The Department of Defense (DoD) needs to be penalized for consistently failing its audit

The Department of Defense (DoD) has a gargantuan budget, which would presuppose that those paying attention to budgets, would definitely want to determine as to whether or not the monies being allocated to the DoD were being appropriately spent and accounted for.  Regrettably, the DoD has failed every audit since 2018, and the bottom line is that the DoD will continue to fail every audit until such a time as this becomes a priority for the DoD to rectify, because as it stands right now, the DoD budget continues to go up, which thereby sends the signal that all is fine and well, and thus it is business as usual.

 There are a multitude of ways to get any department to adhere to rules and regulations that are important to this government of, for, and by the people, of which the most basic way is to either provide an incentive or in lieu of such, a punishment, to get those necessary things done.  What the DoD does not need is an incentive to successfully complete an audit, because it has an inherent obligation to do that very thing.  This signifies that the DoD needs to be punished for its failure to be successfully audited, and the best punishment is to hit the DoD where it really counts, which is in its budget. 

 Therefore, a fair punishment is to deduct from all contracts and engagements in which money is being spent 1% of that contract price, which will only be returned to the vendor or else to the DoD when the DoD passes a successful audit.  The 1% represents just a little bit of belt tightening, but considering that the DoD budget is approximately 1 trillion dollars, this would be a savings to the taxpayers of $10 billion.  Additionally, should the DoD continue to fail its audit, that percentage should increase on a yearly basis by .5% until it reaches its maximum at 2.5%.

 For all those that don’t understand audits or the point of such, it needs to be recognized that failing an audit, for the DoD, can represent lost, stolen, fraudulent or unaccounted for equipment and supplies, along with contracts that do not conform to industry standards or are structured in a way in which the contractor is given essentially “most favored” treatment, when such is not warranted or necessary.

 The fact that the DoD is permitted to exist and to increase its budget year after year, despite its failure to be successfully audited, is a reflection of the need of the American people for a DoD.  However, just because the people need a DoD does not mean that the DoD should be permitted to run an operation which cannot with a straight face tell those that pay for the DoD that everything is on the up and up, because those organizations that cannot pass an audit, clearly have systemic problems that need to be addressed forthrightly, and therefore, the sooner that the DoD becomes in compliance with such, the better it will be for all.

The negative aspects of “we band of brothers”

There is something to be said about soldiers or law enforcement personnel who band together in order to accomplish great and necessary things on behalf of their task masters.  This is all to the good when the overriding purpose is to serve the people and their countrymen appropriately, so as to protect the homeland and society, thereby to make for a better world.

 On the other hand, when soldiers band together, and are under the wrong leadership or the wrong mission, we find that it is far easier for those that are part of that band of brothers to slip into doing the types of negative things that they would in all likelihood they would not do on their own, such as rape and the wholesale annihilation of civilians or unarmed enemy combatants.  That is to say, those who believe that their loyalty must at all times be to the group, and thereby discount their moral and ethical obligations, have forsaken the good for that which is wrong.

 Indeed, those who are under armed fire or the intense pressure of life and death are going to see the team that they are an integral part of, as of supreme importance, which thereby lends itself to that team, if not directed in the right direction, being susceptible to doing the types of horrible crimes that society would not countenance if awake, but in many a case society does countenance, by simply not giving any credence to the stories so generated or ignoring such, which thereby signifies that because nobody is held accountable, this thereby does not resolve what should be and needs to be resolved.

 When we look at human personality, it has to be understood that peer pressure and the feeling that we cannot let ourselves down to those that we either respect or are part of a group with, encourages people to do things that they probably would not do, but because of that peer pressure and also in conformance to what appears to be occurring by others, as either seen or believed in, lends itself to people embracing that which is inimical to their good character, and once that line is crossed for the first time, it thereby becomes easier for it to be crossed again and again.

 This means that soldiers and police officers need to be periodically examined by internal affairs, or something akin to it, to root out problems, so that what is occurring that should not be occurring can be rectified, before it becomes even more ingrained or worse.  Because the bottom line is that regretful actions are taken far too often by soldiers and policemen, that need not be happening, and would not happen if there was a more robust response to deter them from doing the types of things which are damaging to their psyche, to their being, as well as to society.  This is the salient reason why there are so many soldiers who suffer from Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), because once a soldier finishes his tour of duty, and thereby disbands from their band of brothers, they are left ruminating on what went down, and that which is morally reprehensible leads to endless regrets and a very troubled mind and soul.

The motivation of religious jihadists

Virtually every government wants to see terrorism, and thus religious jihadists, become a non-factor, because they do not condone their violence, which often harms and kills innocent civilians, and does not, in its effect, accomplish anything of lasting purpose or meaning.  That is to say, religious jihadists don’t seem to have a goal other than to be destructive of those that they do not respect, such as those labeled as infidels, and somehow in their mindset, have convinced themselves that non-believers or apostates deserve to die, as their punishment for not having the right religious beliefs.

 The above would presuppose that religious jihadists are, first of all, quite religious. Therefore, those who are religious jihadists haven’t been radicalized, but rather this is part and parcel of their religious tenets.. The truth though is far more nuanced, for a significant number of those that make up religious jihadists aren’t really religious, at all, but rather come from the background of the criminal class, and see that in their joining to a cause that thereupon permits them to be seen as an avenger against those that deserve to be punished, makes them therefore to be designated as honorable and righteous in the killing of the other, which permits consequently them to focus their criminal mindset upon committing dirty deeds which they believe they will be absolved of, because of the religious cloak that they have become part of.

