The Middle Class and the Rich

As reported by forbes.com: "In the four decades since 1971 the share of the U.S. population earning between two-thirds and twice the national median income has dropped from 61% to 51%."  That decline is staggering, especially so in a country that is neither a monarchy nor has hereditary titles, with ostensibly democratic institutions, independent judiciary, and still prides itself on being the land of equal opportunity.  According to theguardian.com: "Wealth inequality in the US is at near record levels according to a new study by academics. Over the past three decades, the share of household wealth owned by the top 0.1% has increased from 7% to 22%."  This would seem to imply strongly that there is a correlation that as the richest of the rich become wealthier, it has impacted the middle class so that this class is now shrinking at an alarming pace.

There has been a lot of changes in America since 1971, to which some of the most significant, is the rise of technology and robotics, and so too the successful scaling up of so many businesses into truly massive international global enterprises, as well as the unholy alliance that we see so frequently between industry and government, that effectively crowds out other sources and companies that are not part of the privileged set.  All of the above, has trickle down effects so that the necessity of your 9-5 worker, has become more interchangeable, than ever before, because as the world has gotten smaller and has reduced or eliminated tariff and trade restrictions, so too job security within industries has definitely gotten more and more problematic.

The biggest corporations in the world are not really interested in employing the most people in the world, gainfully or not, they are far more interested in seeing that they meet or exceed their quarterly numbers, and if in order to do so, this necessitates the removal, dismissal, or replacement of workers, so it will be.  To the rich the middle class is like a gigantic mine to be mined until it is depleted and used up, and when finished, they will have the lion's share of the profits and the benefits. 

The rich use the middle class in two basic ways.  The first is as their beasts of burden, to ride them as long as they have usage for them, and to discard them when their economic utility is less than their output, so as to be displaced with either younger workers at a cheaper wage or even better, with machines.  The second way the middle class is used, is to sell them the illusion, that if only if they work a little harder, get their stock options at the right time and price, make the right moves in the right way, that they too can climb up into the rarified airs of staggering wealth.  It helps that for the most part, the middle class believes it, but like that carrot on the stick in front of the horse, that keeps the horse going ever forward, the middle class has found over the last few decades, that the brass ring is a game that is often rigged from the outset.

A thing in motion has a tendency to stay in motion, so the rich will continue to get richer, and the middle class will continue to crumble.  The rich are not fools, they make sure to provide all the necessary toys and distractions to keep the middle class basically satiated and passive, along with championing any of those few that make the jump into the elite, but no make no mistake about it, the rich only tolerate the middle class because at this time it is more profitable for them to do so.  However, their long term interests are direct and to the point, the middle class of America must be eradicated, so that there will simply be those that are privileged, and the balance of the population will be there to serve and to protect their masters from any harm.

The Crime of Being Poor

America in its institutions and in its judicial system, clearly believes in the old adage, "out of sight, out of mind", as it imprisons day after day, thousands of civilians, for simply being poor.  Not too surprisingly, dong so for these unfortunates rapidly creates a downward spiral because once any individual is taken before the criminal justice system, he is no longer free, no longer able to meet family, school, or job commitments, as well as not being able to pay bills or other debt obligations, and ultimately will have placed upon his person, either the conviction of a criminal infraction, which will effectively marginalize him from gainful employment, or will at a minimum, have suffered massive inconvenience and have an arrest record attached to his name.

It should not be a crime to simply be poor in America, yet the indigent that have the audacity to be out on the public streets, are often treated as criminals, and have pressed upon them by legal authorities, the crime of loitering, or vagrancy, or panhandling, or any other crime that the municipality police can foist upon them.  It isn't necessarily that the police are the bad guys, although often they are, and it isn't necessarily that the justice system is corrupt, uncaring, and discriminatory, although often it is; it boils down more to the fundamental practice that "undesirables" are okay and fine, as long as they are not out in the public and thereby making certain businesses, families, and other folks, nervous.

The thing about loitering, vagrancy, panhandling, littering, outstanding warrants, an inability to pay traffic fines or other monetary or similar violations, is that placing a person behind bars and making them be a cog within our justice system, does not in most instances, provide true justice to the person being held, nor does it provide a real service to the community at large.  The poor in our streets are all our brothers, and deserve better than being essentially branded for life as incorrigible, unstable, unworthy, and dismissed as if they are vermin.

If a person with some money or someone having access to money, is picked up on one of these minor offenses which necessitates an arraignment and the posting of bail, he will after some major inconvenience in dealing with the criminal justice system, and having his freedom taken away from him, be released back out into the public, if it is a non-weekend in probably less than twenty-four hours, through making bail, or through his own recognizance, or perhaps even have the charges dropped, but in the meanwhile, during those twenty-four hours, he hasn't been able to take care of obligations at home, or go to work, to which his unexcused absence may necessitate termination, but at least upon release he is now back on the outside which enables him to have more options to rectify things.  A poor man, on the other hand, that cannot make his bail, or isn't issued freedom on his own recognizance, will be stuck in jail, for perhaps a considerable period of time, for some minor offense, that should never have necessitated jail time to begin with.

The criminal code book is endlessly long with so many tributaries, twists and turns that just about anything that certain designated undesirables do can be construed as being some sort of crime.  What this really amounts to is that if you are poor and are engaged by the police, your freedom and your choices will often be left in the hands of the police officer that is dealing with you.  Often times, police agencies have cute little sayings, such as "to protect and to serve"; recognize this reality, that the police most times when they deal with the poor aren't there to protect you, nor will they gladly serve you; in reality the police will often do exactly what the powers-to-be have told them to do to people like you.

