Rich v. poor

While there are all sorts of comparisons that can be done in regards to the unfairness of the distribution of wealth and opportunity for those that are American, such as a comparison of how much more wealth whites have as compared to African-Americans or Hispanics, the bottom line when it comes down to wealth in America, is less about how much white people have, though they have an awful lot, and more about how few have so much and how so many have so little.  For instance, as reported by forbes.com, "the top 1% of Americans have a combined net worth of $34.2 trillion (or 30.4% of all household wealth in the U.S.), while the bottom 50% of the population holds just $2.1 trillion combined (or 1.9% of all wealth)." That statistic absolutely puts the lie to those that believe that America is fair in its opportunity, fair in its taxation, fair in its justice, equable, egalitarian, as well as being a country that is the true land of good opportunity for all.  Rather, having that much wealth in so few hands is indicative that this country is unfair in all of its aspects, without exception, and clearly corrupt in all of its meaningful institutions, despite what rules and regulations, have been enacted and enforced.  In America, there is, in reality, the law, opportunity, and taxation as applied to all those that are exceedingly rich, and then there is how such is applied against all those that are effectively disenfranchised, poor, disadvantaged and thereby having zero meaningful say, whatsoever, in their governance.

The reason that there is seldom any fundamental change in America, and in fact, why the disparity between rich and poor, ever increases, is the fact that at the highest echelons of governmental power, of corporate power, and of policing power, we find that all of these important institutions are effectively controlled by those that have, so as to obtain even more of what they want, at the obvious expense of all those that have little or nothing, except for empty hopes, broken hearts, and dead-end streets.  If would be one thing if all those that are wealthy accomplished such through honest hard work, but rather a significant amount of the wealth so accumulated is simply transferred from one generation to the next, with a minimum amount of taxation; and additionally there is a significant amount of wealth so having been created by favorable corporate structures that reward the elite with the lion's share of profits at the expense of those that labor for them as well as those that purchase such, often done through the power of near monopoly or duopoly positions or cartel like structures.

It seems amazing that there would be such a disparity of wealth in America, in which, fair competition, innovation, and dedicated effort would seem to mitigate such from ever occurring, but in fact, the system as constructed is fundamentally flawed, and the only institution large enough and strong enough that could ever effectively negate such wealth from accumulating into so few hands, is our national government, which is either the unwitting enabler of this tilted wealth, or co-opted to such a degree that it does little or nothing to level the playing field.  The real reason then why there is so much disharmony in America comes down to the simple fact that the distribution of wealth is skewed so dramatically to the few, that this thereby leaves the masses to fight for the scrapes, and far too often against one another, rather than effecting the utilization of their numbers in order to unite in cause so as to throw out the scoundrels that have eviscerated the very reason as to what this country was dedicated to and created for.

The troubling burden of the United States debt load

As of 4/1/2021,fiscaldata.treasury.gov, shows a United States national debt of $28,081,128,042,930.95, of which $21,971,261,601,025.54 of that debt is the responsibility of the people that are the citizens of this great nation.  Further, as reported by bls.gov, as of March 2021, our civilian labor force consisted of 150,493,000 persons that were employed.  So that, a fair analysis of how much debt is held by each person so employed at the present time would give us the figure of $145,995, that each of those so employed is indebted to the national government to on an individual basis.  Further to the point, despite historically low interest rates, the interest so charged upon the debt that the United States currently has, was as reported by cbo.gov, $345 billion for fiscal year, 2020, so that just the interest expense so being accumulated per worker, would amount to $2,292 just to service the debt, yearly, without any of that money being even applied against the principal, so of.

All of the above is a fair reflection of the amount of debt that this nation has accumulated, and of which, in order for the United States to ever become fiscally responsible again, so as to subsequently run balanced budgets without having any debt, at all, would necessitate the repayment of those monies of that debt, so accumulated over the years being paid off.  What is most troubling to those that make up this country is the sheer size of the debt so incurred, of which, for anyone that has ever had mortgage debt, auto loan debt, student debt, credit card debt, or debt of any sort, one must recognize that payments made towards that specific debt are thereby payments not being made or purchases not enacted for the consumption of items needed or desired, or of entertainment or to make investments in those things of personal interest, for financial gain, or need.