 This thereby signifies that those that end up becoming religious jihadists have more in common with the criminal element that thereupon has been redirected and refocused to take their anger, frustration, or lack of respect and re-channel such into an activity in which they will receive respect from those that are their peers, meaning that those that are religious jihadists are typically not those who have grown up in an orthodox mosque, but rather those that have grown up with a chip on their shoulder, and thus desiring to get rid of that chip by striking out against those that have been targeted to deserve what happens to them, all done under the guise that doing so, is justified within that interpretation of their religion.

 So then, it could be argued that jihadists aren’t interested in seeing those that are infidels, converted by the sword, but rather they want to eradicate them from the face of the earth, because their motivation is to destroy, which they believe aligns with the beliefs of their espoused religion, structured in a way and manner that this seems to be right.

 This thus signifies that for those nations that desire to see that their people do not become religious jihadists, their government needs to be structured in a way and manner that is accommodating, civil, and just to all of the people, because those most likely to be drawn to religious jihadism are the same that feel that they are misunderstood, uncared for, unloved, and forsaken.  These then find their purpose in harming the other, done so, under the misimpression that it is for the greater good, when, in fact, it isn’t and never will be.

The dark truth about lynching

The lynching is the forceful taking of somebody accused of some nefarious crime, oftentimes historically involving the alleged rape of a white woman by a black man, and subsequently the hanging of that alleged offender by a mob of citizens, riled up to do that very thing.  The lynching of black Americans is a great national shame, which was just another way for white people to enforce their bastardized form of justice upon the black man, so as to keep the black man down and subservient, because the white man preferred to keep the hierarchy of dominance which was the white man’s domain during the times of slavery, and did not care to see that to change.

 The thing about lynching, as wrong as it was, is the salient fact that the excuse that a black man molested a white woman was, in many cases, not true at all.  Rather, this narrative was created because the white man knew that the general public would be up in arms whenever they were led to believe that the black man had violated the white woman.  In fact, lynching was, in many cases, a situation in which the person so being lynched was somebody of substance, such as a black man who owned his own successful business, or was respected throughout the black community for his contributions to his people.  In other words, whites deliberately targeted black men to be lynched, specifically because of their success, because these black men were giving the impression that blacks weren’t inferior to the white man, at all, but rather were able to represent that they, given even half of a chance, were just as capable as whites, and this could not be tolerated by those of the white race who felt threatened by this inconvenient fact.

 So then, lynching wasn’t really about a white woman being raped or molested, but was instead about raising hell and wreaking havoc upon black communities, by deliberately targeting the best and brightest amongst them, who dared to show the white man up, by outcompeting him, and by thus being successful.  This then signifies that the purpose of lynching was to demonstrate to blacks that no matter how successful a given black man might be, that the white man had the power to disrupt that in the worse way possible, so as to impress upon black people, that the only blacks that the white man was willing to tolerate, were subservient, compliant, and that paid endless respect to all white man, no matter their given place in society, for the white man believed wholeheartedly that even the lowest of the low of whites, was superior to any black man.

 This violence perpetrated upon the black man was a grave injustice, that was quite frankly a form of terrorism, that the government of this nation, along with the law enforcement of communities, did not do nearly enough, and in a lot of cases, did nothing, to protect the black man, because at the end of the day, they didn’t care to or believe that the black man was entitled to their full Constitutional rights or to have a fair opportunity at all.

Are your taxes fairly distributed?

As a people, we are directly taxed upon, for instance, our income, capital gains, and property, and all of this money, collected from a local, county, State, and Federal perspective, is thus utilized or distributed by these respective governmental agencies.  The thing, though, that isn’t really answered is whether or not the taxes, having been collected, are being fairly or appropriately distributed.  It would seem that this would be something that should be carefully studied, because quite obviously, those areas that receive more in benefits than they are taxed upon would seem to be in a superior position to those areas that receive less in benefits than they are taxed upon.

 The thing about taxes and the distribution of those tax monies is that there are certain communities that, for instance, have a lot of people of retirement age, who thus are benefiting from receiving Social Security and Medicare benefits that far exceed what they are paying into the system at the present time.  Yet, that seems to be alright because that is the nature of how these programs were structured.  Nevertheless, this appears to reflect a common complaint of the younger generation that their payroll taxes would seem to be going into the pockets of those of the elder generation, making them to believe the distinct possibility that when it comes to their own retirement and need for Medicare that the well might be running dry.

 So too, corporations that have a lot of presence and payroll in certain communities, probably aren’t seeing those taxes being return to their particular area of domain, but rather these taxes are being allocated to other areas of interest, that is to say to different communities or organizations, which though making sense at one level, seems to be something in which, those that are contributing these tax dollars would obviously prefer to see that the tax monies so being collected be fairly spent in closer proximity to the communities in which the employees are employed.

 Then there is the situation in which the United States is made up of fifty States, in which each State pays taxes to the Federal government of differing amounts, but the allocation of where those taxes goes does not reflect a distribution that is consistent with those payments, thereby signifying that certain States are net beneficiaries of federal taxes; whereas other States are net contributors, which is something that would appear to be unfair.

 In sum, because of the sheer amount of taxes being collected, it would behoove politicians and legislators of all types to desire to find out whether they are getting their fair share of that rather sizeable pie, because those that are not, would appear to be cheating their own communities, thereof, in addition to the salient fact, that the tax system, though progressive, should at the end of the day, be fair to all of the people of this nation, as opposed to certain segments of that population as well as communities apparently getting over on the other.