MADD – Misguided Mission

MADD stands for (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) which was started back in 1980, after a mother lost her daughter to a driver with repeated drunk driving violations.  While the incident certainly qualifies as tragic, and perhaps justice at that time was too lenient in regards to punishment and penalties for those that drove while obviously impaired, the pendulum has swung far to the other side in the present day.  First off, “drunk” drivers are an obvious target to attack, since there are reliable scientific means to measure the blood alcohol content of a driver, however, just because a scientific instrument measures the blood alcohol content of an individual at .04% or .06% or .10% does not mean that the driver is actually impaired, even though the supporters of such a system want to sell you the illusion that this is true.  While there does come the point when a person’s blood alcohol level is so high, that there is a fair “presumption” that that driver is impaired, that number will vary considerably from person-to-person, based on a number of factors such as: their age, their psyche, their fatigue, their driving skills, and the time period of the test in relation to when the drinks were consumed.  In addition, there are a multitude of other reasons why some people could be impaired while driving far exceeding someone who is legally labeled as a DUI by State authorities, such as: medication, illegal drugs, temper, bad peripheral vision, bad depth perception, faulty side mirrors, fundamentally bad driving habits, cell phones, texting, radio, DVD, children, eating, applying makeup, fatigue, distraction, and just about anything else one can think up that would take away good concentration while driving. 

The main problem with organizations such as MADD is that rather than going after specifically people that are truly a menace to others out on the open road and that should have their driver privileges revoked, they instead focus their attention on people that for the most part, are no danger and no menace whatsoever.  This means that thousands of good citizens have their lives and their financial affairs negatively impacted each and every year, because the empowerment of MADD in conjunction with State authorities have set up a symbiotic industry that benefits State budgets, State courts, police organizations, attorneys, and other interested parties, on the backs of good taxpaying citizens, all under the guise of performing a proper civic duty.  The money that comes from these drivers that have for the most part, not been in an accident, nor harmed anyone or anything, but simply been cited for having an arbitrary amount of blood alcohol in their bloodstream is a bonanza for those that receive it, but for those that are compelled to pay into it, it is often a real misery, which, in some cases, means termination of employment, restrictions of employment opportunities, and often times in essence the equivalence of carrying the scarlet letter “D” for the balance of their lives.

MADD isn’t really about going after the few drivers that are habitual offenders of driving while under the influence, but instead is more about empowering the State to have more control over the people, to let them know that the State has little or no interest in justice or fairness, but wants to impress upon its citizens the command, that they were born into this country not to be free, but to obey.

Halfway Houses: A Better Alternative

Halfway houses have been given that moniker because they are seen as the halfway point from incarceration to being released back into public society, and as such are an opportunity for prisoners to re-adapt themselves to functioning well in society.  The basic hope and reason for being for these community correction centers is to cut down on recidivism and to also save the community coffers some money from the cost of incarceration of these criminals.  Halfway houses are often run by non-profits, but they also may be run by Federal, State, or local authorities, and even by large and small private corporations specifically dedicated to this particular industry.   Consequently, because there are so many different entities involved in halfway houses, the quality, safety, usefulness, and expense of halfway houses will vary considerably from community to community.  However, the overall concept of halfway houses in a country to which way too many people are incarcerated for way too much public monies spentand for way too many crimes that do not necessitate incarceration in the first place is sound, the execution behind it, may not be.

When it comes to our criminal justice system, the United States should be ashamedof itself that it locks-up such a high percentage of their population, often for "crimes" that are either non-violent, or substance abuse, with non-victims, and for nothing more than overall poor decisions, that should not necessitate the penalty of incarceration.  Often the point of sentencing criminals to prison is punishment, as well as to simply get these certain people off the street, but in neither case, has appropriate justice been served.   The concept of halfway houses is to provide an alternative that is far less disruptive to the criminal himself, but also less damaging to society as a whole.

A halfway house should be seen as an opportunity for someone that has made what society has deemed to have been a poor decision, and to help correct the situation in such a way, that both the public as well as the offender, benefit.  This means, that rather than the halfway house being the stopping point between prison and freedom, it should instead, be the starting point for certain individuals that qualify, as an alternative to incarceration in the first place.  That is to say, for example, if a person is convicted of a victimless crime, but is either current employed, or has had a history of steady employment, that it would serve the public more good to see that person continue with this employment, than to wrest that away from him, by making him serve his time in prison. 

There should be in this country, far more alternatives to being locked up from the get-go, especially considering that the cost of monitoring an individual in a halfway house or similar, is relatively inexpensive, and because too, technology has never been better to track someone through monitoring devices such as ankle bracelets and the like.   The United States has increased the percentage of the amount of its citizens incarcerated at a staggering rate over the last few decades; it is time, to look for something more becoming of a nation that claims to be the beacon of freedom and justice.

Drug Testing for Employment

A basic tenet of freedom is whether your body and your mind is your own, or whether indeed it is the government's or your employer or anyone else's that believes that they are the masters of your domain.  In order to survive in this material world, there is a necessity to work, and whereas at one time, generations ago, this was an agricultural nation, filled with family farms, sole proprietors, and the like, in the modern age, most people that are employed, are employed by a company that they are not owners or principles of and therein lies the rub.

If we were to presuppose that all drug usage, specifically illicit drug usage, was always pernicious, dangerous, debilitating, and with no redeeming value whatsoever, it certainly would make sense for corporations and government agencies to act as "our brother's keeper" in wanting to see that we did not fall upon evil ways but in fact, that supposition, in of itself, is deeply flawed.  However, leaving that aside, if we were to presuppose that illicit drug usage, by its very nature, upon detection of such, means always and without exception that you are either mentally and/or bodily impaired to such a degree at that present time that the performance of your dutiful work would always be negatively impacted and would be in fact, damaging to others within the corporation or would have material adverse effects upon the byproducts of the corporation, that also would be something clearly to avoid, but here too there is an assumption made which is false in its very premises.

The fact of the matter is, your drug usage, may or may not be debilitating to the company, depending upon a multitude of circumstances, to which it can be succinctly stated that rather than drug testing being a means to provide a safety umbrella for the company, its products, and its customers, it is reallya means to discriminate specifically against certain members of the public at large, so as to encourage the employment of certain preferred members of society vis-a-vis other members of society, nothing more, and nothing less.

One of the most common drug test usages, is testing applicants before they are employed or as a condition of being offered a job for employment at a given company.  This, on the surface, makes no logical sense, as the person being tested, cannot possibly be able to adversely affect anyone or anything within the company, as they currently are not even employed by said company.  This pre-screening, however, does what it is intended to do, which is to chase out those that do not fit the culture of said company. 

