Smart Immigrants are like Gold

The United States has all sorts of rules, restrictions, and laws dealing with the issue of immigrants to our country to which there are limitations and specific rules for immigrants in regards to their becoming temporary or permanent residents and, of course, exceptions to all the rules on record.  The upshot of all this bureaucratic red-tape is that the United States deliberately and as part of its government policy restricts legal, temporary, and residential immigration into our country.  While some people might consider our immigration policy to be both fair and even-handed, it is in fact, neither of those things, and instead easily fails into the category of stifling stupidity and wanton wastefulness.  The fact of the matter is that the United States spends an inordinate amount of time in litigation for intellectual property and the like, but dismisses out-of-hand the very people that would help to enrich this country, and by default, the world, simply because they have the indecency to have been born outside of our borders.

The United States should be grateful that so many people, of superior intellectual skill and astute abilities have a strong desire to immigrate here, or to at least, receive their higher education in the United States.  If anything, simply from a pure greed perspective and not even taking into account all the benefits that intelligent and motivated people bring to the table, the United States should be doing everything within its power to recruit the best and the brightest to our shores.  The bottom line is that the concept of labor is changing within America, to wit, that brawn has rapidly been replaced by brains, and this wholesale change will not soon revert back to brawn, if ever.  This means, that those of superior intellect should be exactly the people that we want within our borders, because this is the very need and desire that we are looking for.  

The United States has plenty of land, as well as being recognized worldwide as the industry leader in hi-technology and its associated fields, with also the highest quantity of top universities and research centers in the world, so it behooves America to recruit a team, that reflects the best that the world has to offer, without consideration as to the birthplace of said persons so qualified.  It is a given, that those that are both highly motivated as well as of superior intellect naturally gravitate to places and institutions that are best supportive as well as demonstratively best for the nurturing and development of their skills as opposed to simply be limited to the confines of their native country or community. 

The United States should be the sanctuary for all those that are desirable of taking their skill-set abroad and thereby sharpening their steel against the best steel that America has to offer, so that each friend and fellow associate sharpens the other.  America does not have the patent on being #1 in anything, because to be that, takes desire, resources, and renewal, to which all of these things mean that in order to constantly replenishour tree of liberty, necessitates our welcoming all who have America first in their heart.

Our Two Most Important Documents: The Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address

While America has many great speeches and other fine documents contained within its history, none are of more significance than our Declaration of Independence and the Gettysburg Address.  These two documents stand for everything that makes America great; they represent two gigantic bookends that contain between them everything that is the essence and the brilliance of the American experience.

The Declaration of Independence declares that are we endowed by our Creator, not by our government, not by our king, not by our dictator, nor by any other power or principality but that our unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are freely given to us by our Creator, and further that because all men are created equal that each of us, all of us, every man, woman, and child within this country are entitled to exercise these rights.  When those words were written down and signed back in the year 1776, these were truly revolutionary words, words almost unheard of or thought of in the annals of human history, to which for most governments, for most principalities, mankind was considered to be in perpetual subjection to the government at large, with rights circumscribed by government decree, and liberty at the sole discretion of the government that they were subject to.  This Declaration turn the viewpoint of legitimate government of the people on its head, declaring instead that legitimate and just government powers was in existence only when it was derived from the consent of the governed, as opposed to the arbitrary dictates of those that claimed the "divine right of kings" or other similar but misguided excuses to take from the people what was their birthright.

The War Between the States was a great war, testing whether indeed this was a nation of liberty, as well as to whether it was true that all men are created equal, and therefore entitled to equal rights under the rule of law.  Our civil war, took our Declaration of Independence, and tested this eminent document as to whether the words that were written upon it were words that we would live and abide by, or merely words that rung hollow when placed upon the mantle of truth and justice.  At the time of the Gettysburg Address, America was at the crossroads of whether it would become that new birthplace of freedom, and whether too it would honor its brave men that had died in this fateful struggle, by becoming dedicated to finishing this heretofore unfinished work of our Declaration, and thereby to re-birth our nation into one that was devoted to being a nation of the people, for the people, and by the people, under the blessings of our God.

The Declaration of Independence was the promised made to the people of what this country could and should become, whereas the Gettysburg Address was that promise writ large, understanding that no government and therefore that no people, is easily conceived, or birth, without the pangs and travail of a difficult passage, but for those dedicated to the completion of such a sacred mission, that this nation, would, under God, become a people united in that proposition that all are conceived in liberty, and that all are indeed children of the one same loving God.

Let the Middle East Be

If you take a look at the map of the world, America is nowhere near the Middle East, and in fact, historically, has had little or nothing to do with the Middle East, until the aftermath of World War II.  While there are many reasons as to why America ended up taking a vested interest in the Middle East, the most prominent among them is simply oil; along with the fact that since America was the most powerful, richest and productive nation in the world after World War II, America seemed to be the best choice to assure the western nations that trading routes and oil resources were kept flowing and under the auspices of western civilization.

Since the creation of Israel, America's presence in the Middle East, via its Navy, naval bases, military bases, military exercises, military weaponry, other military personnel, materials, and knowhow has increased tremendously so that even though America is physically far away from the Middle East, its military power, personnel, and logistical skills are sufficient to maintain control over the Middle East under virtually any realistic contingencies.  While some people may think the above is all well and good, it is nothing of that sort; and whereas virtually all European nations relinquished their global empires and colonialism years ago, America instead has become the de facto global empire today.  What America fails to understand or to heed is that having a military presence in or around foreign Middle Eastern sovereign nations, makes America an easy target for resentment by those native peoples as well as being considered to be provocative in its very nature.

The bottom line is that the American presence in the Middle East should be reduced forthwith, and our military bases as well as our personnel in those areas should be significantly pared back, because the Middle East has been a cauldron of troubling problems, uprisings, and revolutions for years, that on a fundamental level, has little to do with America, but is more akin to sectional warfare and strife between Middle Eastern cultures that the United States does not really understand or care to comprehend.  The notion that the United States fails to adhere to is the fact that by reducing our presence, and/or taking more of a hands off attitude to the goings on in regards to the Middle East, will actually make the world safer.  America would be far better served by being perceived by the world as a place of sanctuary and freedom, as opposed to one that insists that might makes right.

