn’t necessarily going to happen.

A true national emergency, necessitates a true national response in both a timely and an effective manner.  As it currently stands, when it comes to a national quarantine, the United States is clearly not prepared, and further doesn’t have the infrastructure or the wherewithal, other than through martial law, to assert a national response.  The problem with martial law in a nation of individuals that believe religiously in personal freedom, is that people on both sides of such a dispute are going to get hurt and there will be deaths.

The better way for the United States to deal with a future national quarantine, is to sit down now, with the governor and legislature of each respective State, and then to come to a consensus of what defines the necessity of a national quarantine, and thereby what each State would do in turn to be responsible to that national quarantine.  Those then that will not responsibly prepare for that contingency, will therefore see the same sort of inconsistency and confusion so generated through the governmental response to COVID-19.  That is to say, there has to be some sort of consensus of what an appropriate national response should be, and in order for that nation to actually unite together, then each of fifty States has to be on the very same page, as their national government.

There has not always been inflation in America

We read at globalfinancialdata.com, that “From the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 until the start of World War II in 1914, there was no inflation in most countries.”  This is an American society, which has gotten use to the persistence and the existence of inflation and of which its expressed monetary policy so formulated believes that an inflation rate of 2% is just about right; thereby representing something that is neither too hot, nor too cold, but instead is lukewarm, of which, then, clearly this government somehow believes that the absolute stability of its currency is either an impossible objective to achieve, or that our modern-day monetary system cannot risk even the possibility of deflation or both.

Just because this country, amongst most countries in the world today, suffers from some degree of inflation, does not mean that this is the way that it should be, or even what should be desired by governmental monetary policy.  After all, if, for instance, the United States had no inflation, whatsoever, that would thereby indicate that everything that is measured by the dollar, would remain constant, and thereby knowing that a dollar today would be worth the same as a dollar tomorrow, business decisions, would be far more straightforward, with no real need for currency hedging.  That is to say, a known future, is going to be superior to an unknown and an unknowable future, of which, for instance, the inflation rate may be far higher or far more volatile than expected, which thereby makes it far more difficult for people and businesses to know which side to bet on or even what the best strategy is to protect their assets.

So too, inflation, is in its very nature, is going to have winners and losers.  Those that are always going to be on the losing side, is everyone and everything, that doesn’t properly comprehend that money that sits absolutely idle is going to invariably become worth ever less; which is a way of saying, that those that save money, but have difficulty finding somewhere safe to park that money, are going to see their worth in real terms, decline.  On the other hand, those that are in debt, in which the debt is pegged to a fix rate, of which that rate is lower than the effective inflation rate, are going to find it far easier to pay back that debt than previously, because they are doing so with dollars which are essentially costing them less and less against the debt that they so incurred.

This thus signifies, that governments that have deficits, often find that inflation benefits them in the ease of paying back that debt, and businesses may just find that inflation benefits them too, especially when they are able to increase their price point for products so being sold, without correspondingly increasing per the real inflation rate the labor compensation of their employees.  All of this basically signifies, that in any era of inflation, this typically means that the sophisticated and the connected are going to be in a better economic position as compared to all those that aren’t that sophisticated and are unconnected, because those that have a good read of inflation, are to a large degree, the masters of those that do not.

Should the government be permitted to issue tax-exempt investments?

Those that invest money into equities, bonds, mutual funds, and other investments, recognize that when they make that investment, that they are susceptible to having the profit, so of, subject to taxation, be it local, State, or Federal.  On the other hand, there are governmental entities that issue tax-exempt bonds, mutual funds, and other investments, in which as the name so amply describes, those that invest in these assets, aren’t subject to any tax whatsoever, per the specific exemption status of that investment.  The ostensible reason why these tax-exempt investments are available to the general public, are in theory, because the return so promised to those that invest in such, is lower than the equivalent taxable choices for them, and of which the borrowing cost of the issuance of those bonds to those government authorities, are appreciably less, thereof.  While that certainly makes sense, that’s only one part of the story, for the other part is that those with enough assets and capital, are thereby permitted to make additional passive income, with the foreknowledge that they will not be taxed, whatsoever, which seems on the surface, to be unfair to all those others that are subject to taxation, and thereby permits those with capital, to make additional money without restraint, on end.