Then there are companies that reserve the right to drug test employees for reasonable suspicion, which adheres onto these companies police-like powers in which they are, suppose to objectively observe as to who isn't and who is subject to such a reasonable suspicion.  What this means in reality, is that the company now has given themselves the power to specifically target employees that are considered to be undesirable, and to use the mechanism of drug testing to either terminate them if they fail, or to serve as a fair warning that they are being watched.

In summary, drug testing is really a means to separate the sheep from the goats, to reward those that adhere to some arbitrary State standard, and to punish those that either are not cognizant of the rules, unable to game the system, or in general, lead a life that is consistent with believing that their body is their own.

Compulsory National Service

John F. Kennedy ranks as one of our favorite presidents, especially of the modern era, who stated in his 1961 inaugural address, "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."  This quote states that each of us, has an obligation to perform some duty or some sacrifice on behalf of our country, which considering the virtues that America represents to its citizens, doesn't seem to be an unreasonable thing to require from its people.  To date, there is no compulsory national servicer required in the United States, but in an era, to which there is an elite in this country, who may not ever put their hand to the plow but still are able to live high on the hog, as well as their being an underclass in this country that may not ever be gainfully employed, it might well be the most democratic thing to see that these peoples, as well as all others, can meet at the common ground of national service to their country.

The length of time for community service, could be set at six months, which in length of time, hardly seems a great burden, and this service would be compulsory to be served between the ages of eighteen to twenty-nine, with the flexibility to divide the time served into two separate equal sessions, so as to perform such a duty, if desired, during the summertime, between the conclusion of one year of college, and before the beginning of the next year, or similar.  Even though the obligation to all citizens would be a national requirement, in fact, it would be best to have the flexibility of that service to be accomplished either through national, State, local, non-profit, or religious organizations in its aspects.  That is to say, the point is for each citizen to serve their nation, to which, they can do this in a manner that is most acceptable to themselves and their particular inclinations.  This means that the service provided can be as simple as being directly related to the community at large, or be something that is international in nature, and all things in-between.

People love to talk and admire how free our country is, but freedom, comes with a price attached to it.  The freedom that too many of us take for granted, cost this country, blood, sweat, tears, and sacrifice, and this freedom would not have happened without those noble men and women that performed their duties on behalf of not only their generation but for generations to come.  The obligation that today's generation has to the past as well as to future generations, is to do and perform the duties and the obligations that one citizen has to its country and to its people.  While words may have their place, it is actions that move the world, and a six month obligation to this country, would not only benefit our country and its communities, but will do more to build character, devotion, and appreciation in its citizens, than anything else you might learn in your high school classroom.

Civil War Executions for War crimes against Humanity

At the conclusion of our Civil War, most Americans would be surprised that in its aftermath, only two confederates were executed for their war crimes.  The infamous Henry Wirz was executed for his war crimes against the prisoners held in Andersonville, of which he was the commander of.  The only other confederate executed after the war, was the notorious Champ Ferguson, a sadistic confederate guerilla, who took the lives of civilians, Union sympathizers, and Union soldiers, often times done in cold blood.  As for the confederate leadership, such as the President, Vice-President, governors of the rebel states, judges of the rebel states, generals of the confederacy, colonels, and so on down to the lowliest private, none of these other men were executed, not a single one. 

Not only were with the exception of two men listed above, no other confederates tried and upon duly being convicted, subjected to execution, not a single confederate was ever convicted of treason against the United States of America.  While it is true, that confederate president Jefferson Davis, as well as General Robert E. Lee, in addition to some others were later indicted for treason, all in the end were granted a general amnesty by President Johnson in 1869.  For the most part, rebel soldiers were allow to return to their lands upon their defeat, and upon taking a loyalty oath or receiving a pardon they would become, once again, fully invested with all the material rights of the citizenship of America.

This meant, in effect, that the rebel states were able to instigate and sustain a bloody and destructive four-year civil war, that cost many men on both sides of the conflict their lives, their health, their livelihood, and their possessions, and upon defeat, to be taken back into the fold of America, as if in essence, that they were prodigal sons. 

The magnanimity of the United States to their former compatriots was absolutely astonishing, and a credit to the graciousness and wisdom of the United States of America.  Lincoln's belief was that to subjugate and to punish the South further, would serve no useful purpose, and would unnecessarily delay the reunification of the United States of America; an important step in making the USA, a country that in no way or form, that Europe would ever be able to threaten or conquer by war, as well as making our country more prosperous in its trade with foreign nations.

Lincoln stated in his second Inaugural Address, just a month before the end of this great civil war, that: "With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations."  Unlike so many other politicians, Lincoln meant the words that he spoke, and to the credit of this great nation, even after Lincoln's assassination, the country for the most part, made good on those words.

To take the life of another man is not necessarily a difficult thing to do, because mankind has created weapons that do those deeds quite effectively.  To take a man that is your sworn enemy, and to make him your friend, by not destroying him when you have him in your possession to do so, demonstrates maturity, charitableness, agape love, and hope in a better future.

This is the legacy of showing mercy to our erring brothers.

1 Corinthians 6:12

We read in 1 Corinthians 6:12: "All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any."  The above is one of those intriguing witticisms brought forth from Paul's wisdom to the Corinthians, and although it addresses in particular bodily sins, it also can be seen in a much broader manner.  The most basic thing about those professing to be Christians, or believers in Christian theology, is that man's nature aches so often to bend the rules in such a manner as to be able to justify certain things in this world, without fear of penalty in the next.  But, however, not too surprisingly, this type of thinking is flawed at its very foundation.

Another point that is very important about 1 Corinthians 6:12 is its assertion that as human beings with free will, all is permitted unto us, but in wrongly asserting that that freedom has no bounds, you will find that in the end, you will be the creator of your own shackles that preclude you from the joys and grace of beneficial eternal life, much to your chagrin. 

We find too that on the other hand, 1 Corinthians 6:12, is a backdoor way of saying that by virtue of being created by God, that we are entitled to as our Declaration of Independence states, to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  But unlike our Declaration of Independence, this declaration from Holy Scripture, gives us fair warning that although we are masters of our fate and of our decisions, that like a chess match with a grand master, we may quickly find ourselves outclassed and in a heap of trouble, should we decide that ultimate wisdom lies within ourselves, rather than at the temple of God.