There isn't really a compelling reason for America to feel obligated to become engulfed in foreign entanglements, as these are often better suited for resolution with other powers or principalities that would have a more historical, a more legitimate, or a more common heritage that would bring something of real overall merit to the region.  America wrongly believes that the Middle East won't be OK without her, but in point of fact, that is pure hubris on America's part.  In truth, since our involvement of nearly seventy years in the Middle East, there has been nary a noticeable improvement in peace, justice, or democracy to those nations that occupy the Middle East.  This fact would strongly imply that it is high time for America to step aside and to instead concentrate on working on domestic issues as opposed to pretending that America knows what is best for every country in every situation, worldwide.

Geronticide - The Killing or Euthanasia of the Elderly

Throughout history different societies have dealt with ailing elderly people in different ways, from benign neglect to outright abandonment, to the slaying of, as well as to the nurturing and appreciation of, and all the shades in-between.  In America, with more and more people becoming elderly each year, of which many of these elderly people are not in particularly good shape physically as well as mentally, there are legitimate concerns that there may come a time when government agencies will decide whether a particular person will live or die, by a discriminatory usage and allocation of resources and monies attributed to those people.

It would be a tragic mistake of epic proportions if America should ever adjudicate that whether a member of our society lives or dies, or receives the appropriate medicine or care, is based mainly upon whether that person is considered to be of "use" to society at large.  That is to say, if the State determines that in its viewpoint, per some sort of standard, that a person does not merit being kept alive or having access to medicine or medical equipment necessary to maintain that life, that the State, not that person, nor that individual's family, will have the power and the right to terminate that citizen's life.  Should this tragic state of affairs ever come to our shores, America as we know it will have ended, because without life, and consequently the ability to make decisions about your life, you have sacrificed the most basic freedom that is inalienable to all, which is life itself.

As a matter of course, any country, having the power to determine who has the right to live and who must be put to death, is a country that is not free.  Additionally, it is far easier to make these types of decisions about who is allowed to live or to die by the State, when that State is secular or godless, since in not recognizing the soul of a man, that government only sees the physical shell, and believes not that mankind is made in the image of God, but simply is seen as just another animal; and it has been said, "they shoot horses, don't they?"

The true measure of a society is not how it behaves when all is sunshine and glory but how that society behaves when it is pressed up against the wall, when its foundations are truly under assault or attacked upon either from within or without.  The character of a society and of its government, will not be exclusively found in documents written by man, but will be found instead in the actions and in the hearts of men.  How society treats its poor, its disenfranchised, and its elderly is a true reflection of that society and of that government itself. 

The worth of a man, any man, of any age, is not determined by whether that person is productive or not, a criminal or not, a good man or not, but by the fact that all men are created equally by their Creator and that therefore that mankind is endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.  Any government that deems to take away those rights is fundamentally wrong, and a country that will not respect your life, is no country for old men.

Double Indemnity

Just the term double indemnity sounds mystifying, intriguing, corrupt, dangerous, and somewhat shady; but basically double indemnity simply means that for certain approved life insurance policies, that the beneficiary will receive double the insurance amount of that policy, typically for a death that is purely accidental and always subject to the review of the actual issuer of said policy.  As you might imagine, life insurance companies are not in the charity business, so if they do indeed offer some sort of double indemnity policy, rest assured, that they have done their research and such policies issued in aggregate will be profitable for them. Also, normally to be even eligible for double indemnity often means the payment of a premium for that optional extra indemnity coverage.  Whether there should even be double indemnity clauses issued in the first place, or triple indemnity, or bonus indemnity, or multiple indemnity, or accidental indemnity, is something best left up to the marketplace, but the overall effect is to somewhat tarnish the image of the life insurance business in itself, but it is what it is.

The more intriguing part of life insurance policies, is whether anyone can take out any policy at anytime for any reason on anyone.  The answer to that question is no; life insurance companies will only allow people that have an "insurable interest" in the person involved, to take out insurance on that person.  So even though you might have a premonition that some certain person is going to die, really soon, there isn't any way that you can profit from that precognition, unless you are the spouse, or perhaps the business partner, or perhaps the domestic partner, or perhaps a very close relative.  In any event, to assure that you have an "insurable interest" you must be able to demonstrate that you have a financial need or dependence on the person that you wished to take out the life insurance policy on; which is the most basic reason why life insurance is offered to being with, as should that vital person die, you are counting on that life insurance policy to help make financial things whole.

Another thing that people are inquisitive about is whether you can take out a "secret" policy on a spouse or somebody else that you are financially dependent upon.  Not too surprisingly, since you are talking about collecting monetary benefits upon a particular person's death, the life insurance company has a vested and fiduciary interest in actually knowing the person who is going to be insured, so then they will definitely want family health background information on that person, as well as to subject that person to medical testing, so the chances of a "secret" policy being issued on a particular person, are pretty much unheard of.

You can also take out a life insurance policy on yourself, to which this is somewhat typically done for single parents, as a lifeline for their children, should something tragically happen to the parent.  In America, there are all sorts of life insurance products for sale, such as term life, whole life, universal life, variable life, and even those with double indemnity clauses; rest assured that although you might think or believe that the insurance companies selling or promoting these policies have your best interests in mind, they are really about the making of that dollar, and monetizing well on your fears and vulnerabilities.     

Churches' Accounting Books Should be Transparent

America has many churches, many denominations, and many charitable organizations.  This is, for the most part, a very good thing, since church organizations are known for providing both monetary as well as logistical aid to those in their community as well as abroad, while also quite importantly providing spiritual aid and guidance for the faithful.  Unfortunately, when living in a country as wealthy as America, sometimes the mission of churches can become compromised so that rather than being about the giving and the loving of neighbor as guided by God's hand, there is a propensity to better the insiders first, before taking care of the flock in general.

