Full disclosure by all public companies should be mandated by governmental law

The United States has over 4,000 corporations that are designated as public companies, and therefore are permitted to list their common shares through a stock exchange, thereby permitting the investment of money from outside sources, including, of course, individuals.  While public companies divulge an awful lot of pertinent information to the public, as required by law, one of the most important disclosures which is not being done at the present time, but so needs to be done, is the full disclosure of all criminal convictions, fines so issued, and sealed deals so done with prosecuting authorities; all of which subsequently should become part and parcel of what is fairly divulged to the public in regards to these public companies, along with any current litigation that is still in process.

Further to the point, all advertising, all annual reports, and all publications issued from public companies, should as a matter of course, list every single conviction so enforced against said company, such as for pollution, financial chicanery, price fixing, and so on and so forth.  Additionally, agreements so done which have resulted in a fine should be fully disclosed, as well as all those deals so finalized in which subject corporation has paid a fine in exchange for criminal charges being subsequently dropped as part of that negotiated deal.  In other words, just as pharmaceutical companies are required to warn the general public as to the bad side effects of a given drug, so too, these corporations should be required to divulge fully all of their bad actions so having occurred.

After all, it is quite common for individuals to be asked as to whether they have a criminal record or even if they have been arrested as a condition for their consideration of employment with many a company.  Therefore, those so considering purchasing the common stock of a given company, or seeking employment at said company, should have divulged to them, all of the convictions and all of the fines so having been imposed against a given company, along with pending litigation addressing similar concerns.

Additionally, it must be recognized that judicial law has determined that companies are considered to be defined as "corporate personhood", and therefore this is even more justification that public companies must appropriately have their feet held to the fire, and further to the point, should be held to the highest possible ethical standard, since unlike real human beings, those that work within corporations, are typically never personally held accountable for any egregiously bad behavior.

Those that invest their hard earned money, and those seeking fair employment, should have fully disclosed to them, before such investments and before such employment is finalized, who and what a given company really is, as compared to the public relations smokescreen, so often provided to the general public by badly behaving corporations, that all is well and good, when all is definitely not.  Those that are criminals complain again and again, that they have to keep on paying for that which they did, previously, over and over again, through the discrimination that they must deal with day-by-day by virtue of that conviction.  Why then, would we as a country, permit corporations, to not have to walk the very same line?

Matthew 7:18

We read in Holy Scripture, "A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit." (Matthew 7:18).  This scriptural passage makes eminent sense, for that which is good is going to procreate good fruits, thereof; and that which is corrupt, will not have the capacity to propagate fruits that are good.   That said, the more that we contemplate upon this passage, the more that we can begin to understand it at a far deeper level, of which, the very first thought that comes to mind, is that this scriptural passage is not really literally about the fruit of a given tree, but rather it is all about the quality of the figurative fruit so produced by each one of us.  That is to say, each one of us is called upon as members of society, to be good for something, and thereby to be of good value to our fellow community members, by the good deeds that we so produced on behalf and for the benefit of those others; and of which, those that are too selfish, or lack direction, or drive, are those that create little or nothing of benefit for their community, and often are the ones that harm such by their bad actions or lack of attentiveness.

What we are, and what we thereby subsequently produce, has an awful lot to do with our perception of life and its incumbent duties, so of; as well as the discipline and drive to do what is consistently right to do.  In other words, it isn't so much that we are what we think, but rather what we are has a lot to do with the desires and goals that we are driven by and the subsequent deeds so accomplished, day-by-day, and to the degree that those desires and goals, are for the greater good, then the ensuing fruits so being produced are going to be, in one form or another, of benefit to the greater whole.  As for those, that think wrong thoughts, such as wishing that the world would bend to their selfish desires, we find that within that construct -- fairness, peace, justice, and harmony will be sorely lacking, personally and for the community; for that which is so produced from that sort of self-absorbed mindset benefits, at best, the person so willing it, whereas, it does little or nothing of merit for others.

Each us needs to look at our own desires and goals, and seriously contemplate as to whether such makes eminent sense or not; for that which is not sound to begin with, will surely reap to its ultimate regret what it has duly sown; whereas those that are focused upon that which encompasses something outside of just their own egotistical domain, and takes into consideration, not only what they are trying to achieve, but also how such will effect others, are on the pathway of sowing that which will give forth a bountiful harvest, that feeds well not only that individual, but others.

It's up to each one of us, to find a worthwhile cause that is worth achieving for the betterment of society, for we are meant to help make our community a better place for our having been part of it, for that is the very reason why those that are fruitful desire to do that which is what they so forthrightly do.

In defense of drug dealers

The United States, has waged a futile "war on drugs" since the Nixon administration, of which, the upshot of all this, is in essence, a whole lot of incarceration for those at the lowest echelons of society, in which, somehow, despite this, the eradication or really even the slowing down of illegal drugs so being sold and consumed thereof still has yet to occur.  The bottom line is that a significant portion of Americans, desire illicit drugs, and those that deal in those drugs, from the streets to the nightclubs are to a very large extent, providing a service for those that so wish to indulge.

Additionally, and of immense relevancy, society in America, has in virtually any city of some size, areas of impoverishment, neglect, ill-educated people, bad housing, poverty, discrimination, and harassment -- all of this with no real job opportunity, and no real future for those that are stuck there.  Those that live within those communities do live and breathe, just like everyone else, and with 24 hours in every day, with seven days in every week, and not a lot of money in their pocket, people are going to have to consider all sorts of things in order to bring in some sort of income, or to have some semblance of hope in a situation that gives every appearance of being hopeless.  So then, drug dealers, are the entrepreneurs of the street, doing what they can to make the best of a situation that entraps them into very limited choices, and the seemingly best of that bad lot, entails real risk.

Of course, there are plenty of people that don't buy into any of this, but most of those people, have not taken the trouble to actually look at the reality of the unfair construct in which billion dollar corporations are permitted to ply their licit drugs over the airwaves and through commercial advertising of all types, so as to push their pharmaceutical drugs onto people that often don't really have the knowledge to understand the inherent dangers that typically go with prescribed drugs, including unintentional addiction, dependency,  and the alteration of a given person's mind and body.  Yet, these legal drug dealers, make billions upon billions of dollars in profits, and seldom are ever held accountable for the bad consequences and abuse that so incurs.