So too does 1 Corinthians 6:12 send a clear warning to all tyrants of the world, that each of us, is gifted by God with the free will to be about our business in our mind, in our body, and in our spirit, and that there is no tyrant on earth, that has been given by Divine hand, the scepter that makes them the supreme ruler of ourselves.  In fact, all, both low as well as high, must ultimately bow to the Supreme Authority that rules all nations and all worlds, and that unlike legal legerdemain that works so well for those crafty souls in earthly matters, there is no legal escape clause that will allow one to skip away from true justice and fairness from He who makes no error, and knows us better than we know ourselves.

Finally, for those that like to play the blame game, to which all their problems and all their complaints can be laid at the feet of others, recognize that 1 Corinthians 6:12, applies particular well to you, whether you wish to own up to it or not.  All of us, each one of us, are masters of our fate and captains of our own ship.  Fortunately, in every situation, in every experience, God's hand is there, to guide us, to console us, to strengthen us, for He cares deeply about His lost sheep, and wishes all to come into his fold.

What Happen to Independence in our Declaration?

Back in 1776, the representatives of the United States of America, in a general congress, appealed to the Supreme Judge of the world in their petition against the British crown, to which, the outcome, after seven years and many battles was for the United States of America, to become a free and independent people created in a new birth of freedom as a country.  Since that time, many things have occurred within our nation, some great, and some not, to which, given the present state of America, it can be asked as to whether we as a people currently live under the principles of our Declaration or whether, instead, we live under some sort of reduced and pathetic subset of such.

Our Declaration of Independence made many specific accusations in regards to the king of Great Britain and his tyranny against the colonists.  In looking at today's world, a list could be submitted that too would show a long record of usurpations and injuries to the people.  For instance, the Government has set aside a Supreme Court of nine unelected justices, nominated by the President to the Supreme Court for which the President makes it his policy that said nomination is in agreement with the political party that championed the President as their candidate.  This means that rather than these Supreme Court justices being free of ties and impartial, they are in fact, chosen for their political ideology, and further, their decisions, as a matter of course, are binding on all States and citizens, to which it is the Supreme Court that makes law, overrules law, re-interprets law, and thereby consistently overturns and replaces law of long-standing popular favor of the people, because these justices are in effect, the law.

Furthermore, this Government has created a powerful and permanent military force that is both a drain upon the public weal as well as making it Governmental policy to influence, disrupt, or get involved with wars with foreign principalities whether covert or overt.  Further, the military has explicitly or implicitly become intertwined with domestic police forces and spy agencies so as to place the people as a whole, in imminent danger of living within or being subject to an effective police state, which subverts, contravenes or endangers all of our Constitutional rights, as well as our life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

Additionally, the coin of the realm, is controlled not by the States or by the people, nor even by the Federal government, but is instead in the hands of certain powerful and unelected banking establishments.  These banks control and set the interest rates that will be charged to borrowers, the supply of the money, and the intended inflation rate of the money issued.  Their power is so great that recessions and depressions are at their command, so as to enrich the few at the expense of the many.

Then there is the taxes imposed under the people under the semantic term of "voluntary", a word that if taken at his face value, would mean that the people have a choice as to how much that they wish to voluntarily surrender to the Government in payment of tribute, but in actuality, this is not the case at all.  The tax code is, in fact, deliberately byzantine so as to favor selected persons within America and is effectively structured in such a manner that those citizens simply trying to adhere to democratic law pay considerably more than their "fair" share.

These are the conditions of our life that we are subject to.  Our master is no longer the king of Great Britain, who when he ruled us, ruled us from abroad and with a somewhat tolerant hand.  Today, our master is omnipresent, omnipotent, and insatiable to which we are the huddled masses, tired and poor, yearning for re-admission through the golden door that once admitted all.

Water and Water Pressure

If you live in a traditional one-story home, you probably aren't too amazed how water gets around the house from one sink to another, or from one shower to another, it seems on the surface to be pretty darn easy, even though on a basic level, water still has to travel to that sink, as well as to travel up the pipe in order for it to come out at the spigot, which necessitates some sort of water pressure in order to accomplish all this, but the overall vertical rise is relatively tame throughout.  However, for a multi-story apartment or housing complex, the issues of water and water pressure gets a lot more complicated.  First off, water follows the law of gravity, so that its natural course is to flow in the same direction as gravity directs to go, which is typically downward.  The water to your home usually comes from the city and in order for that order water to reach you; it must be pressurized so as to flow through the city's pipes and into your dwelling. Once there, your home will have to have its own pressurized device and/or pressurized reducing valve in order to create a happy medium between the Pounds per Square Inch (PSI) of not being too low and thereby the water not flowing with enough power throughout the home, or too high, and having thereby too strong of a water flow, which, if too strong for too long, will prematurely age the pipes and could later be the cause of expensive and damaging leakage.

Most of us take it for granted, that water just works throughout our house, and don't really appreciate the value of having water readily available at a pressure that is comfortable to take care of the tasks that water does, such as being used with the toilets, shower, laundry, dishwashing, and watering, until something goes horribly awry.   The fact that water flows so readily throughout our homes and works so reliability is a testimony to man's mastery of the science and physics of the operation, because without running water, the conditions within our homes would quickly deteriorate into something being quite intolerable.

Often the city water that we utilized each day resides in a water tower up on a hill, making it easier by the virtue of gravity to distribute the water throughout the town through the piping that lies beneath the ground, as well as reservoirs being used throughout the city to store the water for future usage and/or to be pumped into water towers as needed throughout the day.  All of this we take for granted, because the engineering behind it has allowed mankind to move water from place to place seamlessly, and not only that, to distribute the water to individual homes in such a manner, that without even really thinking about it, we are able to control the water at our homes, by merely moving the faucet handle up or down, or left to right, and viola, water flows out, as if by magic. 

Trans-sexuality, Really?