While public corporations are subject to all sorts of laws as well as to public disclosure and the publication of their financial operations, this is not typically the case with church organizations, so that it is fair to state, that the less transparent a church is in regards to what it does with the monies donated, materials provided, labor offered, tax benefits given, and the like, the more likely that pertinent and important information about the church is being withheld from those that provide its assistance.  A church has a moral obligation to be held accountable for its actions and the usage of money that it has been furnished with, so that as a matter of course, a good church should disclose such information, not because it is required to do so by law, but because it is required to demonstrate that it is a good steward of the gifts that the church has received.

Anytime that a church is requesting or imploring its congregation to donate time, money, or the like to the church, the church must do its part to substantiate that this contribution is being put to good use, in one way or another, and not instead being wasted or finding its way into insider's hands to do what they want to do with it, as contrasted to what they ought to do.  Each congregant has a right to know how their contributions are spent, or utilized, not just because the gift came from their hands, but also because devotees too have an obligation to demonstrate to their Lord that they are also good stewards of their money and that their gifts, to which they must not just take it on faith, have been well spent, and further that they can honestly verify in their heart via due diligence that this indeed is so.

It is the church members, themselves, that rather than accepting the truism that "father knows best", should instead, if necessary, be that "doubting Thomas", willing to hold the leaders of their faith feet to the proverbial fire.  It is isn't enough to assume that your work and that your labor has been put to good use, just because that is what you hope for or assume, the church should make it clear, where monies and materials have been earmarked and what they have accomplished to date, and further they should declare their mission to you, the congregant, for the future. 

A good church should be a community of people, united in one faith, their God should be God, and mammon should ideally be a tool used for the betterment of those less fortunate, rather than an opportunity for some to get rich or reap benefits taken from those that have honestly labored for it.

America's Drivers' License Age Will Soon be Eighteen

The Nanny State is alive and doing very well in this land which likes to image itself as the aura of freedom and free choice but is in actuality actively behaving more like overprotective parents that never wants any of their offspring to have the courage to take upon themselves the responsibilities of actual personal choice and decision making.  For instance, if automobiles were a new invention, just now making their mark upon American soil, it is a certainty that the general driver's license age of sixteen (which is consistent with most American States) would never have a remote possibility of happening in America.  First off, there isn't much of anything that is legal for a teenager at sixteen, I mean, you can't even go in to see a "R" rated movie at sixteen, you can't legally buy cigarettes at sixteen, you can't vote at sixteen, and you certainly can't legally drink at sixteen; so it would be a truly audacious leap to believe that any legislature anywhere in the United States would even have the nerve to suggest a driver's license age of only just sixteen.

Slowly and inexorably, the noose has tightened around the privilege to drive an automobile at sixteen, throughout all the States of this Union, to which virtually all States now have some sort of license restriction such as a passenger limit in the car, a curfew limit on driving, an age threshold for the passengers, and so forth for drivers under the age of eighteen.  Additionally, to that, whereas previously the age to drive unrestricted in most States was sixteen, this has been pushed back by a few months in many States, to sixteen years and six months, or even out to seventeen or eighteen, and so forth, with virtually no blowback from youthful drivers at all.  The fact that there has been so little protest about this isn't too surprising, since sixteen and seventeen year olds have no voting rights, and are typically not emancipated from parental authority, so consequently they have virtually no political power whatsoever.

Making things even more problematic for young drivers is the fact that the very people that would be most likely to champion their driving at sixteen, their parents, are often conflicted about their young charges actually being permitted to drive their vehicle since, in point of fact, they may not have compete faith or confidence in their decision making and maturity.  This means, in essence, that except for the tradition of having drivers at the age of sixteen, there isn't much else that would be a compelling reason for them to have this privilege, since most drivers of that age, don't have steady employment, or other credible circumstances that would necessitate their driving, other than convenience, or school-related reasons.

The bottom line is that the Nanny State sees this as a ready-made opportunity to correct something that needs to be corrected to which there will be a minuscule complaint about it.  After all, the Federal Government was able to push through the increase of the legal alcohol drinking age from eighteen to twenty-one, by simply attaching the funding of Highways within their States to their adherence to this new law.  This playbook worked very well for that purpose, so it is almost a given, they will use exactly the same play again in the very near future.

They Couldn't Kill Christianity

It is a given that Christianity is the most dominant and the most prevalent religion today, yet we speak of a religion to which the Founder of this religion, Jesus the Christ, died an ignoble death via crucifixion, because He was branded by certain Jewish leaders as deserving of death for blasphemy, while by the Romans He was crucified for rebellious treason, for claiming Himself as a King.  You would think that His tragic death would have simply been the end of the story, as even his closest disciple believed that it indeed was, although Christ had carefully laid the path beforehand for his triumphant resurrection, to which He came forth, resurrected on the third day.  It was this resurrection, attested to by all of the disciples of the Christ, to which we further read in 1 Corinthians 15: "After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once..." as witnessed by the apostle Paul.  We read too that before the Christ ascended up into Heaven, he commanded his disciples according to Matthew 28:19 "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit…"

Here was the great commission given from Christ to his disciples, who did indeed carry out his sacred mission, which continues onto this very day.  In regards to those eleven original disciples, Matthias, and Paul, what penalty did they pay for the preaching of the way and of the faith?  It is generally conceded that all but John who was exiled to Patmos, died deaths of martyrs, some crucified, some stoned, and some burned alive.  Then too, what happened to those that became believes, and other apostles of the Christ, during the beginnings of Christianity?  Many of those good people suffered for their faith, by being discriminated against, banished, arrested, imprisoned, tortured, beaten, unjustly persecuted, set on fire, torn apart by wild animals, killed, or martyred.  Unfortunately, the Roman authorities considered Christians to be a threat to their system of government, because the Christian loyalty was not to the State, but to their God; and especially galling to the Romans, this Christ, was not one to bow down to the pagan beliefs and the pagan world, instead He was the one true way, superseding roman gods and silly superstitious sacrifices to them.