Instead, the overwhelming amount of pressure and incarceration falls upon those that have little resources, and a whole lot of vulnerability to being hurt on the streets where they do their deals, or locked up, or both.  Drug dealers are vilified by most people, when the truth of the matter is that they are providing a service to all those that so wish to indulge in these mind altering drugs.  The dangers, thereof, are absolutely real, because unlike licit drug dealers that earn that easy money and typically make a respectful career and are well remunerated for it; the street drug dealers take all of the risks, to gain the smallest of footholds, of what they hope is at least a portion of the American dream so desired; but instead get nothing much more than the hypocrisy of the police, justice, and those law and order types, that use these drug dealers as the scapegoat for all that is wrong, even though they that make the rules and therefore should know better, in truth, do not faithfully represent what is right.

Not in my neighborhood and the affordable housing problem

Everyone within this nation, needs to have a physical place to live in, and in consideration, of the massive income disparity of the population within America, it would behoove State as well as the Federal government to make it their point and principle to be more forthright in dealing with this all important issue.  For instance, the Federal government has all sorts of rules and regulations that are applicable to all sorts of businesses throughout this nation, that thereby supersede local and community desires for control; so that it therefore seems surprising, how much local and county control that there is in regards to housing within communities.  While, one can understand the mindset for rules and regulations so being contemplated and subsequently passed by local or county legislatures that address the need for having a certain percentage of undeveloped land, or to limit a particular percentage of land to a particular use, or to preclude land ever being used for certain industries, of which, on paper at least, all of this seems reasonable and sensible.   The problem though, is that when each locality is able to impose what they will or will not accept in regards to the housing in their particular domain, that this without a doubt, drives up the price of future housing within those communities, while also helping to subsidy or to augment those that are already home owners within those neighborhoods, by virtue of the fact that when supply is limited, and/or additional rules and regulations are effected which impacts adversely the costs so associated with building future housing; than those that already own, are effectively protected from any sort of oversupply or anticipated adverse actions negatively impacting their home investment.

The additional problem to this, is the issue of "not in my neighborhood," of which when localities make a determination that they will not accept housing less than a certain amount of square footage, or that they will not accept high density housing, or that they will not accept apartment dwellings within their community, than they have categorically and deliberately eliminated a significant percentage of Americans from being able to live within their communities.  This thus signifies, that what is actually so occurring, is that these communities are consciously precluding people that they consider to be "suspect" or undesirable, from becoming members of their community, under the belief that by blocking these people from their neighborhood, that their own quality of life, will be better and more secure.

The upshot of these limitations upon housing, so imposed by local and county communities, is that developers are thereby limited to developing high density housing and apartments only in those areas of communities that are prone to accept such; typically because those communities are amendable to any sort of investment that they can so garner within them.  Additionally, this also serves to segregate the poor from those that have money, and thereby consistently creates ghettos of poverty, which thereby typically results in the negative issues and the downward spirals so created by that concentrated poverty.  Still unresolved, though, is that none of this substantially addresses the real need for more affordable housing, because the effective pricing of that housing so being constructed, and the short supply of such, still ends up by consuming too much of the income of those that need housing, and of which the good options for those that are impoverished, are sorely lacking.

The new mercenaries that serve the United States military

The United States went to an "all-volunteer" military in 1973, and despite the fact that since that time, the United States has been involved in a multitude of adventures and misadventures, abroad; the conscription that once existed, for previous wars, does not currently exist, and seems to be something that does not appear to be returning anytime soon, which actually is pretty amazing.  Whether this is good or bad, is up to a given individual's viewpoint, but to a large extent it is a heck of a lot easier to have an all-voluntary military, when that military subcontracts out to non-United States citizens, all sorts of activities that traditionally would be performed by United States soldiers.  In fact, those that perform those duties for the United States military, aren't just those that are performing kitchen duty, military support, janitorial work, and the like, but are actually also directly or indirectly involved in the killing so done in wars.

So then, those that are part of our military but are also not considered to be a direct member of that military, are those that have essentially been subcontracted to that military, and therefore are not entitled to the normal benefits that are so provided for United States soldiers, such as health care, vacations, housing allowance, and the like.  So too, reported deaths of United States soldiers are only those soldiers that are classified as such by the United States; whereas those brave men and women that die in the service of the United States but are considered to be temporary labor so hired, are not accorded that same sort of respect.

Somewhat surprisingly, when it comes to the subcontracting of labor to the United States military, the biggest beneficiary of such is not actually the United States military, though they do benefit; but rather are instead the management team so profiting as the representative subcontractor, thereby signifying that the people that labor for those subcontractors and are paid directly by them, are actually the ones that benefit the least, because their labor has been marked up by the subcontractor in order for that subcontractor to make a profit, upon their toil.

There are a multitude of people, all over the world, that are in need of employment, and some of those have the skill-set so desired by subcontractors to the military, such as the need for translators, construction laborers, logistical knowhow personnel, and the like, who offer services to the military infrastructure of real worth.  Further to the point, there are plenty of people that are un-favored within their own nation, because they are not the right nationality, nor the right religious sect, nor financially secure, nor this nor that, which makes them susceptible to the siren call to work for the most powerful nation that the world has ever known, though only as temporary labor.

What we so have, then, is essentially a group of unseen men and women that support our military, but are not actual United States soldiers or personnel to such; but rather are guns for hire, as well as the intricate support apparatus that is so needed for the sophisticated and the often protracted wars of today.  These are the new mercenaries, some of whom are risking their lives for the United States, though they are not in the direct employment of such; but rather are subcontracted to the United States, to do what they are instructed to do, come what may.