In today's world, medical doctors can perform all sorts of successful surgeries through their skills, knowledge, and powerful medicinal drugs, but just because something can be done, does not necessarily mean that it should be done.  To the point, elective sex-changing surgery, especially for those that are not of legal age, should be carefully looked at and monitored in such a fashion so as to hold accountable, those that are responsible for making such decisions, which once made, have consequences which cannot easily or ever be undone.

We live in a world to which every generation has had a certain small percentage of people that identify their sexual orientation more closely with the sex that they are not biologically part of.  This isn't that unusual, for some people it can come about by parents that were hoping for one sex for their child, but received the opposite, yet decided to bring up the child as if the child was the opposite sex.  For others, it is just a phase that they go through during adolescence or even beyond, where they are trying to identify themselves, and experiment with clothing or makeup or pretending to be something that they biologically are not, and over a period of time, they typically grow out of this phase.  Then there are still others that are adamant that they are a female, even though biologically they are male, and they cannot get that concept out of their mind.

For better or for worse, it has never been easier to "transition" from one sex to another, but do so, is still not an easy process, as it involves, psychological counseling, hormone therapy, testosterone or estrogen as the case might be, and for younger patients, puberty-blocking medication.  All of this, over and above the actual surgery itself or the money involved, have consequences to anybody's body, and the younger that the patient is, the more serious the ramifications of taking these medications can be physically, emotionally, and psychologically.  The fact that teenagers that are not yet of legal age are even eligible for this type of intensive life-changing surgery is deeply disturbing because most teenagers of that age do not yet have the capacity or the wisdom to understand the consequences of such a decision, nor do medical staffs, themselves, have the data to know all of the possible ramifications or consequences of doing so.

Through it all, one very basic thing is missing, and that is a lack of understanding why anyone would insist upon being of a different sex in the first place.  While those requesting such an operation have their viewpoint, as do medical staff and other professionals, they all seem to be missing the boat completely.  If you study nature, you will see that nature is an endless litany of birth, death, and re-birth, over and over again.  So too this is true for humans, however, we are taught in Genesis 1:27 that: "God created man in His own image…"  That image that is created from God's mind is not a physical image, but is instead our immortal soul, which when it chooses to incarnate here on earth, has the choice of being either male or female.  So that, if one then through interminable cycles consistently incarnates as a female, life after life, and then suddenly decides, without proper cosmic attunement, to become a male, it then comes as no surprise that having done so, that that individual, will possibly have a hard time adjusting to this new sexual identification. 

This then is the real nub of the matter, our over-identification of the physical to the detriment of the spiritual.

The easy way is to just say "Yes"

For a significant amount of people, there is an over tendency within the personality, to say "yes," almost without thinking about it, to issues in which with any reasonable reflection, a more reasoned or qualified response would have been seen as more appropriate.    The main reason that so many of us say yes, in certain situations, is that we want to get along with others, we don't want to be seen as difficult, and thereby by saying yes, it demonstrates that we're a team player, even if in reality, we are not.

Each of us wants to be loved, and to love, so that there is an inherent bias to want to please and to placate others, in the hopes that, by doing so, the same consideration will be shown to us.  While that may be true to a certain, modest extent, politeness, empathy, and listening, are not the same things or make up the same characteristics as acquiescence.  It is said that one's "no", should mean "no," and thereby the corollary should follow that one's "yes," should mean "yes", and this further signifies that when one says "yes" but really does not mean it, that one has been false to one's self.

It is well understood that the easy way and the simple way in certain conditions is to say yes, because we often don't want to be the ones that are holding things up, and/or the ones that are rocking the boat.  But in point of fact, if saying yes is wrong, and you know that, you have done yourself as well as the other a large disservice.  Too many times we are afraid that we will lose someone, lose their respect, lose their friendship, and lose their validation, by not giving in to their demands or to their wants, but when these things conflict with who or what we are, it is our duty to stand up for our principles, and if by doing so, this means a breach between two parties develops, then perhaps that party was not so worthy of our respect and admiration as we previously thought.

It is important to get away from making snap affirmations to requests or to things, to which, the issues being brought up, required a more thoughtful or nuanced response.  If you think back upon your own life, certainly it will be easy for you to remember many times, when you got your way, and many times when you did not, yet you know, for a certainty, that in hindsight, not all the times that you desired your way, would it have been prudent or the better path for you to have had that granted.  This means in some cases in which you were absolutely adamant that you needed a yes answer, and did not receive it, this was, in fact the correct course of action, and now belatedly recognized by yourself as wisdom.

True wisdom comes not by going with the flow or by saying yes, without thought, but by doing right, as we are gifted in seeing the right, to which sometimes the best answer is not the easy one, but the more difficult and necessary one.

Life + Five Years

One can readily understand that when someone receives two life sentences as logically being the commission and conviction of two separate offenses to which in each case, the criminal has been convicted and sentenced to life, so that, if for some reason, the convict is able to overturn one of the life sentences, he will still have another life sentence to contend with.  So too it is fairly easy to understand that life without parole, means exactly that.  Then there is the punishment of life imprisonment plus five years or plus twenty years and on the surface, that sounds absurd, but in fact, it makes sense as seen in the first example, in which the person being convicted for life, has that term imposed upon him, and if for some reason that conviction is overturned or served in such a manner that the man can now successfully appeal for parole and is granted it, he still would have an additional five years to serve for another crime that he has been duly convicted of.

Once understanding that, another question comes to mind, as to why doesn't the justice system simply allow the man to serve the second sentence of five years concurrently with the first, especially if the second sentence is something that is not of such a serious nature as to have necessitated a long and lengthy prison term in the first place?  It hardly seems like a just punishment to have a man serve thirty years in prison for the commission of a crime, and then only after those thirty years, have to serve even more time, for some other crime, even though he has been in prison for the last thirty years.

It our justice system is so insistent that a man must have two non-concurrent prison terms than it would make more logical sense that the convict serves the lighter sentence first, before having to serve the later one.  Their argument against this, I suspect, would be that the lighter sentence may allow that convict to serve his term in a prison system that would treat him "better" than the lowlife that he really is, since his initial servitude would be based specifically on that specific crime and sentence. 