One would think though with the martyring of the disciples and the ill treatment to those of the faith, that Christianity would have simply died out, because most people would not have an interest in becoming disciples of a religion, which endangered themselves as well as their families, but this was not the case with Christianity.  Christianity could not be killed because it is the Higher Law, the law and the way that supersedes man's misguided efforts to be master of all, when he cannot even master himself. Those of the Christian faith, the true believers and followers, were able to become the children of God, because they recognized through Christ that God is their father, that fear and evil is of this world, and that therefore to die is to gain, because we are truly not of this material world, but are made in God's image, which is spirit, and not matter.  Death did not hold back the Christ, nor can death hold us back either, because the physical is of the physical world, while the spirit is of God's kingdom, to which we will find in due season the treasures that have been stored there for us and leave behind the tribulations of this world.

Progressive National Sales Tax

The 16th Amendment to our Constitution was enacted in 1913, allowing Congress to levy an income tax, which was, in theory, suppose to be a progressive income tax.  However, our income tax has over the years become manipulated, bent, distorted, corrupted, and had all other sorts of unfortunate ills applied to it, so that the effect of the income tax has become that those that can most afford to pay a higher percentage of their income for taxes, instead often are able to pay substantially lower taxes than they ought to, which is hardly fair. 

There is, however, another way to tax people in America, which could accomplish much of what the progressive income tax was meant to accomplish, and that is taxation by consumption, which can be done by a progressive sales tax.  In America, there are items that can be bought, such as groceries, that are not subject to a sales tax, other items that are taxed at the time they are bought, with the sales tax being added on to the price of the good at the cash register, and then there are sales taxes which are hidden within the price of the good, such as with gasoline and airfares. 

A progressive sales tax should be exactly what it purports to be, with higher tax rates on items that cost more money, and/or are expensive to begin with, and/or are priced substantially above the norm.  For instance, homes are subject to property taxes, but not to a national sales tax.  There isn't any reason why homes that are being sold for, let's say, thrice the median price, in a particular metropolitan area, that those homes shouldn't be additionally taxed at a certain progressive percentage rate, since the obvious implication is that the buyer of said house has the means to afford it and therefore should "pony up" the additional sales tax to do so.  Further to the point, homes that are sold at perhaps 5x the median price should be taxed at an even higher rate, and so forth, in a progressive and logical manner.  Vehicles that are sold in America are subject to a sales tax, in States that have a sales tax, but this should be augmented with a national sales tax on vehicles that exceed a certain price point.  Again, the tax would not affect those that purchase vehicles at that price point or below, but would affect those buying above that point and for those purchasing vehicles that retail for prices that are well above the mean, the sales tax would be progressively higher.

The principle behind the progressive national sales tax is to not add any additional burden of taxation to those that fall within the middle class or below, but instead to make those that can afford to purchase goods that are considered luxury, upgraded, or extravagant merchandise to pay a tax premium for having done so.  The luxury tax for vehicles in the United States was tried previously in 1990 and by 2002 the tax had expired, but it is high time to pass it again.  As reported by CNBC.com for 2014: "This year, automakers are on pace to sell more than one million vehicles in the U.S. with transaction prices of at least $50,000."

The proposed progressive national sales tax would not replace our income tax, nor would it affect the majority of Americans, but it would affect those that can most readily afford to pay such a tax, and it would help to redistribute those monies within America.

Presidents are Selected Not Elected

In a letter written to Edward Mandell House, Franklin D. Roosevelt wrote that: "You and I both know that presidents are not elected, but selected by a small group of elites".  The fact that this letter was written by the only President, "elected" four times by the people, is a remarkable testimony to the legitimacy for which it stands, that far from elections of Presidents being a democratic process and of the selecting of our National leader being by the popular vote of the population at large, that this individual, instead, is pre-selected and vetted, by vested interests that range from influential leaders of transnational corporations, to the military-industrial complex, along with well connected financial centers, and others of  vast material influence, knowhow, and wisdom.

If one was to look at our last ten Presidents, since 1960, six of those Presidents went to either Harvard or Yale University.  Out of the four Presidents that did not attend these higher Eastern Establishment institutions of learning, two became Governors (Carter and Reagan), one became the Senate Majority Leader (Johnson), and the other was a former Congressman as well as Senator (Nixon).  Politics is a business that requires connections, money, and a certain intelligence, to which those that are behind the scenes are able to recognize at a fairly early age, much like a scout following ballplayers, those that have it as opposed to those that do not.  Not too surprisingly, not every high pick, makes it to the big stage, but none that make it to big stage, are either unexpected or unheralded.  The so-called truism that in America, that anyone can become President, is fundamentally false, but true in the sense that if you are backed by the elite these things can be made to happen.

Presidential slogans, are eerily similar from one campaign to another, from Carter: "a leader, for a change," to Clinton: "for people, for a change," to Obama: "change we can believe in," it's always the same old pig, just with a slightly different shade of lipstick.  The elite make it a point to find bright and new people, fresh and bushy-tailed, that are both charismatic and articulate to sell the illusion to the American people that this time, they are serious, change is really going to come, but in actuality, any changes that do come, are fairly routine, predictable, and pretty much expected.

Those that hold the true power behind the Presidential throne will never voluntarily relinquish it, and that power is so intertwined, so interconnected, so byzantine, that even if the President had the boldness or the audacity to sever those ties, like the Lernaean Hydra, each head that would be lopped off, would be replaced by two more.  Too many people, have far too little conception, of how big a country that the United States is; its Gross Domestic Product is estimated to be over $17 trillion dollars, its federal budget is about $3.78 trillion dollars, it has over four million federal employees, so to think that any person taking over the office of the Presidency, can get a handle on all of that, is delusional to say the least.  Not to worry though, those that have selected the President, already have in place, the infrastructure and personnel to keep things running just as they have been running, to their benefit, and to the people's loss.