More and more laws so made is oppressive

The fact of the matter is, that Holy Scripture lists just Ten Commandments so being applicable to the people; and our Savior, subsequently reduced this to just two great commandments.  Yet, we live in a civil society of which there are so many laws, and codes to those laws, thereby applicable to the citizenry of this nation; of which, unfairly, certain segments of that citizenry are far more prone to being adversely affected by those laws and codes, obscure or not, thereby being enforced by the policing arm of the state that even those that are most circumspect in their behavior, at all times, are, should the powers-to-be so desire, subject to being arrested and persecuted by some application of those laws, at any time.

In reality, the more laws that are passed by legislatures, the more people that will be subject to failing to adhere to some aspect of those laws; yet, there is not one single entity within this country that can expound the logic thereof, the reasoning thereof, and the coherence thereof, of all the laws so having been passed and thereby why each one of those laws is correct, necessary, and does not in any way, form, or manner contradict some other law.  In fact, the laws as exercised in this country are done in a manner in which, anyone at any time, for just about any reason, can be arrested for something, and thereby lose their freedom; of which those that are most especially vulnerable, are all those without a voice, un-favored, un-championed, and typically without the necessary monetary means or connections to effectively fight back.

Additionally, the prevailing purpose of all these laws being in the arsenal of the policing armada of this country, is to sell the illusion that this government always adheres to the "rule of law", and thereby those being arrested are being arrested via some violation of some specific law, so written upon the arresting papers, subject to that individuals' opportunity of having their day in court, with the implied recognition that in America, all are innocent, until proven guilty.  The reality though, contradicts this narrative, as millions of Americans each year, never get their fair day in court, and never even get bailed out from their involuntary incarceration, but rather are essentially placed into the unenviable position of having to make a plea to a lesser charge in order to either secure their freedom, or if not free, in order to ameliorate the full force of the state incarcerating them for some extended period of time.

It is to America's lasting shame, that it purports to be a country of laws, equally applied to all, of which justice is seen as being impartial, and that therefore there is liberty and justice for all, when this is not true.  Rather, there can never be justice in any country in which the laws so enacted and enforced are done so in a manner in which some are subjected to the full force of laws upon laws, so written and exercised so as to control specific segments of the population; whereas others, can do whatsoever that they so please, with no interference by the policing state, because these others are functionally immune from such. 

That which successfully resolves pressing issues in nations is never the passage of more laws, but rather, the construction of that which provides for its population, better opportunities as well as a playing field, leveled out.

United States corporations are significantly under-taxed

As reported by statista.com, "In 2019, corporations in the U.S. made profits of around 2.25 trillion."  Further, as reported by taxpolicycenter.org, "… the federal government collected about $230 billion in corporate taxes in 2019."  This signifies, that corporations paid an effective tax rate of just 10.22%, and of which, it must be remembered that individual taxpayers, are subject to Federal tax rates of up to 37%.  The bottom line is that corporations are way under-taxed, and need to be taxed at significantly higher rates for the betterment of the country.

The first thing to note, is that corporations are artificial creations, so created by state sanction for the benefit of that state, and of which nowadays these corporations are basically permitted to exist in perpetuity; so that there are corporations that so exist in America today, that have been in existence for over 250 years.  Unlike, a human being, that has a finite amount of time on this earth, and if wealthy enough, will be subject to estate taxes, there is no opportunity for the government to ever implement an estate tax upon a corporation because corporations are functionally perpetual.  This thus signifies that it behooves this government, of, by, and for the people to thereby subject corporations to the highest tax rates of any entity so taxed in America, because those taxes that are not collected, today, thereby accumulate, effectively forever, in the coffers of those said corporations.

Additionally, the taxation of individuals most definitely hits those individuals directly in their pocketbook; as opposed to the taxation of corporations, which is done upon the profits so made, which directly impacts that artificial entity, known as a corporation, as opposed to a given individual, or group of individuals.  So too, the United States government has in recent decades, consistently been running sizeable budget deficits, of which, thereby to cover such deficits, that government has to borrow money for today's needs, and thereby charge such borrowing and that responsibility so of to future generations.  Rather, it would make much more eminent sense to tax corporations of America in a manner in which instead of collecting such at a mere 10.22% of corporate profits, that a more reasonable percentage so being collected should be closer to 33%, which would make far more sense, and thereby would increase tax collections, such as in the year, 2019, from $230 billion to $742.50 billion at that 33% rate, or an increase of $512.50 billion which would, in many a year, make a significant dent in the yearly federal deficit, so of.

Quite obviously, there are few that so desire to be taxed, yet, the massive discrepancy in wealth and assets so held by the elite of this country in comparison to those that are at the bottom, or even the middle thereof,  needs to be addressed in a manner in which instead of sticking the great middle class of this country, with the bill, or placing such into the hands of those yet, unborn; this needs to be placed directly upon the shoulders of those artificial creations of perpetuity, so as to collect fair monies from these companies.  The bottom line is that those that have far more than enough, need to do far more, to pay their fair share, so as to make this a country that actually is of, by, and for the people, as opposed to being in the prevailing control and hands of powerful corporations.

America's minimum wage compared against other countries

America's federal minimum wage is a paltry $7.25/hr, made even worse, by the fact that there are notable exceptions to employers even having to pay that small amount, such as for employees who are under twenty years of age, or are classified as tipped employees, and so on.  While it is true that some States have enacted minimum wage standards which are better or even substantially better than the federal minimum wage, as well as the fact that employers can on their own -- pay their employees more than the minimum wage, the nub of the matter is that a substantial amount of Americans, are compensated at a rate which is less than what is generally considered to be a living wage, of which as reported by nelp.org,  we find that "Forty-two (42) percent of U.S. workers make less than $15 per hour."

In regards to other countries, and the minimum wage so paid, we read that as reported by worldpopulationreview.com, that when converted into United States dollars ,that Luxembourg's minimum wage is $13.78/hr, Australia is $12.14/hr, France is $11.66/hr, Germany is $10.87/hr, United Kingdom is $10.34/hr and our neighbors to the north, Canada is at $9.52/hr.  Additionally, and of much relevancy, each one of these nations also has a far more robust and accommodative governmental social welfare program in place to be of assistance to their citizens, especially for those in need, as compared to the United States.