Being that as it may, it is a travesty of justice that a man would not serve his sentence for a crime that he has committed, until thirty or even more years have passed after being convicted of such a crime.  If the purpose of having convicts be imprisoned is both for rehabilitation and for a just punishment, having a criminal serving a lesser sentence after having being paroled from his previous life sentence, should be seen as a violation of the Eight Amendment against "cruel and unusual punishments". 

The justice system should be allowed to convict a criminal for two or more separate offenses, that have two or more separate sentences, but after that conviction, the order of service of those sentences, should be mandated as the lesser sentence being first, and the sentence with the greatest punishment being last; unless the State decides that they wish to begin and to end with the more severe punishment, in which case the lesser sentence(s) must be served concurrently.

I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore

The above quote is from the movie: Network, in which anchorman Howard Beale on live television in an emotional cathartic outburst pleads with his audience to stick their necks out their windows and to shout out that they are indeed "mad as hell…".  This, of course, was fictional, but forty-odd years from this seminal movie, it doesn't appear that the American public has ever really bought into that they are indeed the captains of their own ship and the change that they claim to want, is therefore in their own hands.  Instead, most people are far too involved in their own minutiae of their own life, to have the capacity to demand and to effect real and lasting change, and so through their own inactions, the chains of governmental intrusion and servitude to the State are strengthened.

There isn't a country or a business model that can successfully and fully function, if the people, if the majority, will not give in to the State or to conglomerate demands.  It is up to the people to rock the boat, to agitate for change, to press their points, to protest with their bodies and with their pocketbooks, as well as to shine light on things that the oppressors fear to have exposed that will begin the process of actual, functional, and meaningful change.  Most of the change that we desire does not happen overnight, nor does it often happen by leadership suddenly becoming more enlightened, instead it happens, because of relentless pressure, because it is an idea who time has come, and because it is right.

Those that are first to rise up against the State, are like the first soldiers to strike out against a formidable enemy, in which often the result for the first wave is injury, hurt, privation, or even death, but without these brave souls sacrificing themselves for the greater good, the greater good would not ever come.  Today's corporate State has but two primary objectives, to see that you are placated, and to exploit you in such a way that you are not overly upset about it; they need to accomplish this in order so that these privileged elite can live high on the hog on your backs, on your labor, and on your knowledge.  Life does not, need not, be this way, as there are many alternatives to this current poor state of affairs.

Fortunately, in America, each adult is entitled to one vote, so that in theory, we can vote upon the change that we actually desire.  However, in function, this often is not the case, as the choices given to us, are in effect, nothing but a Hobson's choice.  Still that does mean, that brick by brick, step by step, that change cannot be implemented as the Watchman, no matter how diligent, cannot see everything, cannot know everything, and cannot anticipate everything. 

Some great changes have already occurred in this nation, mainly because of the brave mortals that have obeyed their heart and their inspiration to help to manifest that change.  When you are mad, dig beneath the surface and mine that anger, discover what it is that upsets you, and if it is worthy, make a vow to do something about it, and not to just sit back and stew in your anger.  A man is not born to be permanently stooped over, so stiffen up your back, and reclaim what is rightfully yours.

Hotel Resort Fees

In the business world, you always have options as to how to conduct your business, to which most people respect those businesses that respect them.  The best way to show that respect is by dealing with your customer base in an even and fair-handed method and to charge people the rate as advertised or promised without having to resort to underhanded or questionable tactics.  Ideally, the more transparent business transactions are, the better the experience will be. 

Over the last decade, certain hotels in certain cities, have added "resort fees" for things such as pool access, gym access, Wi-Fi access, and so forth, to which the price for these resort fees is not trivial, whatsoever.  That is to say, you can easily book a hotel for what appears to be the low-low rate of $60/night only to find out that you have another $50/night in aggregate to pay for: resort fees, parking fees, taxes, cleaning fees, tourist taxes, and hotel occupancy fees.  What this does, in effect, is take what you thought would be $60/night and instead increases it substantially in comparison to the true and actual cost, something that may or may be within your budget, and also something that seldom that you will be pleased to accept without feeling a bit undone by.

Hotel resort fees are especially gut-wrenching, because there are most definitely hotels that charge this fee, that on the surface, you would not expect it, because there isn't anything about the hotel that would make your believe that in a fair description of its characteristics, there would be included the word: "resort".  Further to the point, even more galling, is that upon doing your initial research for the subject hotel, to which you thought that you were comparing apples to apples, you haven't been doing that at all, as hotels with resort fees do not show that resort fee as part of their advertised internet price, so while doing your comparison shopping you are invariably comparing some hotelswith resort fees that are currently obscured to you, to hotels without resort fees, and believing that when the internet pricing is about the same, that the overall price will be the same, when that definitely is not close to being true.

Those hotels that do charge resort fees, make it a point to show that on their website, after the subtotal, or upon their terms and conditions, so the resort fee is there if you are looking for it, but the advertised price per night is in bold print, which doesn't take into account those resort fees, so the consumer can easily overlook these additional fees, completely.  Also, should you in fact, book the hotel through a third-party website such as Priceline or Expedia, once again, it is very easy to overlook this charge, as that website might have something written such as "hotel fee not included" which doesn't seem to really mean anything to the uninitiated, as instead it is the advertised price in bold print that garners our attention.

There isn't any doubt that resort fees work out quite well for the hotel industry as it allows them to make their nightly rate appear more competitive by matching the competition in advertised price, and then augmenting their particular price by adding in the ignominious resort fee.  This means, that the resort fee isn't going away anytime soon, in fact, no doubt, the opposite is in effect, so that the consumer can expect that resort fees will become a more and more common experience, to which the consumer is stuck with fee, and wonders exactly where the resort is at.

Courtroom Recording

Basically, with the exception of the people that have a vested interested in the courtroom, and courtroom proceedings, such as those in the legal field, journalists that cover trials, and friends and family of specific court cases, our public court rooms are mainly cleared of any disinterested observers, so that court cases, except for those of a certain notoriety, are simply done in the public, but watched by virtually nobody.  Maybe that is a good thing, maybe it isn't, but in point of fact, in the era of the high-technology and universality of audio, video, streaming, blogs, and so forth, it seems like our court proceedings are a throwback to a bygone era and that therefore the less exposure that court cases get, the less accountability the public, in general, will hold the courts to.  This means, in effect, we take it, more or less on faith, that our courts are fair, impartial, and just, but with little public oversight, this probably is not true.