Public housing and “Big Brother” surveillance

There is a significant and fundamental difference between public and private property, of which, that difference is the fact that private property is not permitted to be surveilled by the government, unless a properly issued warrant has been put into effect; whereas, public property because it is governmentally owned can be subject to intrusive surveillance, sold under the aegis that this is for public safety, and for crime control.

 While there may well be a significant portion of those that live in governmental public housing who appreciate being surveilled for their protection, the problem is that the control of that surveillance and the monitoring, so of, is virtually never in the resident’s hands, but rather is in the control of the government and what the government does or does not do, would appear to be at their discretion, which means that those living in public projects are being surveilled, which thus places them essentially into a fishbowl to be examined, monitored, and dealt with.

 So too, when it comes to surveillance and the laws of the land, surveillance is going to permit governmental authorities to have video documented evidence of crimes that have been committed, ranging from serious crimes to crimes that are not only trivial, but often are the type of crimes that are ignored or of little concern to those residing in private housing.  In other words, because of this surveillance, it becomes rather easy for the government to concentrate and to target certain residents that they consider to be troubling, not from a true crime perspective, but from the perspective that they are too vocal, complain too much, or are trying to engage other residents in some sort of formal complaint against the public housing authority.

 This therefore is one of the main reasons why those being surveilled, aren’t going to appreciate such, because they are thus put into the unenviable position of being susceptible to being arrested or harassed for trivial violations, which could result in their removal, or at a minimum, quiet their voice, which thus means that their freedom has been restricted, which doesn’t seem fair or right, all done under the supposed need to surveil residents for their protection and safety.

 The problem with video cameras that are on 24/7 is that they are not only on 24/7, which makes them to be ever monitoring those that are in their view, but that there isn’t ever any relief from that monitoring, and thing about human nature, is that people, need to have space to do their thing, of which, some of those things are going to be considered violations of some part of the criminal code, but in actuality, aren’t really harming anyone or anything.  This would indicate that those surveilling public housing should be subject to some sort of residential feedback, review, or pushback, or else that surveillance will be seen for what it truly represents, which is the control and the monitoring of those residents in public housing, as the taxation and price that they have to pay in order to live there.

Arrests for the convenience of the state

Police officers are known for many things, but one of those things that they are not known for is their high expertise in criminal law.  That is to say, police officers are not lawyers and typically have never attended law school, which means that they actually don’t know the law backwards and forwards.  Additionally, no human being knows every single law or the appropriate application of the law in every single circumstance.  In other words, when police officers arrest a given individual, they often are just going to go to a common playbook that they are familiar with, and find a charge that seems to fit, which will thus justify the arrest, of which, there are those types of charges that pretty much can be used in many a circumstance, such as disturbing the peace, disorderly conduct, and things of that general ilk.

 The above thus signifies that when a person is being arrested and they ask what they are being arrested for, there probably isn’t any point in the asking, because the police officer is just going to find a charge that seems reasonable for the circumstances, for that initial charge leading to the arrest is not going to often represent the formal charge. In actuality, the charging of an individual with a crime is determined by the prosecuting agent of the state, who will look at the notes so provided by the police officer and determine what charges are most appropriate, or decide not to charge the individual so arrested, at all.

 This signifies that those being arrested not only don’t know for certain what they are being arrested for, but really won’t know what charges they will be accused of until the prosecuting agent weighs in.  Additionally, there are many cases in which someone is arrested in which no formal charges are ever filed, whatsoever, and thereby the person arrested is released.  While that might sound good to the person that has been released from having been arrested, it has to be noted that being arrested is for many people a pretty traumatic affair, and to thus lose one’s freedom for some period of time in which at the end of the day, no charges are filed, seems to be the type of thing, that should be investigated more thoroughly because there may be arrests being made that the officer of the law knew were under a spurious charge, but they did so perhaps because they simply wanted to enforce their authority that they are an agency not to be trifled with.

 The bottom line is that it is one thing for a police officer to engage in a conversation with a person, over some perceived incident, and to thereby let that person go, as compared to actually arresting and putting a person in handcuffs and the back of the police vehicle to be processed.  This means that police officers seemingly have a lot of discretion over what they are allowed to do, which seems to be something that should be monitored, but not necessarily by agents of the state, such as the prosecution, but rather, monitored by those who are citizens of the state to ascertain as to whether police officers are behaving in a way and manner consistent with civility and service to the community.

Israel was formed for the benefit of Western nations and Zionists

When we think of the Middle East, we are cognizant that the people who live there are primarily Arabic, Turkish, Persian, or Kurdish.  So too, the most prominent religion in this region is Muslim, though within the Middle East, there are many sects of that Muslim religion.  Yet, somehow in the country of Palestine, an Arabic nation, the nation-state of Israel was founded upon their land, and thus was born after World War II, thereby bringing Jews to the Middle East, but not just any of the Jewish faith, but in particular and specifically, European Zionists.

 There are a multitude of reasons, why Israel was created, of which, one of the reasons which is typically discounted is the fact that the Middle East has not only a religion which has been at odds with the prevailing European religion of Christianity, but also the fact that within the Middle East there is a tremendous amount of oil, which Western nations have an obsession about and have had an obsession about for decades, because the engine that still fuels Western economies is oil based, and thereby those that have oil, are in the dominate position to call the shots, which is why Europe, despite losing their colonies and direct colonial influence in the Middle East, were absolutely determined that they would not lose completely their influence in the Middle East because the price of this happening to them would conceivably be catastrophic.