The bottom line is that a minimum wage as currently constructed in the United States, makes no logical sense to be as low as it is, for a number of reasons; of which the very first reason is that very few people can possibly make a wage as low as $7.25/hr, to somehow be enough money for them to actually live a reasonably decent life; in addition to the fact, that America does not have a federal mandate, that those so employed that are desirous of being full-time employees, are mandated to actually have forty hours, or more assigned to them by their employer of record each week--thereby indicative that those that make just the minimum wage have no guarantee that they will even get forty hours of work each and every week and thereby are often compelled to take on a second or even a third job in a futile hope to make ends meet. 

While one wonders why there is so much discrepancy between those that have and those have not in America; the answer to such is written in the laws that permits employers to not pay their employees a living wage; in addition to social programs which are not accommodative enough for those that have little to nothing, as well as the fact that the richest of the rich, are not taxed appropriately in consideration of the wages, income, and assets that they so have. 

The United States is cheap in its legal pay to a significant swath of its citizens, by virtue of the fact that it so refuses to see that its own people, that labor hard, are paid enough in compensation to have some semblance of the American dream; whereas, other first-world countries have done a far better job in doing exactly that, and thereby those countries typically have less of the poverty, frustration, and privations which are endemic within the bottom echelons of American society. 

While there are more than one way to measure a given nation, in fairness though, one could make a very strong argument that how that nation treats its most vulnerable, by virtue of their living conditions, the opportunities thereof, and how much they thereby earn for a fair day's labor, is as fair of a measure as any, and by that yardstick, America falls far short of the minimum standards that a good nation should so represent.

The wrong type of patriotism

Some people, perhaps even a lot of people, believe that the best Americans are those that are its strongest patriots.  The problem with that belief, though, is that not everyone that takes on the aura of being a patriot is actually a good American or a true patriot.  It has to be said, that some of those that wave their flag the longest, the highest, and seem proudest of that flag aren't necessarily good people, but surprisingly and disappointingly many are actually flawed human beings, that hide behind those symbols of patriotism, in order to compensate for their insecurities, their weaknesses, their prejudices, and their personal lack of material success, by taking upon themselves the symbol of unconquerable power as if it is personally their own, and do such often in an oppressive way against others.

On the contrary, to be a true patriot, first necessitates the comprehension and the understanding of what actually makes for a great country; and those then that are the most patriotic, are those that have either willingly sacrificed themselves for that ideal, or thereby have done their part to uphold the values of that nation, in the belief and sure knowledge that those who are like minded along with being united in purpose and principle, help to make that people and thereby that nation the living embodiment of that which is good.

Unfortunately, in so many respects, often those that profess to be the biggest patriots are sadly also those that are using such patriotism in a manner in which this is utilized as their excuse to intimidate, threaten, or browbeat those others that apparently do not fit so nicely into the box of what they believe fellow patriots should look like, behave as, and believe in.  This quite obviously gives a black eye to all the unsuspecting who are actually good patriots; while also making those that are non-conformists, guilty of not giving in to that which is inimical to their own personal beliefs, as well as to their right to have those beliefs.

Those that are truly patriotic, are primarily those that do not believe in the necessity of group-think, but actually embrace their fellow citizens that are courageous enough to express their views, of which these views are absolutely vital in order to have a viable forum which encourages thereby an open discussion; for when doors are needlessly closed, because of what may or may be on the other side, then meaningful discoveries that should be made, often cannot be made. The greatest countries are filled not with copycat upon endless copycat of simple-minded conformists, but rather consists of people from all different kinds of milieus, backgrounds, and agendas, that somehow, through grit and determination, are able to rise up to join together into one body politic, because they truly believe that each one of us is equally entitled to the fruits of our labor, with fair justice, and opportunity for all.

The well known symbols of patriotism should never be permitted to be co-opted by those bigoted souls that are using such as a way and as a means to intimidate others, so as to through a symbolic force of arms, do harm to others, as well as to destroy from within their very own country.

Declaration of Conscience -- Margaret Chase Smith

In June of 1950, in response to the gauntlet so thrown down by Senator McCarthy which stipulated that the United States was in a battle between those that were communist atheists, so having infiltrated into the highest echelons of American power, against the Christian values so founded by this nation; McCarthy made it his point of principle, that the most patriotic act so needed by Americans was to flush out those communists, by any means so possible, in whatever places that they may so be, so as to thereby to return this country to what it so was supposed to represent, as envisioned by McCarthy.

The fundamental problem and error that McCarthy so represented was that he believed that true American patriots, should all be of the same mind, with the same religion, with the same orthodoxy, and should  thereby desire to eliminate all those that were not of this milieu.  Never once did McCarthy recognize that the truest American patriot, as so correctly acknowledged by the forthright Margaret Chase Smith, is one that holds their fellow countrymen to the Constitutional principles of this great nation, of which some of those very attributes are, for instance, the people's right to criticize their government, of their right to independent thinking, and thereby unpopular thoughts, along with the right of the people to peacefully assembly and to protest against that government of, by, and for the people; and in the exercise of any or all of those rights, this should never mean the loss of a job or a position or of freedom, but rather should be seen as the fair right to call that country so blessed by God, accountable to those tenets that it was so founded upon.

Margaret Chase Smith's "Declaration of Conscience" was the seminal call to all Americans to listen to and to pay proper obeisance to the better angels of our nature, rather than to let a wannabe demagogue to essentially sever this country from its "melting pot" background, to thereby become a hostile and repressive nation against all those that would not adhere to that which was so promulgated by McCarthy.  Rather, through the great amalgamation of different voices, different viewpoints, and different opinions, so deeply expressed and felt, a nation such as the United States could still so rise to become the great beacon of light of the world, when those people are, ultimately, in adherence to the same vision, that each one of us is gifted with the exact, same unalienable rights, and that this country so formed, was thereby created so as to ensure its domestic tranquility, as well as to secure those blessings of liberty and to promote the general welfare of.