In other words, there are many problems with too much debt, of which one of those problems is that it costs real money to borrow money; as well as there is also the fundamental problem that monies being utilized to pay off debt, is therefore money that cannot be utilized to improve one's own life, or to purchase that which one desires or has a need to have.  This thus signifies that huge debt loads are going to slow down economic growth because those that do not have the ready means to purchase that which they would be inclined to purchase, do not thereby make those purchases, no matter how advantageous the price may appear to be.

So that, all those that do not keep their fiscal house in order, are going to, sooner or later, have to pay the piper or invariably fall into insolvency of some sort, of which the most troubling aspect of America's national debt, is how fast and how much that debt has accelerated in the 21st century, which is probably indicative that those that should be diligently guarding the national henhouse are clearly not those that have the best interests of this country in mind, but rather are the proverbial foxes that are trying to get what they can get, while the getting is still good, leaving those that are the general public, to suffer the terrible consequences of monetary collapse.

"…the long terrible story of man trying to find something other than God which will make him happy”

The above quotation comes from the inestimable C.S. Lewis, of which, this pithy advice, serves notice that as much as mankind spends an inordinate amount of time trying to find happiness in all sorts of activities, escapes, selfishness, and ego fulfillment -- that mankind as long as it stays upon these diversionary routes, will invariably find itself actually getting further and further away from the true path of happiness.  While there is much of merit here on this earth, and much to do to make it better, there are also plenty of sideshows and wrong actions that mankind has shown way too much of an inclination to devote time and resources to, only to find out at the very last hour, that all of this has be in vain, and for nothing much more than temporal vanity.

Those that insist upon substitutes will invariably lead lives of which that substitute no matter how enticing it may at first seem, will never be able to fulfill their true heart's desire, for that substitute does not have and never will have the means to satisfy anyone, fully.  This signifies that all those misguided people that spend time doing that which will not bring them that type of lasting joy and satisfaction of a good mission, well done, are going to invariably be disappointed; though they may, for a time, find some joy and satisfaction from that activity, but, of which, it will not and cannot last.

It is amazing, that many a person that refuses to accept that which is fraudulent and/or of inferior quality as being just as good as the real thing in their material interactions, somehow yet believes that the pursuit of that which cannot ever end well, will somehow end well, when that cannot be.  It isn't that we are meant to simply worship God night and day, as if that, alone, will make us happy; but rather it is imperative that the thoughts, actions, and deeds that we do throughout our interactions with others that are part of our community that we are in, are consistent to the attributes of what makes for justice, compassion, fairness, and wisdom.

Those that are most satisfied and thereby happy, are all those that have aligned themselves to the best of their ability by their thoughts and by their subsequent actions so as to synchronize with that which is the Creator of it all.  If we truly want what is best for ourselves as well as for others, so as to have that inner peace of knowing that we are doing right, then we need to take to heart the wisdom of the ages, and that wisdom will not ever steer us wrong.

The failure of mankind is the repeated failure of mankind through its sustained belief that somehow its individual self-serving wisdom is the superior wisdom, which should be adhered to by all others, and that those that will not listen and obey, need to be taught to obey.  That corrupt mindset is the very basis for all that is wrong in this world.  Rather, that which mankind needs in order to find that inner peace, is that which mankind needs to freely avail itself of, and when mankind finds that which must be found, then that which is false and disappointing will be replaced by that which is True and ever satisfying.

Do not be a fair-weather friend

There are all sorts of friendships, some healthy, some really not, of which the objective of any healthy friendship is that it actually is beneficial for each party.  This doesn't necessarily mean that a friendship needs to be 50:50, for any good and worthy friendship doesn't actually keep score; but rather each party to that friendship needs to be a fair contributor to it.   Additionally, as much as we might wish that friendships would be filled with nothing but an unending series of good times and meaningful interactions, the fact of the matter is that friendships are going to reflect the reality of life, and life has a way of being complicated, with unexpected twists and turns that have to be resolutely dealt with.

All of the above signifies that a true friend in a real friendship is going to be the type of person that will not step away when those unenviable situations come up, that necessitates some degree of sacrifice, perspicuity, patience, concern, and action.  After all, when someone is only there for when the times are good, and to their benefit, and thereupon simply vanishes at the first sign of trouble, that isn't a friend, but rather represents in truth the epitome of a fair-weather friend.