 Indeed, it could be said that Israel represents the Western nations in the Middle East and thereby provides those Western nations with a formidable presence, which helps to keep recalcitrant Middle Eastern nations in check, because they rightly fear that war against them by Western nations would be disastrous for them.  Additionally, Middle Eastern nations have recognized that for their own stability, it is thus seemingly in their best interests to have alliances with Western nations, that though currently making sense, may be the type of relationship that could at some future point, be one that they will regret, because Western nations have their own agenda – for the business of oil is the type of business that Western nations must have their continual say and influence upon.

 All of the above indicates that Israel, as a proxy European nation, works hand-in-hand also with the United States of America to pursue the mission to, in essence, impress Western desires upon the Middle East, with the basic objective to have either compliant Middle Eastern leaders that adhere to Western goals or to defang those stubborn Middle Eastern nations so that they aren’t able to assemble a viable sovereign nation, and thus represent no threat to Western national interests.  In short, Israel is a powerful presence in the Middle East, and will continue to be so, because the intent of Western nations really comes down to the salient fact that as long as oil is the engine of economic growth, then Western nations must have a controlling influence upon such, and thereby a strong military presence in the Middle East is there to effect that very thing.

School motto: Give Them A Chance

The schools in America are clearly unequal, and far too often, still segregated and discriminatory, which is a true reflection that America still has a lot of ground to cover in order to make up for historic prejudices as well as the prejudices of today which thereby serves to keep those that are the unfavored, the disadvantaged, and the poor often excluded from their children having a fair chance of receiving a public education that would be of true value to them.

 Look, it has to be said, those in the most impoverished circumstances need to have at a minimum, within their community, an educational sanctuary that will serve not only to feed the students food, but to school them in a way and manner in which they will be accomplished in the fundamentals of not just reading, writing, and arithmetic, but also a prevailing moral code of what a good societal member consists of, which is consistent with the values of that country which professes to believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, for all.

 To the degree that America does not care a whit about dealing with systemic poverty as well as injustice is one thing, but to take those that are newly born or have immigrated to America at a young age, and to not provide them with a fair and equal opportunity to attend public schools that will do an outstanding job of educating them, is to destroy the hopes and dreams of those that have the potential to do wonderful things but are essentially closed out from having a reasonable chance of this actually occurring.

 Each generation should want to aspire to be better than the previous generation, and in consideration that the rich don’t need any help, and the middle class though squeezed, seems to be able to maneuver their way through society so that they can manage alright; this thus signifies that this government of, for, and by the people needs to create citadels of sound public education so that this country will have the best and brightest throughout all age groups and income levels, and thus become what it claims it desires to be, which is great, again.

 Indeed, most people can handle just about anything that comes their way that is unfavorable if they can see that there is some legitimate pathway that will either make their life better, or if not that, their children’s life better.  We live in a day and age in which the separation between those that are ill-educated as compared to those that have a good education has never been more stark, so that, it behooves this nation to see that those that are currently the least amongst us, have their fair opportunity to prove themselves by being educated in a facility that is structured to do exactly that, which would make not only for a more cultured society, but also a more inclusive one, as well, for those that have educated their minds are the same that are well positioned to be successful and to do good for their community.

The return to serfdom

We read through Google AI that in January 2020, “The wealth of the world's billionaires was approximately $8 trillion,” and that in April 2025, “A record 3,028 billionaires had a combined net worth of $16.1 trillion.”  This signifies that over the last five years that the wealth of billionaires has doubled.  Perhaps this is a good thing, but in reality, it’s mainly a very good thing for billionaires and is not a good thing for those who are, in essence, subsidizing those billionaires; as well as it isn’t good for societies, for the more unequal a society is, the more systemic problems that it thereby has.

 When it comes to governments, it has to be remembered that governments need money in order to conduct their business, and the best place to scare up money is going to be taxing appropriately those who have buckets and buckets of money, as in billionaires.  Regrettably, governments the world over seem to have effectively been “captured” by those billionaires, so that billionaire wealth isn’t taxed at the levels that it should be, and, of further insult, they aren’t taxed appropriately when they no longer are among the living.

 There was a time when the middle class of America was the envy of the world, which perhaps is still sort of true today, but those that have spent any time looking at the sheer numbers of the declining middle class, and their general nervousness that they will be able to maintain their position, let alone improve such, would make most people re-evaluate that all is well, for the middle class is being squeezed, so that though it has been said we will always have the poor amongst us, we also have a middle class which is not nearly as secure as it should and ought to be.

 We seem, therefore, to be on a path in which, just as in times of old, societies will be structured and are being structured in a way in which the superrich have everything, with a small enclave of those that directly or indirectly support those superrich personages, and in which everyone else pretty much has the scrapes off the master’s tablecloth to live upon. Indeed, inexorably we are returning to serfdom, because without a government that actually is of, for, and by the people, we have instead a government that is of, for, and by the billionaire class, proved by the fact that billionaires are consistently getting their way in everything that affects them, and thereby getting ever richer, which thus signifies that the mass of the population is getting ever poorer and thus have ceded their hopes of achieving the American dream, to those that have more than enough already.

 It could be said that life is a battlefield, and if that is so, the battle is clearly in the distinct favor of the billionaire class, which is an incredibly small subset of the people that populate societies.  This signifies that the “lord of the manor” is back, and is bigger and more powerful than before, for when that which governs us has been compromised on behalf of the superrich, then the result is what we see today, and unless the billionaire class is brought to heel, we as a people will return to being lackeys and serfs.