Of course, the argument made is that tax-exempt securities almost always make less money than alternative choices; but then again, the risk of those securities are often considerably less than other investments, of which, there are plenty of those with a lot of capital that aren’t looking for risk, whatsoever, but rather desire to have that sure and steady return, which bonds, for instance, are very good at providing for them.  So too, most people with a considerable amount of money, aren’t fools, so that if they felt collectively that tax-exempt investments, were overall, a poor choice to make, then they wouldn’t do it, and because they actually do make that investment and continue to do so, then clearly being tax-exempt has its advantages for them, and that is why they make those particular investment choices.

America has a progressive tax system, of which, the purpose of such progression in tax rates is to capture a higher percentage of the income of those of whom make more in income.  So then, when that particular class of people that has plenty of wealth, are permitted to make investments in which they won’t have to pay nary a dime to the tax man, then this seems like a deal which on the surface is unfair to the general public and probably then shouldn’t be permitted.  After all, part of being wealthy is not just desiring to hold on to that wealth, but to augment such, and when therefore there is an avenue that will do both, with little risk, and no taxation attached to it, at all, then for a certainty, there are going to be wealthy people that are going to gravitate to it, and therefore the shortfall in taxation receipts, so of, will have to be made up by somebody else, somewhere else.

The necessary corporate estate tax

Those that are individuals have a finite amount of life on this earth, of which, the fewest of the few, make it to 100 years of age, and thereupon, if their wealth is great enough, are thereby subject to estate taxes by the Federal government, as well as to estate taxes in their State of residence, if so applicable.  The thing about corporations, is that corporations are artificial creations of the law, of which nowadays such corporations are perpetual in form, which presupposes that corporations are therefore logically never subjected to estate taxes, despite the fact that corporate wealth and profits, absolute dominate the richest of the richest individual estates.  Further to the point, because corporations are not subject to any wealth or estate tax, this so indicates, that without the imposition of an estate tax upon corporations, that their corporate power, will, if it doesn’t already represent so in the present day, supersede the impact of individuals in just about every meaningful piece of legislation or endeavor – which obviously does not harmonize well with a country that is supposed to be of, for, and by the people.

A reasonable solution for this government to enact on behalf of the people in order to get back a reasonable amount of wealth from those corporations that have treasure chests of wealth that consists of billions upon billions of dollars, is to make all corporations of a certain size and length of existence, subject to a periodic estate tax.  The first estate tax for corporations should be implemented against all corporations that have been in existence for fifty years or more, and specifically impacting those corporations that have assets beyond $500 million, in which they should then have a practical percentage of that wealth subject to an estate tax.  Additionally, thereafter, every twenty years, corporations should be subject to that same estate tax, as long as their assets are above that same dollar threshold.

When it comes to taxation, besides the incumbent fairness of making such a tax progressive as well as being in sync to the income and wealth, so generated, is the fact that governments are always going to collect more money into their hands when they appropriately tax those entities that have an abundance of money.  America’s corporations have an incredible amount of wealth and power, along with having the best attorneys, the best lobbyists, the best tax accountants, and so on and so forth.  There is no other entity that can possibly stifle the power of these mega-corporations, other than the national government, and if the national government won’t do what they need to do, in order to fairly collect estate taxes from that which is perpetual, then human beings have essentially been superseded in power and in worth by that which is an artificial creation of the state, thereby signifying that which is unnatural to be ruler over that which is natural, which not only doesn’t make any good sense, but clearly is inimical to any democratic society and further will serve to clearly be the means of the destruction of that good governance, replaced by corporations that will effectively rule the roost, in perpetuity.