America is a nation of all sorts of laws, some clearly outdated, some clearly self-serving, and the prohibition of cameras and picture taking in all federal court rooms, for example, seems to benefit only those that are part of that court system, and impair the ability of the public to be well informed.  In fact, there are so many cases, on so many days, in so many court rooms, throughout America, clearly, even if as policy video-recording was allowed in most court cases, there simply would not be enough interest in virtually all cases, for there to be any traction in recording the overwhelming majority of cases.  This means, in effect, that these laws ban something that would, in all likelihood, hardly ever be utilized for the public interest by the media, so that as a matter of public policy, the question should be re-written in such a way, as to ask if allowing the public recording of this public trial, would be clearly prejudicial against certain elements within the trial and to thereby get an injunction on that matter to decide it.

It does not make a lot of logical sense that our court rooms are open to the public, yet, picture taking, video and audio recording are not permitted or allowed in most cases.  Yet, when we watch a court proceeding, in our mind, we take pictures, we absorb audio, and we record our own video, so that the recording has already been made.  There isn’t any real good reason, why certain rules and regulations, could not be setup in such a way, to protect the anonymity of the jury, or certain witnesses, by either the deliberate blurring of their faces or by simply directing the camera to shoot only from the shoulders down and so forth.  In addition, should a live camera be considered to be a potential danger to the integrity of the court proceeding, the recording could be tape-delayed, edited if necessary, and so forth in order to uphold the court's desire.

Furthermore, if a video recording is considered at the present time to be that "bridge too far", an audio recording should not be, as an audio, is simply the voices speaking, which could be transcribed, streamed in real time, or released in an edited form, with the removal of extraneous information.  In fact, audio recordings of court trials that are of public interest would best be in keeping with the spirit of the law, that are trials are to be public as both a protection for the people as well as keeping the people informed as to how law is applied in their domain.

As Goes Greece, so goes the World….

Greece as a country is relatively small potatoes, with its GDP ranking somewhere around 45th in the world at large, Greece hasn't been an economic force in centuries, yet Greece has been getting all sorts of publicity, because of its economic woes and civil unrest over the last few years and the fact this western nation's economic situation is dire.  On virtually every economic level, Greece is in sad shape, with high inflation, high unemployment, and retraction of its GDP, along with its massive debt overload which it cannot service successfully.  All of this, brought about not just domestic disturbances within the nation itself, but lead to the inevitable closing of the financial markets, so that those that needed to trade in the stock market, or to access a bank for cash or other financial transactions, were either completely shut out from doing so, or severely restricted in accomplishing things that previously were taken for granted.

The bottom line is that a severe financial crisis often has incredibly bad repercussions within a country, and depending upon the size of the country can possibly produce tragic ramifications throughout the entire world.  For instance, the USA has currently a massive debt load of nearly $19 trillion dollars, but even that number as large as it is, is dwarfed by the possibility that including all of our off-budget legacy obligations that our true national debt could be as high as $70 trillion.  The problem with massive deficits and the continuation of policies that keep increasing these deficits is that one day, some day, the creditors to these obligations such as financial institutions and foreign countries, may begin to doubt that ability of a nation, even one as rich and powerful as the United States, to make good on their debt.

There are hedge funds run by geniuses that have made huge amounts of money, understanding the markets, and taking advantage of obscure pricing differentials and inefficiencies between markets, that have consistently made money, until there comes that day, when the "black swan" event comes, that could not ever come, but it does and then this same hedge fund collapses within a very short period of time, because its house, far from being built on a solid foundation, has instead been built on assumptions that are good 99.99% of the time, when instead they needed to be good, 99.9999999% of the time, and with a viable contigent exit strategy, no less.

The fallout and collapse of Greece should be an object lesson to all that a country, any country, cannot successfully rely on the ever present availability of capital to paper over the deterioration of previous financial situations, ad nauseam.    When the time comes that the lenders get wise to the game, or that the lenders decide that they wish to change the terms of the game, you, as a borrower, probably don't have a lot of good choices, and the lack of those choices, will be felt throughout the entire infrastructure of your country, when word gets out, that your credit line has been terminated or severely restricted.

As Shakespeare tell us, "Neither a borrower nor a lender be, For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry."  Greece as a country cannot honor its debts, and by this dishonor, they have short-changed their citizens, their economy, their liberty, their livelihood, and ultimately their lives.

411: Directory Assistance

There are things that use to be free and that are no longer free, then too there are things that use to be free but are only free for a limited amount of time or usage, and then there are things that use to be free, that now have alternatives that are also free.  In regards to 411, directory assistance calls, made by your house phone, or cell phone, or prepaid phone, or cable phone, or VOID phone, there often isn't any consistency as to whether these calls to 411 are free or are not free.  Where there is consistency is that when you are charged for a 411 call, whether you dialed it on purpose, accidently, or even actually talked to anyone on the other end to get information, is that you will be charged/billed $1.99 for each one of these calls, without any warning of this impending charge while the call is in process.

While one can understand that the entity processing the directory assistance call, wants to make money to cover its costs and whatnot, from a fairness to the consumer perspective, that charge should be brought up at the beginning of the call, so that the person making the 411 call, can opt out should they desire to do so.  In point of fact, there are many people who are ignorant that a 411 call, costs money, and with knowledge of this material fact, they would find alternatives to dialing 411, such as using the internet, or other toll free numbers to directory assistance that are advertiser sponsored.

To make matters worse, phone plans that are prepaid such as magic Jack or prepaid cell phones, should never as a policy charge their subscribers for a 411 call without a warning, mainly because as a prepaid subscriber, that payment for the specific usage of that phone and data has already been made.  However, on the prepaid cell phone that I have, not only is there an app with the 411 icon, you will, even if accidently dialing 411 or accidently touch the app, be charged $1.99 which will be added to your balance owing for the next month of usage of your prepaid cell phone. 