Each of us has a conscience, and it behooves each one of us, to listen closely to that conscience, so that we do not get unduly caught up in the emotions of a given moment in time, nor give in to needless fear, so as to sacrifice all that we hold so dear, for the false promise of a security or safety, when the doing of such, would serve to change us into that which would fundamentally undermine that Declaration of Independence, and our Constitution, to our own detriment by trading in our precious independence and liberty for that which would be a false flag and thereby the counterfeiting of that which binds and unites us together.

1890, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act

Think about this; ponder the significance that the United States, back in 1890, considered it necessary that an Anti-Trust Act be so enacted.  So then, how much more in this era of gargantuan international corporations, of which these corporations have incredible revenues in the billions upon billions of dollars, and thereby typically are also making profits in the billions, yearly; that this would thereby seem to be the very time therefore when serious anti-trust action so needs to be taken by the governance of this United States.  Incredibly, five out of the six biggest market capitalizations in the world, which are Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (Google), and Facebook are arguably companies in which a significant amount of the business so generated, appears to be monopolistic in structure or in function, thereby providing these corporations with outsized profits, incredible power, as well as a compliant government that continues to permit these companies to buy out potential competitors and/or to conduct their business, in whatever manner that these corporations, so desire to do.

The more concentrated that capital is, in which such is ever being funneled into fewer and fewer hands, the worse off the people are going to be, because people have a need and desire for all sorts of things, and when all roads lead to or through these gargantuan technology companies, then consumers are going to be wont to pay what they have to pay in order to benefit from that technology, irrespective of what those costs should actually be in a fair and open market.  That is the very reason why anti-trust legislation was passed to begin with, and the fact that this anti-trust legislation appears to have no teeth to it, and has seemingly been gathering dust for over a century would indicate that the battle has been fought, and the people have lost.

If this government will not make it their mission to break up those technology companies that have too great of market share as things so stand, today; then clearly this country is not run by the people's representatives, but rather we are seeing instead those representatives being co-opted by those companies to do their bidding.  The bottom line is that the only force that can stand up and do the right thing for the people, is that government, of, for, and by the people; for money, power, position, dominance, and greed cannot be overcome by any other avenue, other than that government effectively utilizing those powers so vested in it to do what is right for the people it so governs.

For a lot of people, none of this really matters, because they are happy with the things as they are, but the problem with that sort of mindset is that monopolies ultimately aren't healthy for the freedom, independence, and good viability of people; just as, back in the day, when there were company towns, that owned those that worked for them, lock, stock and barrel; of which those conditions were definitely not good for those that were trapped within those dead-end towns, so suffering from that lack of choice as well as opportunity.  

This continual concentration of capital into fewer and fewer hands brings to those that have that capital, everything: and for those that have less and less, a terrible pass into oblivion.

Encouraging criminality

The United States incarcerates an absolutely staggering amount of its citizens for crimes so committed, most of which serves no real good purpose, akin to the endless and futile "drug war", which keeps on keeping on.  Those that are dim-witted, but apparently not cognizant of such, are the very ones, that keep doubling-down on more and more punishment for that which keeps on ever expanding, encouraging therefore the powers-to-be to add on even more dubious so-called crimes into their punishment book, so as to stay ever busy.

It is regrettable, that the United States does not seem to recognize the truth, that higher crime rates, to a very large extent, occurs in those societies that are inherently unequal in the quality of life, so provided to its citizens; and of which, those that have little or no opportunity, are invariably caught within a cycle of despair and poverty, of which because they are given little or no hope to ever successfully extricate themselves from, are going to therefore breed citizens that aren't going to be adherents to the orthodoxy so imposed upon them, because they know the hypocrisy of such.

So too, when quotas, official or non-official, are imposed upon the policing arm of the state, and thereby are part and parcel of that justice system so enabled, than all those that enforce the muscle of that policing, are going to, more times than not, flex their muscle not against those that have the means to fight back, through money, connections, power, and cleverness; but rather will instead inflict their dominance against those that are effectively powerless, voiceless, and do not fit the traditional depiction of what visually is considered to be a good citizen.

Not too surprisingly, none of this ever works in either bringing fair justice to society, nor in eradicating criminal activity, for all those that have nothing and thereby have nothing to lose, will often have a very strong inclination to fight back against the very system, which has criminalize their behavior, which to a very large extent, could be considered to be explainable and even rational, due to the unjust circumstances so imposed upon them.  In fact, all of this combined, strongly suggests that in order for those that govern this nation, to maintain their constant surveillance of the population, and thereby their continuous and routine violation of Constitutional rights of its citizens, need to impress upon that population, over and over again, just how dangerous civil society is, and thereby to make that public to believe that some loss of freedom and autonomy, is well worth sacrificing, in order to be safe -- thereby essentially sanctifying law and order.

For those that would like to see a more civil society, and hence far less crime, the most obvious way to do such, is to rightly return to all of its citizens, their unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; in addition to structuring that society in which a fair and progressive tax system would be successfully imposed upon the wealthy so that they would subsequently contribute their fair share to that society which help to make them, wealthy; and of which, each citizen, no matter their place of residence, would be fairly entitled to a good education, good healthcare, equal justice, and fair opportunity.  That would be called good governance, and good governance drives out crime.

Home mortgages back then as compared to now

Back in the 1930s, a home mortgage was structured in a completely different manner, than the mortgages so issued in today's market, of which, back then, a typical mortgage required a significant down payment of 50%, of which usually an interest-only mortgage was thereupon issued, for a length of time of just five years, in which, in order to complete the purchase of that home, a balloon payment of that other 50% was so paid, upon that date.  As might be expected, mortgage terms such as that, pretty much closed out from the owning a home for those that were middle income and lower; but this also meant that overly exuberant speculation on homes, was absolutely minimal, as the wherewithal to purchase a home, necessitated both wealth as well as a serious investment of equity in such.

The government, in order to make homes more affordable to the general public, eventually became the primary source of guaranteeing mortgages to its citizens, via the creation of both the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp as well as the Federal National Mortgage Association, which along with more lenient terms in regards to a down payment so required, as well as mortgages encompassing a far greater length of time to amortized such, as in a typical time span of 30 years, so provided an opportunity for a far larger percentage of Americans to purchase their own home, as the affordability of such, accomplished through these mortgages, was a quantum improvement over previous terms so issued.