The objective unfairness of DUI “Less Safe” laws

Just about every driver is aware of the law in regards to a DUI (Driving Under the Influence), of which, what is considered to be Driving Under the Influence is directly related to the alcohol in a given driver’s bloodstream of which the Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) at or above 0.08% is considered to signify that the driver is under the influence of alcohol and subject therefore to jail, monetary fines, and possible license suspension.  This thus indicates that a DUI is a very serious offense, especially considering that most people need an automobile to get to work and to take care of errands and things of that sort.  So, to be charged and convicted of a DUI is pretty much devastating to the driver guilty of such.

 We live, though, in a day and age in which not only do a multitude of people take prescribed medicine, which could readily impair their driving ability, but we also have a multitude of people who take illicit drugs, which could do the very same thing.  The difference, though, between these drugs, licit and illicit, is that, unlike alcohol, there doesn’t seem to be an industry standard as to how to measure such, in order to determine not only possible impairment, but to objectively state that this drug is or is not in a given driver’s bloodstream, and therein lies the rub.

 The problem with drivers who have taken licit or illicit drugs that appear to have impaired their driving ability, is currently dealt with differently in different States, so that a State such as Georgia, has something labeled “DUI Less Safe” which relies on an officer’s testimony that because the driver had, for instance, bloodshot eyes, or the smell of marijuana, or failed the field sobriety test that these are considered to be a true indication that their driving was impaired, and therefore the charge of DUI Less Safe is appropriate.

 The problem with charging somebody with DUI Less Safe is that, first of all, the physical characteristics of a person’s eyes can vary greatly from person to person, and bloodshot eyes may have absolutely nothing to do with having indulged in licit or illicit drugs.  Further to the point, the smell of marijuana just isn’t going to be something that is tangible enough to ring true all of the time.  Finally, field sobriety tests aren’t a good or fair way to determine whether a person is or is not impaired, because those tests aren’t conducted in a scientifically objective way.

 All of the above signifies that a DUI Less Safe charge should be substantiated only when the evidence of drugs has been determined through a reliable chemical test of the driver’s blood, and in the absence of such, the charge should be seen as speculative. That is to say, those charged with a DUI are charged because their blood alcohol level is at or exceeds a certain level, which is why it must be said that DUI Less Safe charges should be held to the same sort of scientific account, or else it really isn’t fair or just, at all.

Vote with your pocketbook

It used to be that for an effective boycott or civil action to occur, the leadership would have to come from institutions such as Unions or Churches.  We now live though in a day and age, in which social media permits those with like interests to band together to be effective in getting across their complaints about the unfairness or discrimination of different businesses or organizations, thereby permitting those that are motivated to effectuate change by the pressure of an unrelenting boycott, that has specific goals in mind and stays focused upon the prize, that will make their blood, sweat, and tears all to be worthwhile.

 Indeed, catchy and pithy sayings such as “don’t buy where you can’t work,” are not only easy to remember and to identify with, but they get right to the point about the complaint that the people have, especially when this government, of, for, and by the people has taken a “hands off” approach to injustice, or has thus permitted the wheels of justice to move so slowly, it would appear that those wheels aren’t moving at all.

 This is why, whenever the people are disappointed that progressive legislation that has been passed is either being effectively ignored or has been neutralized by those in executive or judicial positions, that this necessitates a call to arms to do something of merit to reverse what has been wrongfully taken from the people.  So that, when we think about diversity, equity, and inclusion being negated by executive or judicial fiat, the correct response is to band together, to put pressure on those institutions that are not being progressive in their hiring practices, so that their business is affected in a way and manner that they will be forced to pay attention.

 After all, the demographics of America have seriously changed over time, so that, never have there been more citizens who are non-white, non-Christian, and not necessarily in harmony with conventional views upon gender or sexual orientation, as well as of national origin.  This is why like-minded people who have money in their pocket need to be cognizant of where they spend that money, and thereby to support those institutions, stores, and restaurants that are inclusive, and to boycott those that are not, for in doing this, they will make progress in those areas where progress needs to be made.

 What makes a boycott effective comes down to the boycott being focused on a certain specific issue, and that those who are part of that boycott will not relent from their efforts until they receive justice.  This thus signifies that boycotts need to have an overriding specific purpose that will often have ripple effects when successful, because other companies and institutions will desire to get ahead of the curve, as opposed to having to deal with a boycott that will negatively impact their business enterprise.

 Indeed, all those who are motivated for change have got to recognize that collectively their money and their voice can effect that change, by hurting businesses where it really counts, which is their profit and their reputation.

Are foreign-based gangs a true threat to Americans?

Just because something is talked about, over and over again, so that the perception is that the barbarians are at the gate, doesn’t necessarily mean it's true. For instance, we are told that America is being overrun by primarily Latino-based gangs that are wreaking havoc in our communities by committing violent crimes, drug dealing, and drug running -- thereby making our communities to be unsafe and effectively in some aspects, that in some communities, it is alleged that they are now under the domain of these foreign gangs.

 The truth of the matter is that while there are foreign gangs that have infiltrated America, their overall footprint isn’t all that great and the crimes that they are committing are not only localized but often is focused upon their own people that have immigrated to this nation, as opposed to some fearful belief, that law enforcement, and the overall protection of American citizens is somehow been negated or is in danger of being overcome by these foreign gangs.