Ultimately, there are those things that we are in control of and have influence upon, and then there are those other things that we don't control, and may not have much influence upon at all.  So then, that which is in our domain, we have to take responsibility for, and because of that, we may indeed have obligations and commitments that are ours to own and to do right with.  So then, it must be acknowledged, that a friendship implies some degree of responsibility of one person to the other, for the very point of a good friendship, is to have that other person to share things of value with, and to be of substance and of material aid to our friend, when such is called upon.

So while it is true, that we cannot control others, we can though, control ourselves and our subsequent actions; thereby signifying that we have no legitimate excuse in not been a good friend to our friends, if that be our volition. So then, the true test of any friendship is what we do when our friend has made an error or a series of errors, even those that are grievous ones.  If we decide there and then to cut the line and run, we have done them wrong, for the time that people need their friends by their side, more than ever, is when they are at their lowest, their weakest, and their most vulnerable.

The best things in life, require effort, perseverance, patience, aforethought, and follow through.  Those that would have good friends need to have the attributes of a good friend displayed through their own character and by their actions.  So then, when our friend is needful, that is the time to do what is right and what is necessary to be that aid to them, for that is the very epitome of a true and good friend.   For all those that do answer that call they have done well, and for those that do not, they have not, no matter their excuse or reasoning.

Overreaction, oppression and the oppressed

We would like to think that we live in a fair and just world, but virtually everything that surrounds us tells us differently; so what we see and know is that actually far too often this world is unfair and unjust, which is unfortunate, but true.  What makes this unjustness and unfairness especially of concern to each one of us is that even in our familial relationships, we are prone to that very same theme of injustice.

So then, it follows that what we often find is that those that feel that they are oppressed within a personal relationship will at some point, reach that breaking point and thereby will respond to that criticism or oppression, with often a response that will not be a reasoned one, but instead will be prone to and susceptible to a high degree of emotion and even hysteria.  The reason why this is so, is that those that feel that they are within that particular construct, of an inferior position, will often not reasonably believe that a reasonable response is going to avail them of much of anything; whereas an emotional and hysterical response might well serve to get across the point, that they have reached their breaking point and thereby should be left alone.

For the most part, hysteria has its place and time, for those that get hysterical have often done so, because they feel that they have nowhere to extricate themselves out of their current hopeless situation, except to respond in the most intemperate manner, in the hopes that by doing so, that they will perhaps knock the person that is in the superior position, off of their perch, or at least get that perch to tilt to the side a little bit.  So too, those that are constantly on the receiving end of criticism and belittlement, are also going to have a very strong tendency to take what has been done to them, and search for someone or something to direct their inward anger against; so that, sad to say, the victim of oppression, becomes often in a different scenario and with a different person, the oppressor of that person, utilizing as their tool of trade, that same sort of oppressive stratagem against another.

This signifies that what we find is that those who are oppressed, and without the capability to defend themselves in a mature and reasoned manner, are going to from time-to-time strike back against their oppressor by some sort of emotional overreaction or through subterfuge or both.  So too, oppressed people, often are in search of those situations in which they can regain their footing and get their own self-respect back, thereby making them prone to utilizing the very same actions that they so richly despise against someone that is weaker than their own self.  This thus perpetuates the dynamic of oppression and the overreaction to such, until somebody, somewhere, ends that cycle of negativity and emotional destruction.

Far too often, those that lord it over others, do not realize that their actions, have consequences that they have not fully contemplated upon; so that, the evil and the wrong that we do, may, in fact, live on and extend much further, than we ever could have imagine it so becoming.

Hierarchy and social order

Though people may want to really believe that the United States is a country of meritocracy, of egalitarianism, of opportunity, of freedom, of liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the reality of what it really is, does not match that very pretty picture. In fact, as in many nations, there most definitely is a pronounced hierarchy to America, as well as the consistent enforcement of that social order.  As important as that hierarchy is, and that hierarchy is very important to those that are its elites, they strongly prefer that their hierarchical business be business that need not be advertised.  On the other hand, social order is all about intimidation, threats, fear, incarceration, pain, punishment, and the overwhelming powerful authority asserting itself in a manner in which it does not relent from ever taking its boot off of the necks of those that need to know their place.