Of course, as in just about anything, there are pluses and minuses; of which, the biggest plus in this revamping of the mortgage market thus created the real opportunity for more Americans to be personally invested into what for a wide swath of those Americans became their most important and abiding asset, which is their own home.  On the other hand, when down payments are a very low percentage of a commodity which is quite expensive, and of which, takes a considerable period of time, to own free and clear, this does lend itself to those situations in which some people ultimately are unable to make their payments, because of illness, because of lost of income, or various other reasons, and hence subjecting those people to the foreclosure of that property.  Additionally, in any program, in which mortgages are in essence being backed or being bankrolled by the government, loans so being initiated may be or have the tendency to be of more questionable quality, because those so originating those loans, are more concerned about their own personal profit, as compared to the soundness or sensibility of such.

While America would like to be the industry leader in home ownership, as a percentage of its citizenry, so owning, it is ultimately disappointing to note that in 1990, for instance, as reported by urban.org, Italy and the USA had about the same home ownership rate of 64.2% and 64%, respectively; whereas in 2015 those rates were 72.9% and 63.7%, respectively.  This so seems to signify that America which prides itself upon the attainment of that American dream for all of its citizens, has not been able to successfully accomplish such, by virtue of that fact that home ownership has stagnated in recent years.  While, the government has done its good part to help its citizens in the financing of their homes, what it has failed to do, though, is to effectively see that more of those citizens have the financial means, wherewithal, and opportunity, via their income and wealth, to actually successfully do so.

The American military worldwide empire

There was a time, as it was heard, that the "sun never set" upon the British empire; but that was back in the 19th century, and since that time, Great Britain as the preeminent power has seen its sun set, and except by grabbing upon the coattails of America, that island nation, is no longer an empire, and will never again be one.  That, for Great Britain, is probably just fine, for at least Great Britain still exists as a viable nation, still has relevancy, and there are advantages in Great Britain not having to directly concern itself about foreign nations and those territories, that were once under their domain, especially when they can have the United States act as their proxy, in so many different ways for them as well as for others.

The United States, has no contiguous enemies, but for whatever reason, as reported by politico.com, "…maintains nearly 800 military bases in more than 70 countries and territories abroad," of which this can only be described as an empire; so that it is far more appropriate to describe the United States as being an empire, for that clearly is why it has all of these military bases so as to protect and serve the monetary interests of its military-industrial-technology base that thereby runs this empire for that very purpose. 

Of course, with all of these bases and with America having international relations and international concerns with just about every sovereign nation that so exists, that military serves as the muscle for the United States to get other countries to submit, one way or another, to their needs, demands and desires, as the military in order to somewhat justify the gargantuan amount of funding it receives by its government each individual year, has to exert itself against offending countries, that often cannot hope to offer any semblance of a practical defense and therefore must suffer the indignity of their infrastructure being bombed out of existence, the lost of businesses as well as any semblance of a ordinary life, along with the considerable civilian deaths so suffered, that is the byproduct of American military muscle so exerted.

The downside, though, of any empire is how extended that empire gets, and thereby how much money and resources that are necessary to sustain such an empire, of which, no matter how much effort is extended for such, complications and unforeseen events always arise; in addition to the inevitable resistance so created so as to attempt subversion of that empire, both internal as well as external.  All of this combined, necessitates eternal vigilance, which also necessitates in more ways that one, an oppressive surveillance state, both domestically as well as internationally, which quite obviously breeds both contempt and resentment by the people, being directed against that land of liberty, for subverting its own reason for being.

Make no mistake about it, 800 military bases, is only necessary for that which is an empire and none other.  Quite obviously, that empire benefits a very, very few at the expense of the many; and in addition, is the very reason why the world as we know it, is less free today, then it was yesterday, for empire demands obeisance, obedience and tribute, more than anything.  All those then that support that empire or actuate such, are therefore by definition, not patriots; but the very opposite of such, for they mean to take away our life, our liberty, and our pursuit of happiness-- and to forge upon us -- chains.

The American Aristocracy

From the beginning, America was meant to be a land that would have no titles, no nobility, and therefore no aristocracy; but rather would be a land based on meritocracy and the equality of opportunity.  In fact, America's founding documents are clearly supportive of this very concept, but not too surprisingly, when it comes to power and especially in regards to the power of wealth and position, those that achieve wealth, have a very strong tendency to desire to hold onto that wealth, and further are usually very determined to pass on that wealth and their position to primarily those that are an integral part of their organization and family, therefore obtaining for them an enduring legacy, that essentially permits a special class of people to be born into privilege, and thereupon reap all the benefits of that which they personally have never sown.

This government of the people, have a responsibility to tax wealth, and to especially to tax excess wealth, so accumulated, by one person, one family, and one organization; of which while hard working people are fairly entitled to the fruits of their labor, this must be knowingly balanced by the fact that too much accumulation of wealth into too few hands, is destructive of any enduring or meaningful democracy.  Therefore, governance, must enact appropriate taxation upon compensation gained through employment, as well as that accumulated through passive income investments such as equities, bonds, and real estate, in addition to a general wealth tax so initiated against those that have assets of, for instance, 100 times the median wealth of that country's respective residents, and finally through an estate tax, when that person so departs this world.

Those countries that do not tax wealth in the present, appropriately; and further do not subsequently tax that wealth, when that person is no longer among the living, have by virtue of doing little or nothing, thereby have permitted that wealth to be placed into the hands of those that are functionally going to represent an American Aristocracy, of which, through the power of that money and frequently of that position, this aristocracy will not only be able to hold onto that wealth, but have a very strong tendency to augment such, thereby depleting from the hands of the general population, opportunity and income; for remember well that a given person or family, can only spend so much of their money in a given year, and thereby the balance of such, simply is saved and passively invested, ever accumulating to the benefit of those that already have far more than enough, even more.