Our Father Which Art in Heaven…

In Matthew 6:9 we read: "After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name."  In Luke 11:1-2 we read: "And it came to pass, that, as he was praying in a certain place, when he ceased, one of his disciples said unto him, Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples. And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth"  These respective passages and the verses that follow have become to be known as "the Lord's Prayer," the prayer that was taught by the Christ as the way to petition Our Father which art in Heaven, and therefore this prayer is of the upmost value and importance to those of the faith and subsequently we should study and meditate upon the usage of the words: "Our Father," as compared to "My Father," or "The Father" to know its truest meaning.

Jesus of Nazareth is considered by the faithful to be the only begotten Son of God, so then when we are instructed by Jesus the Christ that we are to pray to God, by using the pronoun "our" as opposed to the definite article "the", this is of immense importance to us, and the implication that the usage of "our" in the Lord's Prayer, is that all of us, are too sons of God.  In Psalm 82:6 we read: "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High," and also in Matthew 5:48 we read: "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect."  It is clear then that our Father, is not just Christ's father, or inclusive to just a small group of people as their father, or that we need or should address our Father as something impersonal or some being that we are not worthy of, but, instead, that He is Our Father, that we are all his children, all created equally, with equal rights to call upon our Father.  This is the abiding message of the Lord's Prayer, that it is indeed meant for us all that we, all of us here on planet earth, have the same Father in Heaven, and that therefore we are all one-inclusive family, and thereby not many different or dissimilar families.  We are in actuality all sisters and brothers in our Lord and should conduct ourselves by recognizing that the stranger that we took in, the naked that we clothed, the sick and the prisoners that we visited, are all reflections of ourselves, they are thereby truly the ways and means of expressing our love to our Lord in our actions and in our deeds to our fellow man, our brethren, and our brothers.

The Lord's Prayer is the key to understanding that we are never alone; we are never forsaken, abandoned, or forgotten, by our Lord. We are told that "…the kingdom of God is within you", it is ever ours to claim as the rightful heirs to the throne itself.  Our Lord is "…not willing that any should perish…" and thereby wishes that all should claim God as their own.  It is for us, the living, to seek first the kingdom of Our God, for all other kingdoms are mirages, delusions, and snares that will only entrap and disappoint us, "...For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also;" let your treasure therefore be with our Lord.

Mutual Funds and their Different Classes

Mutual funds are a common investment choice for individuals to which, not too surprisingly, mutual funds make it a point to obfuscate the best choice for the investor, by offering more classes in regards to a mutual fund than is really necessary.  For instance, some mutual funds, offer you the chance to invest in the same fund, but with different class distinctions of: A, B, C, R, and I. To the uninitiated, you might even think, that by giving you all these choices, that the said mutual fund is being consumer friendly, by making sure that you pick just the right fund for your needs, but in actuality, the long and short of it is that the mutual fund whether deliberately or implicitly or by just happy accident, is basically hoping that you slip up and select the fund that pays them a larger fee.  If that wasn't the case, then the chosen mutual fund would reduce their class of funds to just very clear distinctions between one to another, with nothing in-between.

First, a brief description of each fund class type.  Class A shares may have an "up-front" sales load that is paid up-front upon purchasing this mutual fund, but offers in return a lower annual expense fee, which will typically pay for itself in a very short of period of time, such as two years.  Class B shares are virtually always the wrong choice as they have a higher annual expense fee, may also have a "back-loaded" fee, meaning that upon selling the fund that you pay a special fee, and to make matters worse they stick you with a perpetual marketing fee, 12b-1.  Class C shares are similar to Class B shares, but do not have the "back-loaded" fee, and are also not convertible to Class A shares, to which, Class B shares may convert to Class A shares over an extended period of time.  Class R shares are specifically built for retirement accounts, not so much because they are beneficial to the recipient, but more so that the mutual fund company can charge this particular class of shares at a higher annual expense fee.  Class I shares, are for institutional investors or deep-pocketed individuals, that usually require a substantial investment amount to qualify, but these shares do not have 12b-1 fees, nor front or back-loaded fees, and additionally have the lowest annual expense fees.

Believe it or not, there are additional fund classes that are around for some funds but the above basically covers it all.  Ideally, the best class of funds to invest in, is the I class, sometimes the threshold amount to qualify to invest is low enough that you will quality to do so, while also I class shares may be available through specific brokers with a lower minimum required.  If you are unqualified to purchase I shares, you should as a given, never invest in B shares, and probably not invest in R shares, as the extra fee percentage is significantly higher than either A or C shares.  Your default should probably be investing in A shares, but that is dependent on two things, whether there is an "up-front" sales load charge and how long you anticipate holding the shares.  If you are unsure of the length of time you will hold your A shares or the "up-front" sales load is high, than the better part of valor is to stick with C shares. 

It is up to you as in investor, to do the research on not just the fund itself, but the share classes that are offered.  Most mutual funds will show you the past results of their different classes of their particular mutual fund, along with an explanation of the charges and expenses contained within.  It is well worth your time to review this yourself before making your decision or, if in doubt, contact your brokerage company for further edification.

Modern-Day Slavery in America

Slavery has had a long and storied history in America, many people believing that it is dead and buried, perhaps ending with Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation of January 1, 1863, or perhaps believing that slavery was really over after the passage of the Thirteenth through the Fifteenth Amendments soon after the Civil War, or for some people, perhaps the seminal moment when we knew that slavery and the vestiges of slavery was eradicated from America, was when the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed.  Unfortunately, despite all the progress that America has made against slavery over the last two hundred odd years, slavery still exists in America, but has morphed into something that has adjusted with the times, and those that are treated as modern-day slaves in today's America, aren't typically black or African in their heritage, but Hispanics, primarily from Mexico, or from Central America, Spanish speaking, and typically seen by the law, authorities, and employment agencies, as illegal aliens to be exploited.