 The primary problem that foreign gangs have, of why therefore they aren’t really the scourge of our civil society, is the salient fact that foreign gangs are obviously foreigners, and thus do not look like the primary race of America, which is the white race.  Further to the point, most of those that are part and parcel of foreign gangs not only do not look like white people, but they are also incapable of ever assuming the guise of what an upstanding white citizen looks like.  Additionally, the members of foreign gangs are notable for their lack of having a good grasp of English, of which also the minimal English that they do speak has a strong accent which makes them out to be foreign born, and those that are foreign born, ill-educated, and unable to play the part of what a responsible citizen looks like, are not going to be readily amalgamated into the polity of any community, especially when they are seen as being detrimental to such.

 No doubt, within America, there most certainly are criminal elements, but those criminal elements that are most successful are the very same that look the part of regular American citizens, and thereby are adept at infiltrating or making clandestine agreements with law enforcement and politicians, which is why the mafia not only exists in America, but persists.  On the other hand, foreign gangs are not only not part of the mafia, but their chances of ever being part of the mafia are slim, because they are way too violent, and the crimes that they are committing do not permit them to be something that law enforcement would lack motivation to see eradicated.

 In sum, foreign gangs may in fact be here in America, but they are essentially exploiting their own, and lack the sophistication and tools to not be seen as a blight that needs to be eradicated, which, in due time, they will be; because they simply are no match for all the multitude of law enforcement arms of America, in addition to the fact that these foreign gangs don’t have the mojo to corrupt who they need to corrupt to effectively stay secure in the crime business.

Accept your friends for who they are

Friendships aren’t the easiest thing to maintain in the world, because undoubtedly our friends are going to disappoint us in one way or another, and because of that disappointment, we may find ourselves desiring to change them into a form that will conform to our expectations of what that friend ought to be doing in the relationship with us.  The thing that people need to understand well about friendships is that the healthiest friendships are ones that allow room for error and mistakes, as opposed to being judgmental and unforgiving to the other, especially in consideration that not only is a lot of what we have to complain about, not really that big of deal in the long run, but also that we are pretty much incapable of fairly judging our own friendship as viewed by our friend, and thereby because of this flaw, we have a strong tendency to see ourselves as being far more virtuous or helpful, then we actually are, typically because we aren’t fairly judging our own self, mainly because that is impossible to do.

 While it may not be the easiest thing to accept our friends as they are, it’s the best policy to have.  Additionally, we shouldn’t just pout or be secretly angry when things don’t go as expected, for good communication is a necessary component of a good friendship, we thereby though need to do our part to overlook that which doesn’t necessitate a negative or critical comment, thus being careful to bring up our judgments or disappointments in the other’s behavior towards us, only when it serves a good or higher purpose.

 A life without good friends is always going to be a life that isn’t going to be as good as it could be, because human beings are social beings, that need to relate one to the other, and when this is lacking, because we don’t have any close friendships this therefore makes for a more dissatisfying life, which is why we not only need to have friends, but also why we need to be good to our friends, even when we feel that they aren’t as good to us, as they ought to be.  Similarly, it’s essential to have good friends, for when the chips are down, it is our friends whom we desire to lean on, so that they can be that ever-present help in trouble, helping us to get through what we need to get through.

 Also, we need to acknowledge that none of our friends are mind readers, so if there is something that we need to get off our chest, then we need to bring it up, or else it will remain unspoken and therefore unresolved.  Additionally, friendship isn’t necessarily always about the difficulties and issues that we have in our personal life, but needs to have a mixture of just plain fun and joy, so that in our friendships, sometimes we are going to have to leave some of our biggest troubles at home, to perhaps be dealt with on a different day, because part of friendship is the knowing that we need to enjoy our life, as opposed to just enduring it.

Recognize the soul in your intellect

We find that especially in Western nations that the development of the mind is of upmost importance, so that there is a subset of those that populate these Western nations that are highly intelligence, and often take pride in the fact they are knowledgeable about certain subjects at a level which is unsurpassed by virtually anyone else, except for those that are in the same sort of field.  This signifies that they are able to see and to know things that most others are either completely ignorant of or simply don’t have the capacity to know.  This thus gives those of such specialized intellect a definite leg up upon all those that lack such.

 In life, we are responsible for our ideas and the actions that we take on behalf of those ideas applied, so that those who have high intellectual knowledge need to be cognizant that they need to be responsible to that knowledge, because not everything that we know is going to be beneficial when applied, which means that discretion is necessary to be exercised within that knowledgeable domain.

 So too, those that are highly intelligent, must at the end of the day, recognize that not only do they have an innate responsibility to do right by the society that they are a member of, but that within their being there needs to be, or should be, the recognition that they must answer to the eternal soul, that all have within their being, and by doing so, this will keep them grounded and aid them in making right decisions, as opposed to the belief that because they have developed their mind so adeptly, that they need not answer to anyone or anything, because they are part of the class of people, that have applied themselves to knowledge so well, that they are thereby superior to virtually all others, and hence need not bend their ear to those that they consider to be beneath them.

 Indeed, not too surprisingly the power behind the throne is often in the hands of those that are intellectually superior to the general population or even the leader of such, and because of this, they thus have far more power to effect change and to effectuate what does or does not happen, of which, when the intellect is not tempered by some sort of humility or the knowledge that their ethical soul should not be discounted or ignored, then bad and misguided decisions are the result of those that have not taken into proper account, the value of wholesome reflection.