Life typically isn't fair, no matter the governance of any particular country, of which, the purpose of good governance is to see that the bulk of the population is given, to the degree so possible, a fair opportunity to make something of value in their own lives, and of which, this often necessitates a re-balancing of the wealth of that nation, to effect such, by the appropriate taxation of those that are exceedingly wealthy and privileged, so as to redistribute those monies into the hands of those that have little or nothing, but clearly have the innate desire to make a good life, if only the infrastructure and construct of such, fairly reflects such an opportunity so being justly provided for them. 

Our government and our unalienable rights

The Declaration of Independence, not only contains an incredibly powerful Declaration of that independence, but is absolutely revolutionary in what it so claimed at that time and still so represents --that each of us has unalienable rights, of which these rights do not come to us by any governmental decree, though governments can augment and support such; but instead are gifted to us by our Creator, of which, among these rights, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Additionally, unalienable rights also imply the right to our ownership of private property, the right to the fruits of our labor, the right to worship or to not worship as per our inclination, the right to think our own thoughts, the right to move along public roadways without undue interference by governmental authorities, and the right to be secure in our own person.  Each of these are our unalienable rights, of which that government, of, for, and by the people is not the source of those rights, but rather these rights are our God granted rights, of which, no legitimate government of the people has the right to wrest away from us any of these unalienable rights.

Yet, regrettably we live in a time, in which, in actuality and demonstrated by the evidence that we see all around us, and the construct that we live in, that those unalienable rights, are consistently trampled upon, run over, ignored, suspended and superseded by that government, which has taken upon itself, to essentially own us, in a manner in which, those that wish to assert their God-given liberties, either have to bargain with governmental authorities to retain such, or pay obeisance to, or basically have to in one form or another, buy back their unalienable rights from that government. 

For example, all of the victimless crimes that people are arrested upon, convicted upon, and thereby have their freedom taken away from them, are crimes so manufactured by that government, that wrest away from individuals, their free choice to do what they will or won't will with their own bodies, their own mind, and the decisions that they make one adult to another, which has little or nothing to do with appropriate governance.  So too, the people are entitled to peacefully assembly, in order to demonstrate for a redress of grievances, find themselves, depending upon the arbitrariness of that government, subject to basically being intimidated, and sometimes violently attacked and assaulted by that government.

Additionally, in far too many aspects, public avenues that the people utilize day-by-day, are an ever present danger for certain segments of that public, who are subject to intimidation, violence, stoppage, arrest, and the forceful removal of their liberty, by authorized governmental authorities, without any real recourse to preclude such.  This is further compounded, by governmental authorities somehow being consistently sanctioned to conduct "no knock" raids with overwhelming firepower upon the private property of sovereign citizens, demonstrating in action, that this government need not respect people and their property rights.

In short, a country of liberty is only that country that places front and center the unalienable rights that each of its citizens has; and thereby makes it their point to protect and to defend specifically those very rights.  All those governments that do not do this are functionally and fundamentally misguided and wrong, and therefore, until such are corrected, illegitimate.

Mutual aid and mutual destruction

Those that are relatively simple-minded want to believe, somehow, that life is really a battle between them and everyone else, so to speak, and therefore a survival of who thereof is the fittest.  If, indeed life is truly a survival of the fittest, then this would imply that life is ever evolving in a direction in which humankind is thereby constantly advancing and therefore consistently building successfully upon that which has come before, because, it so follows, it is getting ever fitter; but the world as it really is, is not indicative that the fittest have survived and that the weak have been conquered, or even that the fittest are actually in charge.  While it might seem to make sense, that the fittest should be the exclusive winners, this discounts how complicated as well as how nuanced, life really is, so that one's survival or even advancement is based far more  often upon the interplay that is generated day-by-day with other people, then just one's own skill set.

Additionally, it is a mistake to believe that a bunch of superstars, somehow always make for a better team, such that they are superior to a diverse group of people that though less talented in aggregate, are able thereof to work together and to meld over time into one solid assembly; for the former typically have prima donnas within their domain and prima donnas usually don't want to bother doing what needs to be done to work well together as a winning team; whereas the later is all about doing what needs to be done, for the betterment of the team, which ultimately benefits each member of.

So then, those that are simply about their own self are essentially undercutting one another, in order to get ahead, thereby sowing the seeds of their ultimate mutual destruction, for each personage has their own separate agenda, and thereby they conflict one with another.  On the other hand, those that are able to bond together, are the ones that understand that being of service one to another, and thereby creating unity through that voluntary mutual aid, are the very people that are going to be successful, more times than not, because each person entwined together, makes for a very strong bond, that is well nigh unbreakable, against even the strongest of gales. 

So in fairness, it can be said that the biggest survivors aren't necessarily the fittest, but rather are often those that have the perception and the wherewithal to recognize that having found a purpose worth living for, or even that worth dying for, provides the motivation and thereby the important goal to focus upon that actuates people to really get things done.  This signifies that a simple belief in the survival of the fittest, is belied by the fact that in reality, those that make the most progress in life and for society are actually those that understand the necessity as well as the importance of finding something in their own lives, that is bigger than just their own self, and thereupon make the effort, typically with others of like-mindedness to create the change that is needed for the betterment of not only their own self, but indeed, for humankind.

The Bible was made for humankind, not humankind so made for the Bible

There are considered to be many reasons why the Bible exists and why it was so created, of which the main reason a multitude of people believe that this is so, consists of the rather straightforward viewpoint that humankind has access to the Bible so as to avail themselves of it and to thereby to take in the sacred word of God for their betterment and for wisdom.  While this is certainly true, it is important to note that the primary purpose of the Bible is to fundamentally create for humankind a roadmap so that we can find ourselves returning in good faith, back to that which created us in the first place.  Therefore, the Bible exists not only as the word of God, for our betterment and thereby the betterment of society, but also as the means for us to know God, and to thereby to have us to understand that God wants us to search for Him, in the conscious recognition, that God also has a sacred duty, in turn, to search diligently for each one of us, so as to make a noble quest for each one of us, to see that all of his lost sheep, successfully find their way back to the fold and sanctuary that only God is so able to provide for all.