While it is one thing to purposely dial 411 and actually receive information in return, it is entirely another thing to accidently dial 411, talk to nobody, accomplish nothing, and to be charged as if you have received something of worth.  Further to the point, even if you talk to directory assistance, if the information that is provided to you is incorrect or wrong, you should not be charged for that "assistance", but you are charged anyway.

In most marketplaces, free things crowd out those that charge for essentially the same service, but 411 and their $1.99 charges are still going gang-busters, mainly because they take advantage of people's general ignorance and/or laziness, as well as the price being low enough so that it is a nuisance but not high enough to raise most people's ire, and further that they are permitted to charge the other person's phone without that person's full consent.

In fairness to the consumer, 411 calls should not be charged if there has not been a warning given that the call will generate a user fee, as well as the 411 call must also provide something of value to the consumer in order for a payment for such service to be considered fair.

The True Price of Roses

According to the National Retail Federation, "37.8 percent of Americans will buy flowers for Valentine’s Day 2015, spending a total of $2.1 billion."  Of course, flowers are bought all year long, for various reasons, such as birthdays, anniversaries, mother's day, wedding, graduation, promotion, or "just because".  The most popular type of flower to buy is the rose, which means that roses are the most prevalent flower available in all sorts of colors at floral stores, in grocery stores, street vendors, as well as other places that sell flowers.  From a consumer perspective, all this is to the good, as the choice and convenience for buying flowers is huge, with, flowers also being sold online through sites such as proflowers.com, 1-800-flowers.com, and FTD.  Besides the sheer convenience of all the places that you can shop at to buy flowers, there is also the fact that roses, overall, are incredibly inexpensive from a purchaser standpoint.  For instance, on any normal non-holiday, without even considering specials or coupons, you can easily find a dozen roses for prices like $15 or $12.99 or even $10, with some stores or street vendors possibly even lower.  This is a fantastic price for something that is so well received and appreciated by the recipient, it makes you really admire the competitiveness of the stores within America, our efficient transportation system, as well as the brilliance of the flower growers, themselves. However, there is one fundamental problem with all of this, and that is the assumption that the roses that are bought and sold in America, are in fact grown and produced in America, but in actuality a lot of the roses consumed in America, are from outside of America, from countries such as Columbia (the dominant player) and Ecuador.

The fact of the matter is, roses distributed and sold in the United States, use to be 99% domestic, but in recent years, this percentage has plummeted to well under 5%, which effectively means that rose production within America has been ceded to the countries that make up the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) which provides these countries "duty free" access to America.  This means that because there is a tax/duty exemption set aside for these foreign countries, that they are now competing against American companies, with the foreign countries having the advantage of significantly lower labor costs as well as significantly lower land costs, and their only really big expense coming from the shipping of their foreign flowers which is done by cargo plane on a massive scale. Once these flowers safely arrive in America they are then sold to American wholesalers that specialize in these business deals that clearly undercut and annihilate domestic manufacturers of roses, with the wholesalers, in turn, selling these roses to domestic stores and other vendors throughout America.

Obviously, because the price of roses is so reasonably priced, the consumer is a big winner, and those receiving the gifts are also truly appreciative.  Perhaps too, it's wonderful that this trade act was enacted which allows monies to be properly allocated to those that can produce and distribute the product at a lower price point.  Maybe that is the way that it should be, but understand this, that labor and land are often considerably cheaper in other countries than in America, so that today we have roses imported in massive waves to Americans, perhaps tomorrow it will be agricultural products that we take for granted such as corn and soybeans; and what will we do when we no longer can produce the same, and the distributors of such, decide how it is best to allocate these valuable food items worldwide.

The Student Loan Debt Fiasco

It has been said that: "History Does Not Repeat Itself, But It Rhymes," which is certainly apt when it comes to the absolutely insane student debt crisis which has reached unprecedented scales in America.  According to consumerfinance.gov, "The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau estimates that outstanding debt is approaching $1.2 trillion as of May 2013."  While there are all sorts of debt that is created in America, there is something especially insidious about student debt to which the first thing is that a significant portion of that debt is guaranteed by the federal government, which means ultimately it is the tax payers of this nation that have to make good on these bad debts; along too there is the fact that the debt is being issued to people that for the most part, have limited assets at the present time, to which for most of these student debtors, signifies in principle that they are "underwater" as soon as they take out the debt with typically only a hope that one day they will have the reasonable means to pay back the loan.

As bad as that is, it gets even worse, when you consider the fact that a significant percentage of students that take out college loans, never graduate or get a degree from their college of choice.  This often means, that the hopes of a nice salary that they once envisioned will never come to fruition, yet they still have the responsibility to pay back a loan but often with limited means to do so.  Further adding fuel to the fire, is the fact that many students taking out the loans are both young and often quite inexperienced in regards to financial matters, and in particular, in regards to making good, sound and conservative decisions when it comes to money.  To far too many students, the ability to seemingly get loans for nothing, gives them a perverse incentive to try to "max" out their student loans per school semester so that instead of simply concentrating on getting just what they need to handle their tuition, books, and reasonable living expenses; student loans are often looked upon as a cow to be milked so as to receive as much as they possibly can so that thereby they can live large and enjoy the good life.  Yet, at the end of the day, all that extra money that has been borrowed, must not only be paid back, it must be paid back with interest, and not doing so will lead to credit scores being decimated and possible future garnishments.

The fact of the matter is that when you lure students in with a dream that by going to college, that they can live the good life, without the necessary attendant responsibility and dedication, you have done a massive disservice to them as a whole.  To make matters worse, standing behind the institutions that willy-nilly loan out money to students is the federal and/or state governments, to which if they were not guaranteeing these loans, than the loans themselves to students would be far more stringent, far more limited, and far better monitored. 

You could argue that the student debt fiasco is an example of good intentions, gone horribly awry, or you could probably better argue, that the greed of these campuses for new blood and new money to feed their faculty, fill the institution, and swell up the money coffers is the real driving force, behind this misguided policy.  Huffingtonpost.com tells us that: "about 11.5% of student loan balances are 90+ days delinquent or in default and that figure is often reported low because it does not include student loans in deferment or forbearance."  The foregoing is merely a prelude to the crisis to come, to which many students caught in a cycle of debt, and not just limited to student loans, will become effectively, wards of the State, forever