After all, when there are millions upon millions of Americans that really don't have much of a future, and live in conditions that are unsafe, unhealthy, and oppressive, then that underclass is typically going to display its unease in a manner in which they can throw off their chains, for those that have nothing to lose, have in theory, everything to gain.  It so follows that one might think that a more reasonable and reasoned response by those at the pinnacle of that hierarchy might be to provide a better environment with some degree of fairness as well as opportunity, for those of that underclass; but in consideration that the infiltration and compromise of such, as well as the fact that those that march to the elites orders are seemingly only too happy to obey and to enforce the rules, precludes a more humane response.  That is to say, why change, what doesn't need to change; especially as fear and thereby the need for social order, is a song that plays surprisingly well to the middle class of America, and as long as that middle class continues to believe that their security trumps their own Constitutional rights, then the battle has essentially already been fought and won.

For all those that are connected to the elite and/or are part of the right social circles, all is absolutely well within America, for they literally have the best of the best, with a minimal taxation obligation, and they fully appreciate that they are properly respected and competently defended at all times.  So too, those that have enough to put together a semblance of a decent and good life are pretty much okay with what is happening, as long as they are safe, fed, religiously free, and have their entertainment of choice.  So it remains open season on all those enclaves of poverty, abandonment, and hopelessness, in which the objective of the exercise is as simple as the desire of those elites to manipulate and to exploit those impoverished people to keep knowing their place and to thereby perform their service, as underpaid and exploited serfs to those that are essentially their masters.  Those then that continue to fail to learn their lesson will pay in blood, and those that have learned their lessons, will continue to get what they get, but never enough to develop that necessary velocity to ever get away.

Politics without principles

The bottom line is that legitimate political parties are created upon principled ideals, desires, goals, platforms, compromise, unification, and ultimately for the benefit of the people.  This would seem to indicate that a country formulated upon a Constitution as principled as that of the United States, would have no real need for political parties, as this is not only a union of States, joined together; but also represents a republic so created of, for, and by the people.  Yet, soon after the ratification of that Constitution, political factions were formed, and in the present day, these political parties are integral to today's policies so being enacted or rejected.

It would be one thing if those present day political parties were principled, but the evidence seems to imply the very opposite.  Today's political parties seem to be on one level completely unprincipled, and pretty much beholden to those that are the power brokers of their actuation, of which the objective of these parties appears to be deception, not just in regards to trickery meant to fool the opposing party, but outright deception to the very people that are members of it.  That is to say, while there are many gifted politicians that do a wonderful job in speaking and even believing in what they say, the actual effect or subsequent change, for the general core people of those political parties seems pretty disappointing, because the real benefits of what these political parties achieve appear to be mostly beneficial to only those that are well positioned, as compared to the people in whole, who seem to consistently get far less then what they should.

Then again, even when the people do appear to get what they are expecting to get, the receiving of such, has a lot more to do with the power plays so made behind the scenes that benefits those that are part of the winning side, to the detriment of those that are on the losing side; of which, principled actions based on justice, fairness, fair play, and the doing of the right thing, pretty much evaporates as an irrelevancy.  When the political game is played in a manner in which the objective is to win at any cost, then it is a given, that the cost will be the ethics of party principles, as well as the dismissal of the needs of the regular people that aren't considered to be a constituency that actually gets represented.

In point of fact, as the Constitution is the highest law of this land, then it so follows that the principles of each political party, should be the guiding light of those parties, and to the degree that those principles are seen as mere window dressing, then one can expect that the result of political involvement by those parties in regards to justice, legislation, and the execution of rules and regulation to function primarily instead as a very nice looking façade, of which the end result so obscured to the general public is typically a grand disservice to those that are essentially its minions as well as all those on the losing side.

Our governance is supposed to be a representative republic, but the reality is that those representatives don't answer to the people, nor do they answer to the principles of their respective party, but rather they often act in concert with those that are in their ear, playing that bewitching tune that keeps them in line, often quite willingly.The bottom line is that legitimate political parties are created upon principled ideals, desires, goals, platforms, compromise, unification, and ultimately for the benefit of the people.  This would seem to indicate that a country formulated upon a Constitution as principled as that of the United States, would have no real need for political parties, as this is not only a union of States, joined together; but also represents a republic so created of, for, and by the people.  Yet, soon after the ratification of that Constitution, political factions were formed, and in the present day, these political parties are integral to today's policies so being enacted or rejected.