None of us are ever alone, and none us, no matter how abandoned we may feel, or the emptiness thereof, are ever actually outside of the domain of God.  Further to the point, no matter how harsh we are in our own judgment of what we have done to our own destruction or to others, God never abandons a single soul and never will.  Remember this well, that God has gifted each one of us with free will, so that we can freely pursue whatever it is that we so desire to pursue, and of which, God knows, that by providing us with this gracious gift, that we are susceptible to all sorts of questionable enticements; yet, also knowing that we are well able to do all sorts of noble and good deeds by virtue of having that free will, in our freely exercising of it. 

So too, no matter how lost we may feel, or how confused we may be, the Light that so represents God, is ever eternal, and ever to be fully ours, if we only sincerely turn to it.  Yet, even those that are despairing of their own salvation should recognize that God, does not rest, and will never rest, until each soul so created by God reposes in God, once again.  This thus signifies, that though some of us joyfully play hide and go seek with God, whereas others do so, not so playfully; that God never tires of this game, for all that God has created is for our edification, but also for our amusement, our amazement, and the adventures, thereof.  Therefore, at the end of the day, as God measures time, the game will end, for God will have found us, and having found us, we will rest securely, forever, in God's eternal heaven.

Property taxes as a form of discrimination

The American dream is to own one's home, which does not formally occur until such has been successfully paid to the lender of such in full, usually over an extended period of time; still, yet, despite this, it seems that owners don't fully own their home, even when they no longer have a mortgage; for no matter their age, no matter their income, no matter when they first bought their home, they are always going to be -- whether or not  they are living in their personal residence or renting such, subject to being assessed yearly property taxes, for in absence of being able to avail themselves of tax set asides, such as for being a church,  or such as for being a school, or such as for being a favored business, they then must pay yearly mandated property taxes.  And, of those property taxes, such payment to the taxing authorities is not optional, for those that do not pay their property taxes, will, given enough delinquent time -- be subject to liens upon their home, penalties, , interest, and even the possible seizure of such, should they not pay attention to mandatory court appearances, and whatnot.

It would be one thing, if property taxes were always uniformly applied to each home, in the exact same percentage and via a consistent proportion thereof, along with such being in conjunction with the present value of the home, or as in cases in which Propositions were so passed, subject to that appropriate legislation; but in actuality, in far too many cases, the property taxes so being assessed are not consistent neighborhood to neighborhood.  In point of fact, numerous studies have been made, which show that those that are privileged and thereby well connected to the power structures of governance, have historically had their homes, under assessed as compared to all those that lack those connections, who are typically people of far more modest means.  Critically, those that suffer the most from this are often communities of color, of which, their properties have historically been assessed at a higher market rate than these properties are actually worth, as demonstrated per recent sales in conjunction with historical values; whereas those properties own primarily by whites, are under assessed, as demonstrated per recent sales in conjunction with historical values.

When it comes to homes, the assessment of the present day value of homes, is both an art as well as a science, for typically no two homes are exactly the same, of which, the best determinate of the value of a home, is comparable sales within the same neighborhood, of which, those sales need to be robust enough, that the valuation of other homes is not simply based upon just one sale; and further to the point, the sale of similar homes needs to be properly adjusted to the accouterments so of, age of, and condition of one home to another, which is not the easiest task to accomplish in a competent manner.  Alas, far too often, what has occurred, is in the lust to bring in governmental revenue, so needed for schools and for infrastructure, and in the conscious accordance that governmental authorities do not so desire to bite the hand that feeds them, is those that are least able to fight back, are typically assessed higher rates, thereby signifying that within counties, subject to the same taxing authority, neighborhoods are not consistently assessed uniform property tax rates.

The only entity, that can ameliorate such, is for the Federal Government, to bring suit against the worst offenders of this practice, so as to turn the tide, and at least at a minimum, indicate that the Federal Government will take action, where necessary, to assure that property taxes are both consistent and uniform, for all of its citizens, irrespective of race or creed.

Fouls in the NBA

All major sports have rules, of which, the primary purpose of those rules is to see that those that do not adhere to them, are correctly penalized for having done such, whether advertently or inadvertently.   Not too surprisingly, when it comes to rules, there are always going to be players and coaches that desire to work the angles of those rules, so as to "game" them in a manner in which the team so committing the fouls, are actually doing so in a manner in which they will, in one way or another, gain a perceived advantage over their opponent.  For instance, with time running out in a basketball game, the team that is currently losing, may deliberately foul one of the other team's players in the hopes that by fouling a specific player, that they will come out ahead, by that player, for instance, not being able to make their free throws, and also by the stoppage of the game clock.

In order to correct a scenario in which some teams enact a strategy intended to unfairly benefit them in a basketball game, by essentially utilizing rules that are meant to make the game fairer, and thereby circumventing such, the NBA should enact within their rule book, a concept that is used in soccer, which is the "advantage rule."   The advantage rule is one in which the team that presently has the soccer ball, though fouled by the opposing team, does not necessitate in always having the game stopped at that point, but is given the "advantage" of the play continuing, if in the referee's viewpoint, it is perceived that the flow of play being terminated right then and there would be detrimental to the team so having been fouled, and thereby by the calling of that foul commence to actually cause more harm than good.  The same sort of concept could be utilized in basketball games, so that obvious fouls meant to stop the game and to foul a specific player, could simply be ignored by the referee, when the team so being fouled, is better off in retaining the ball, which typically would have been passed on to another player, who possibly would then be in the position of making an easy basket.

Additionally, part of the strategy of fouling players, is for the opposing team to foul a player that is not particularly good at shooting free throws, of which, whether this is done as per a deliberate strategy or not, need not be taken into consideration of, if when a player is fouled, the team so fouled, is given the option to either shoot free throws or to take the ball out of bounds in the opposing teams' end of the court.  After all, fouling players should not be seen as a way to work around the intent of a given rule, but should be seen as being inimical to the integrity of the way the game should be fairly played, which is that basketball is not meant to be a free throw shooting contest, and if it so comes down to that, at least give the team so being fouled, the option to shoot free throws or to take the ball out of bounds, per their volition.  Were these changes to be implemented, the integrity of NBA games would be far better than what it so presently represents.