For Hispanics in America, there is a huge dividing line, between Hispanics that have already been assimilated, normalized, or native-born, and the like, as compared to those that are most definitely illegal border jumpers, in debt to "coyotes", poorly educated and/or functionally illiterate, have poor English language skills, and often hold forged or makeshift documents to identify themselves.  As you might expect, in a country built around a capitalistic footprint, which is also often highly competitive in select industries, and recognizing too that the cost of labor, health care, and the training of employees will make an appreciable difference in the profitability of said company, therefore there are explicit as well as implicit reasons why certain companies are overjoyed to have a segment of the labor force that is susceptible to giving in to the demands of management and consequently excellent subjects for labor exploitation. 

While some may argue that illegal aliens can't be considered to be slaves, simply because they voluntarily cross the border into our sovereign nation, this is a very mistaken notion.  For instance, who but illegal Hispanics, as agricultural workers, for example, are subject as a matter of course, of being not paid a fair wage for their labor, or of being paid less that contracted for or nothing at all because they that "employ" them recognize that Hispanics when it comes to the payment of a wage have little or no power to fight back, and further that Hispanics can be charged essentially whatever management wants to charge them for room and board, tools, food, water, and also to subtract from their wages any damages or product loss that may have occurred.   

Illegal aliens are exploited in America, day in and day out, because the exploitation is at best, in that "gray area" of the law and employment, and at worse, outright thievery.  While some may decry the sheer numbers of illegal immigrants in America, those in the know, embrace them, because their very business model depends on cheap, replaceable, and exploitable labor.  The real reason behind why there is such a huge inflow of modern-day slaves into America is because there is profit in it, enough profit to spread it around so that those that could stop it, don't; and those that rely on it, get what they need.

Islam and Radical Islam

Islam is supposed to mean the initiate's submission to the will of God and also his surrender and obedience to His law.  Whereas radical Islam takes elements of the Islamic religion itself, and under that color, commits atrocities that these adherents purport to believe to be the will of God, but this cannot be morally right.  Radical Islam believes for the most part, that apostasy to Islam is worthy of death, further that those that are of a different religion or of a different culture, may too be worthy of death, additionally Radical Islam often makes it a point of policy to kill or maim even children and other innocents in the name of their terror, and finally that women of their own religion, of their own bloodline, should be effectively treated as captives within their own religion, dictated to by the structure of radical Islam.

While it is not unusual for religions or certain cabals of people to have their factions that are radical, or even terroristic in nature, it is wrong, morally wrong, and also against the rule of Law, for these people or factions of people to assert their "justice" against others.  When confronted with this type of rogue behavior, there are myriad ways to deal with the issues than presented; in regards to radical Islam, the confrontation that is necessary should come from those that have the most to lose from the corruption and the bastardization of their religion, and that is Islam, itself.

It is common sense to understand that when something that is important to you, perhaps the very essence of your being is being dragged through the mud, and becoming something that you know that it is not, that a righteous stand must be made against those that besmirch it.  It has been said that for evil to triumph, you need just have good to step aside.  Islam cannot afford to have their religion hi-jacked by agents or States that do not represent what Islam should truly represent, so by doing little or nothing to prevent this corruption of a religion which has over 1.6 billion adherents, those that believe Islam to be a religion of faith, fasting, and charitable giving will instead believe that their religion is one of vengeance and horror, to which all can be subjected to its awesome avenging sword at any time.

Those of the Islamic faith should make it a point and an abiding principle that those that hide behind Islam to justify their evil actions against others should be publicly rebuked and treated as outcasts to the faith.  Islam believes at its very foundation that there cannot be any other God, but God, so it should not be possible to have such widely divergent views of what God represents from so many different people who all claim to be of the same basic faith.  For instance, Christianity itself has many sects that are not in accordance with all doctrines of their faith, but fundamentally all of those of Christian faith believe that as part of that faith one should "… love thy neighbor as thyself."  Islam too believes that "A kind word and forgiveness is better than charity followed by injury…"  

Physician, heal thyself.

Domestic Violence in the NFL

The Associated Press selected the NFL Domestic Violence problem as the sports story of the year in 2014.  This would presuppose that there really is a crisis of epic proportions for domestic violence in the NFL, which certainly appears credible considering that in the biggest game of the year, the Super Bowl, a domestic violence ad was run as part of a Public Service Announcement.  However, as reported by fivethirtyeight.com in regards to the NFL:  "In fact, the arrest rate for domestic violence is lower among players than the general U.S. population."  There then appears to be a significant disconnect between the actual conduct of NFL players, specifically in regards to amount of domestic violence actually committed as opposed to the impression that domestic violence by NFL players is on the verge of an epidemic, and/or is an issue that needs to be addressed as if it is a catastrophe in the making.

The question that therefore should really be asked is why is the domestic violence in the NFL, a front page issue, as statistically it doesn’t merit this being so.  First off, according to heavy.com: "68 percent of NFL players are African-American," whereas in regards to ownership of the franchises, 31 of the 32 owners are white, with only one owner non-white, Shahid Khan, a Pakistani.   Further to this point, the vast majority of head coaches as well as the general managers for NFL teams are also white.   So in the NFL, we have a sport that is predominantly populated by black players, but with virtually all the important and vital management positions held by whites.  Additionally, each one of the NFL franchises is worth at a minimum nearly one billion dollars, with the highest worth franchise being calculated at just over three billion dollars.  Further to the point, the Super Bowl game is annually the highest rated television program in America, as well as the NFL broadcasts consistently bring in high television ratings throughout the NFL season.  All of the above spells out what matters most to those that are most influential and powerful in the NFL, which is money, and the continued control of their product.

Since, in fact, domestic violence in the NFL is not a crisis, nor on the verge of becoming a crisis, one must wonder as to what is the true purpose behind this firestorm of specific media interest directed against NFL players.  The answer to this question is that those that are in power in the NFL want to keep their boot upon the necks of their players, as if the players themselves were their personal property of the contractual owners of such, so as to dictate to the players what isn't or is considered to be desirable behavior on and off the field, with the implicit understanding that failure to do so will as a matter of course negate the player's salary, respect, and hero status to society at large.  Simply put, domestic violence in the NFL is really a false flag created by ownership in order to allow them to maintain control and status of their valuable product, and thereby to place players in the position of total obedience to the dictates of the NFL, or suffer dearly the consequences for veering outside the designated lines.