 That is to say, the knowledge of how to make and implement a device or its equivalency that is so powerful that it would be devastating to humankind if so activated or released needs to be prudentially controlled, or else in the wrong hands, it could wreak incredible and terrible havoc upon societies, which is why those that know so much, are the very same that need to comprehend that knowledge used unwisely, is the very same as knowledge that has forsaken the bounds of ethics, to become that which could be a horrible bane to society as we know it.

Power and pride need the virtue of humility

Oftentimes, it is not easy to achieve power.  This signifies that those who have achieved power are typically the very same who have been focused on achieving it, above all, thereby indicating that many powerful people do not demonstrate humility, because they believe they cannot afford to possess it, which would thus diminish them.  So too, those that are too prideful typically won’t countenance being humble in anything that they do and accomplish, because it is often their belief that they got to where they are by their own initiative, and therefore need not bow down to anyone or anything.

 The problem with power and pride making a purposeful or ignorant decision to discount the value and virtue of humility, is that these people because of their position in society, are in the catbird seat to get done what they desire to get done, and when they believe that they need not listen to anyone, except those that echo their positions and opinions, then it becomes a scenario in which whatever that they want, they so get; and if they can’t get it right away, they will take steps to do what they have to do to get it, which may mean not just stepping over people, but actually stepping on them, as well.

 In truth, those that are at the pinnacle of power, should desire to have informed and virtuous assistants that will help to keep them grounded, by telling them the types of things that they really do need to know, because without that balance, those in power, will simply believe that they are so gifted, that there really isn’t a thing that anyone else could tell them that would be of interest, because they know what they need to know, and need not know anything more.

 For a certainty, there are those who are so prideful that they won’t deign to listen to others, because the person so expressing their viewpoint is considered to be beneath them, and thereby to listen to them would reflect having to have some humility, which those who are prideful believe would make them look weak or indecisive.  Yet, powerful and prideful people need to be self-aware, because their power permits them to do and enact things that those not in a position of power aren’t capable of doing, and because of that, they should desire to receive honest feedback from those that they are affecting, so that they can be of service to others, as opposed to ignoring service, or believing that service is something unbecoming of their powerful and prideful position.

 Indeed, power and pride have a way of corrupting the individual, of which, those that will not bother to self-reflect and take an honest account of who and what they are, along with an understanding of how their actions affect others, are putting themselves on a pathway that will not end well, which is why those that can temper their ambition with humility, are the same that will accomplish great things, because they are wise.

Plays should not always be played the same way

Plays have been around since civilization first started. There are plays still being performed such as of Shakespeare that have been performed for centuries, of which, truth be told, the play as it is today of Shakespeare, is not the same play that was performed centuries ago, or even necessarily a decade ago, because directors, set designers, playwrights, editors, the players, and the like, all have their place and their input to bring forth, along with the salient fact that no real creative personage desires to carbon copy what has come before, but rather desires to use the source material as a template to create thereby their own vision and spin of a particular play.

 There are those plays which have been on Broadway, or on a tour of cities for Broadway shows, that have been enticing audiences for decades, of which, while an argument could be made that audiences love the familiar, because they can identify with what they have previously heard and seen, which thereby brings them comfort, that though doesn’t seem as if it should be the only thing about how a play should be presented, because it limits the director’s hand, and doesn’t adapt to the fact that audiences are subject to change over time, nor does it make the attempt to make the play better or more relevant.

 Look, it has to be said, there isn’t any fixed rule that necessitates that a play has to be the same thing, ad nauseam.  Rather, plays that are currently on Broadway, should be subject to change, of which, that change shouldn’t have to wait until there is a revival of a given play which hasn’t been performed in that theatre for several years, but rather there should be a pathway for plays to have more than one current version, so that the audience and the performers of that play, aren’t doing essentially she same thing every performance, by acting and reading the same lines, again and again and again.

 Indeed, there is a lot to be said about having variations to plays, as a purposeful thing, because as much as a given person might have a favorite food, or some favorite clothes, they aren’t going to keep wearing or eating the same thing every single day.  So too, those that are an integral part of the show aren’t necessarily going to desire to perform the same thing in the same way, and still find it to be fresh after hundreds of performances, but rather they would appreciate the opportunity to have a variation in how the play is acted and performed.

 All of the above signifies that the audience does not need to see the same play that was performed yesterday or that will be performed tomorrow, but should be given the chance to see the play in a format, that is subject to change, in which, the acts are interpreted differently with different lines and different staging, which will enliven many of those in the audience, to remind them that the players are real, and the story so being told is done in real-time, making this a medium that is superior to that which has been recorded and cannot be changed.

Every decision has a consequence

The decisions that we make in life make a material difference to how our life turns out, but not just for ourselves, but also for others, as well, because there are those decisions that will have consequences that impact others, directly or indirectly, for good or for bad.  This thus indicates that we really do need to pay attention to the decisions that we make, in the sure knowledge that even if we don’t consider ourselves to be of that much importance, still our impact upon those that we know or congregate with can have consequences far beyond what we envision.

 Indeed, we learn by the examples and exemplars that we come in contact with throughout our lives, and when we see people in authority who have made decisions that are immoral, unethical, and selfish, we will feel that impact upon us.  This is why we need to recognize that ultimately, no matter who we are dealing with, that the decisions that we subsequently make are ours to own, which signifies that we are accountable for our own thoughts, actions, and deeds – thereby indicating that we need to be responsible in those very things.