Consumption and Excise are the Best Taxes

Americans are taxed on their labor, and probably will continue to be taxed on their labor for the foreseeable future, but this isn't necessarily the fairest or the best way to tax people.  Being taxed on one's labor just seems obnoxious, as is essentially taking food from the mouth of the one that has created it, and transferring it to the State or some other agent of the State without first giving the person that has labored any choice or voice in the matter.  In an ideal world, a man should be able to keep what he has rightfully earned and not have to be compelled to pay a fee to the State for having done so. 

However, it is understood, that governments need revenue to perform their duties, but there are myriad ways for government to fund and to collect that revenue.  The best and fairest type of tax would seem to be consumption and excise taxes for the basic reason that the individual can make the choice as to whether they wish to consume or purchase a product or not, and that those that consume more, will for a certainty, pay more overall in taxes.  America currently has excise taxes on alcohol, tobacco, gasoline, and airfares, to name some of the most prevalent, to which the excise tax is both typically hidden from the consumer (that is the amount of the tax is typically not separately shown as part of the selling price), as well as the excise tax percentage varies depending upon the good as well as whether it is considered to be "sinful" or similar.  Excise taxes are an excellent way to raise revenue for governments, especially when they are applied to items that are discretionary as opposed to things that are necessary.  Another reason why excise taxes are a preferred method of taxation is that taxes that are hidden from plain view are more easily accepted by the population at large, simply because they aren't as obvious as, for instance, a sales tax to which at the time that the transaction is actually made, the price of said item is now greater, because sales tax has been added.

In America, most non-food items are subject to sales tax in States that charge a sales tax, to which most consumers see the sales tax as simply being the cost of doing business and have consequently grown use to it.  Because the sales tax is only applied to items that you purchase, the customer is still the master as to whether they wish to spend their hard-earned monies on said items or not.  Additionally, the typical one-price fits all type of sales tax rate that we currently have, could easily be modified, so that certain items or even price points could be created, leading to different or  tiered or higher sales tax percentage rates depending upon the actual item being purchased.  In this age of computers and barcodes, making these sorts of adjustments to the sales tax code, should be something that could be readily managed and at the same time be constructive in recognizing that not all articles should have the same sales tax percentage applied to it.

While it is true that nobody really likes to pay taxes, consumption and excise taxes are a fairer way to tax people on their actions and their choices, as opposed to taxing people on their toil and without choice.

Americans Do Not Know How Good They've Got It

I have criticized America and its institutions on many occasions and for many reasons, but not because I hate her, but on the contrary because I dearly love America and for that which it truly stands.  The thing is there isn't any real point in criticizing the lame, the inept, the weak, and the feeble-minded, because you know that their overall potential is rather limited, so you owe these people instead your compassion and your care; whereas for the strong, the mighty, those of superior intellect and abilities, when they disappoint you and fail to live up to their heritage and their potential by their pettiness, by their short-sightedness's, by their cheating, and by their lying, these you will criticize, because you have expected so much more from them and they haven't yet delivered on it.  So that when you study America, you are distressed at all the mistakes that she makes, in its unnecessary middling in foreign affairs and wars, in its' shameful spying of its own citizens, in its over-incarceration of its own citizens, and its unwillingness to lift the lamp at its golden door.

Yet through it all this is still the greatest country on earth, because at its foundation, at its very being, is the rock-core principles that this is a country that has been gifted with the knowledge that indeed all men are created equal, and through its long history, America has walked down this path of true equality, during which there have been times that she has stumbled, backtracked,  veered off the true path, but also she has inexorably through the bravery and the vision of so many, walked the path, that no other country has walked, and has lived the creed, that embraces all men, of all colors, of all walks of life, in a way that brings honor to this nation and has proven that those that have died defending her, have not died in vain.

America too is a nation of liberty, allowing its people to live lives of their own choosing and of their own desire, to worship in their own way, to think their own thoughts, to do their own deeds, and to become what they dream to become.  In far too many countries, where you are born, and who you are born to, sets the limits on which you will become, whereas in America, one has the liberty to break free from such constraints.  Certainly, we do not all start with the same attributes, but each of us is given the opportunity to be the master of our own fate, or the captain of our own ship.

Finally, in America, we can pursue our own happiness, because we are given the freedom of choice to do so.  For some, that happiness that we pursue may be instead an illusion, or a dead-end, or rife with perils that we had not anticipated, but nevertheless it is our pursuit, it is ours, because we have made it so with our free will, rather than being forced to be or do something by the dictates of the State.  For Americans, our happiness, our liberty, and our freedom, is held within our own hands, within our own efforts, our own blood, our own labor, our own sweat, our own tears, and may it ever be so.

William Seward and Immigration

Immigration and its policies when it comes to Americans and who should be allowed to immigrate to America and to subsequently become American citizens has been a subject of much controversy since the inception of America itself.  For whatever reason, for a significant portion of Americans, there is an unforgiving attitude and bigoted mindset against "others" that wish to immigrate to this large land known for its opportunity, its freedom, and its liberty.  Yet, unless you are an American Indian, you, and your ancestors are in fact, immigrants to this nation, so this begs the question as to why the hypocrisy.

William Seward, was once the Governor of New York, later to become a US Senator, and was known as a strong abolitionist with national goals of becoming President of this country.  Ultimately, Seward failed to win the nomination for President in 1860, ended up becoming a strong supporter of Lincoln, and became Lincoln's Secretary of State.  Seward was a highly intelligent man, a man of both principle as well as vision, who did not mix words in believing strongly and affirming in both speech as well as actions, that all men should be free in America, and that therefore slavery had no place in America.  It then followed from these abolitionist policies that Seward was also very much a believer that America was a country for all peoples, that those immigrants to our country, should be educated, adapted to our ways, and be given the opportunity to participate as full members of this nation.