 Far too many of us don’t seem to recognize the responsibilities that we have been gifted or burdened with, and it is our duty to do right by those responsibilities, to the best of our ability.  It is well to remember that this world is a proving ground, of which, each of us will be tested, again and again, providing us with the fair opportunity to prove our mettle, and therefore to show that we have not only learned our lessons well, but that we have appropriately applied those lessons for the betterment of the society that we are an active member of.

 We are thus provided with temptations, not to destroy us or to misdirect us, but rather they are presented to us so as to determine whether we will or will not make the right subsequent decisions, and thereby to garner the best consequences, or whether we will make the wrong decisions, and suffer fairly the fate of having chosen unwisely.  What we become and what we are is fairly determined by the collective decisions that we have made, for few can truthfully say that where they are in life has absolutely nothing or little to do with the decisions that they have previously made, but rather there is a correlation of decisions made, the consequences so of, which must be recognized.

 In fact, the consequences of our decisions may not be fully known to us, because what we do and say impacts others in ways that we may or may not have anticipated.  Nevertheless, we are responsible for all of our decisions, and to the degree that we are cognizant of the consequences of those decisions that are unsatisfactory to us, we need to make amends so as to right the ship, for in the end, the captain of the ship of our life is the one at the wheel.

Promises made and promises not kept

Just about everyone has come to that stage in which they have met their match and have come up short, and thereby in their desperation or of the hope that the door is not completely close, they turn to God, or perhaps to their parents, or even to their self, and make a solemn promise that if this cup would only pass from them, that they would make amends for what they did wrong, or to make good on an event that transpired that was deeply regretted.  Indeed, even the most prideful will find themselves at that point on their knees, in abject supplication, and in apparent sincerity, to ask forgiveness, to make amends, and finally to make that promise that they will reform and make good on that promise, come what may.

 In life, we find that words and intentions are not the same thing as actual deeds, and that therefore promises made are not always going to be promises kept, because quite frankly, not every promise is an easy task, and because a given promise, has its challenges, along with its commitments to what needs to be done, it is not therefore a simple or even straightforward task to get accomplished.  So too, there are many a person that makes promises wily-nilly without any real intention of keeping such, though occasionally they do, and the reason that they don’t keep their promises is that they didn’t really have an intention to do so, but merely mouth the words that they believe will make that trouble to pass, and thereby get on with their lives, without any real concern that they have violated their promise, whole cloth.

 Then there are those others who really do intend to make good on their promise, but because of their addiction, or their lack of determination, or their ingrained weakness, they find that they can’t seem to make good on that promise, even though they give it a good try.  For these people, it is doubly disappointing to know that they have broken their vow, along with having slipped right back into the sinning or back into their character faults, which have caused them so much pain and trouble, and thereby continue to hurt them, and when they duly reflect upon this, they feel immense sorrow and disappointment.

 Finally, there are those who, at the time of their pleading, were absolutely sincere that they would make good on their promise, and had duly sworn to do so, and in that moment, their words and intentions were true.  However, time has a habit of eroding even the best of intentions when the temptation to go back to what we are familiar with still exists and is available for us to rejoin, as well as the fact that we take comfort in doing what we have been habitually doing, even though we know that it is wrong.  These then are the most troubled souls, because when the chips were down, they pleaded and begged, and promised reformation, but subsequently did not reform, signifying that the path they are back on is the same one that is going nowhere and will not ever redeem them.

The federal minimum wage needs to be much higher

On May 1, 1956, the federal minimum wage was raised to $1.00/hour.  That’s right, $1.00 an hour, which goes to show you not only how low that the minimum wage was, but also that quite obviously the value of a dollar was appreciably higher back then as compared to what it is today.  That is to say, smartasset.com calculates that the buying power of $1.00 of 1956 would be equivalent to $11.85/hour in 2025.  Yet, the federal minimum wage has not been raised since 2009, and remains stuck at $7.25/hour, despite the fact that the United States, in whole, is not only a much richer country than it was back then, but that this wage has not kept up with inflation, in addition to the fact that the wealth disparity between those that are very rich as contrasted to those that are not, has arguably never been higher, than it is, presently.

 While each State has the right to raise their minimum wage to take into account inflation, fairness, and other considerations, and therefore are permitted to legislate a higher minimum wage for those that are employed in their respective States, we do so find, that twenty-six States do not have a minimum wage of at least $11.85/hour and that twelve of those States, have kept their minimum wage at the same level as the federal minimum wage, which is exceedingly low.

 It would be one thing if a minimum wage were equivalent to a living wage, but it isn’t that at all. The minimum wage really represents a wage that will put a minimal amount of money into the employee’s pocket, but certainly not enough to make a living on, which is why so many people that make a minimum wage, are the very same, that will take on a second job, because their first job does not provide them with enough income or hours of employment to live on.

 Look, it has to be said, that all those who are not only willing to work, but are actually working, should be provided with a wage that they can reasonably live on, especially in consideration that this is the richest nation in aggregate in the history of the world.  Indeed, suppose America believes that those so employed need not earn a living wage, or even have the minimum wage indexed to inflation, as Social Security is. In that case, it need not change a thing. Still, the result that this country will get will be the result that we currently see, which is a sizeable dissatisfied section of the country, and a continuation of the rich getting richer, at the expense of those who are poor and exploited.

 This signifies that the representatives of this nation need to do their job, which is to do right by the population of this country, and to thereby see that the minimum wage is adjusted to a much higher level that will do something constructive about the poverty and lack that so many working Americans suffer from, and it this nation will not do this, it is to its own lasting disgrace as the so-called leader of the virtues of capitalism, supposedly lifting all boats.