Seward believed that the national government of America was until the time of Lincoln, primarily in the hands of the "privileged class" which he designated as rich Southern slaveholders that distorted the true meaning of our Constitution, by their effective ruling power and meddling influence in all three branches of our national government.  Seward was a rare politician who did not broker compromise in areas of the law or principle, to which he felt that a "Higher Law" superseded them all.  It was this belief that helped to define the man and make it his policy to see that immigrants to America were given and afforded the same opportunities as those that were already here. 

It was also during the time of our Civil War, that it was recognized by Seward as well as by others, that immigration would help the Union cause, as so many of our young men and materials were now actively engaged in the war, and with the subsequent loss of massive numbers of men that were killed or injured in battle, this need became ever greater. This meant that the North acknowledged that it needed additional labor to increase the manufacturing of goods as well as materials required for the war effort, in addition to agricultural knowhow and labor to produce the food products necessary for a nation to survive and to sustain itself.  Since the North was no longer obtaining agricultural products from the South, it was critical for the North to provide this for themselves, to which they took advantage of the fertile fields of the Midwest, and with the help of new immigrants from European countries they were well able to do so.

Seward recognized before its time, the value and importance of immigrants to America, and recognized too that it was the character of the people residing within America, that made Americans, and not every American born within our borders, was, in fact, truly American in their understanding of their duty and obligations to their country as well as to its people.

The Exploitation of the Poor and Powerless

It has never been easier to exploit the poor and powerless than it is in today's world.  That doesn't mean, that in modern society that conditions for poor people are the worst of all-time, they aren't physically for the most part, but it does mean that the elite of the world, recognizing the massive numbers of people that are impoverished, are best seen as resources to be exploited and plundered, and despite the fact that the sheer numbers of poor people massively outweighs the relatively few numbers of the oligarchy, the battle is not fair, not equal, and almost entirely favors the ruling class.

In order to keep any population down there are basic factors that the autocracy must have in their control and for the most part they have these very things such as their ownership or heavy influence of the media, the police/military, the justice system, property, food, assets, and the banking world.  In most countries, poor people have no real access to weapons that the police or that the military have in their possession, and even if poor people have handguns and the like, their overall firepower is pathetically small in comparison to the might, organization, experience, logistics, and the power of the police/military state.  Additionally, if all land is own by the government or it is controlled by elite privileged people, than poor people have no sanctuary anywhere, to protect themselves from the ravishing of the government set upon them.  So too, unless you are self-sufficient in providing food for your family through hunting or gathering, the State will hold you hostage to the availability of food, safe water, and other necessities needed to just survive.  Through it all, if the media and/or airwaves are controlled or heavily influenced by the State, than the misinformation disseminated to you, will be manipulated in such a way as to try to keep you passive and complacent with the State's desires.

There are those that naively believe that because there are so many poor people, that a democratic uprising can occur, so that the people can get what is rightfully theirs.  The fact of the matter is, unless, you have a great moral cause, or unless you somehow are able to appeal to the good conscience of those that hold power above you, that the people enacting such an uprising are inevitably crushed.  The few times when there is an apparent passing of power from the oligarchy to the "people", through some sort of revolution or whatnot, the "people" often find that to their dismay when they "meet the new boss,  [it's the} same as the old boss," and they will get fooled again and again. 

The government is force, and until such time when that the government relinquishes such force, the boot of the State upon the necks of the people, will be felt.  Some governments make sure that the people are held in utmost abjection and misery, while others do a much better job of selling the illusion that the streets may yet be paved with gold.  The governments that last longer are the ones that make the virtual prisons that they keep the poor people in, relatively comfortable, with few demands, and a few false flags for them to rally around, hoping that the impoverished believe that this is some sort of freedom, when it is, in fact, dependence. 

Respect for the Law Derives from Respect for the Law-Giver

No man, nor any institution, government or likewise, is an island all to itself, all of us, throughout life must interact with the other, in one form or another.  These interactions begin at an early age, to which children learn in many aspects and avenues from their parents and other authority figures as they mature through the years.  We are taught in the Bible to: "Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it" (Proverbs 22:6).  However, the problem that is encountered by many parents as well as by others serving as parental or authority-like figures is that the training of a child is not just the words that are spoken to them, but also the actions behind those words, along with the actions of that person in their day-to-day comportment that spoke those words, as well as the character of the person so speaking and acting.

It has been said that children are like sponges, absorbing all that they see being enacted in front of them, day-by-day, so that if the words spoken to children are in contradiction to the actions of the people speaking said words, children will absorb this inherent contradiction.  For instance, if the father demands that his child is obedient and respectful towards the child's mother, while at the same time that father treats his wife with the utmost contempt and belittling disrespect himself, you will discover, sooner or later, that the child will often pick up the same traits of the father itself.  While the father may dictate respect for his law, the respect given to in return, will often be mitigated by the respect that child has for the law-giver. For example, if the father has a significant drinking problem, which is obvious to all, despite his words to the effect that he will not tolerate his children drinking or abusing drugs and so forth, he will often find to his dismay that his words will fall on hollow ears.  In this situation, as in many situations, it is the actions themselves that triumph over the words that are spoken.

Then too there are positive situations, to which, role models or parental figures are gracious, kind, patient, loving, and considerate in their actions and are known as being self-sacrificing, self-effacing, and moral in their character, both outside the home as well as inside the home.  While it is certainly possible, that children growing up in this type of environment, will end up being selfish, controlling, and ugly in their manner as well as their ways, if often can be said that the apple does not fall far from the tree. 

Taking this further, to our daily life and our interactions with government and employers, it follows that it is not too much of a stretch of the imagination to state that if our government is spying on its citizens, is double-dealing and underhanded, unfair, inconsistent, unjust, and corrupt in its actions, that its denizens, will probably not be exactly paragons of virtue.  It follows too, that if your employer consistently cheats or deceives its customers that you as an employee, will probably want to follow suit in doing the same with your employer. 

The problem with simplistic statements such as "obey the law" is that it is fundamentally flawed; obedience and respect for the law can only come from laws that are in harmony with true justice, truth, and fairness equally applied to all.