It would be one thing if those present day political parties were principled, but the evidence seems to imply the very opposite.  Today's political parties seem to be on one level completely unprincipled, and pretty much beholden to those that are the power brokers of their actuation, of which the objective of these parties appears to be deception, not just in regards to trickery meant to fool the opposing party, but outright deception to the very people that are members of it.  That is to say, while there are many gifted politicians that do a wonderful job in speaking and even believing in what they say, the actual effect or subsequent change, for the general core people of those political parties seems pretty disappointing, because the real benefits of what these political parties achieve appear to be mostly beneficial to only those that are well positioned, as compared to the people in whole, who seem to consistently get far less then what they should.

Then again, even when the people do appear to get what they are expecting to get, the receiving of such, has a lot more to do with the power plays so made behind the scenes that benefits those that are part of the winning side, to the detriment of those that are on the losing side; of which, principled actions based on justice, fairness, fair play, and the doing of the right thing, pretty much evaporates as an irrelevancy.  When the political game is played in a manner in which the objective is to win at any cost, then it is a given, that the cost will be the ethics of party principles, as well as the dismissal of the needs of the regular people that aren't considered to be a constituency that actually gets represented.

In point of fact, as the Constitution is the highest law of this land, then it so follows that the principles of each political party, should be the guiding light of those parties, and to the degree that those principles are seen as mere window dressing, then one can expect that the result of political involvement by those parties in regards to justice, legislation, and the execution of rules and regulation to function primarily instead as a very nice looking façade, of which the end result so obscured to the general public is typically a grand disservice to those that are essentially its minions as well as all those on the losing side.

Our governance is supposed to be a representative republic, but the reality is that those representatives don't answer to the people, nor do they answer to the principles of their respective party, but rather they often act in concert with those that are in their ear, playing that bewitching tune that keeps them in line, often quite willingly.

What makes good so good?

It's important to understand that in the scheme of things, each one of us should want to be good by the doing of good things for others, but yet it isn't always that obvious that what we are doing is even good to begin with.  For instance, lots of people like to think that they are doing good, or think that they are one of the good guys, but yet there are those situations in which you have two people or even two countries, praying to the very same God, and of which they are at war one against the other, each believing wholeheartedly that what they are doing and standing for is good, but this can't in reality, be the case.

So the very first thing about good is the need to understand what good actually is.  As it has been written in regards to the characteristics of good, we find that which is truly good, is that which propagates and diffuses itself, as compared to that which is limited and diminishes itself.  So then, that which is good encourages others to become participants in it; thereby, spreading the wealth, and hence becoming as a rising tide for all boats.

This signifies that selfishness cannot be good, and all those activities that benefit the elite at the expense of the public are also not going to be good.  Rather, good is never something that there is a finite supply of, but rather it is something of which the more people that take the time to devote themselves to becoming participants with it, will subsequently propagate that good, for the betterment of all.  That which is good, is that which makes the world a better and a more just place.

Whenever we find people that co-opt good by claiming that which is good, when it is really not, the proof that we know that we are correct in our assessment is the fact that which really doesn't have the quality of good, is something that cannot or will not be shared, one with another, because it is really just beneficial for that one.  So then what we discover is that the fundamental characteristic about good is that good is never a zero-sum game, but rather is something that expands the beneficial pie; this then, is good.

It so follows, that in order to do good, we need to find something that is clearly outside of our own self, something that helps to make things better, in the here or not, or in the future, and most importantly, that which is good, is always that which we intuitively know must be shared with others.  In other words, something that is good, that has happened to us, or that we have brought about, is always going to also be that which we also are going to willingly share with others.  When something is good, there is a joy that cannot be contained within just our own self and thereupon we desire to see that joy freely given to others, which we thereby know as that which is good.

Beyond soap and water

In this current heightened time of concern in regards to viruses of all types, it would behoove government authorities to put forth comprehensive plans to address what is the best way to achieve good hygiene.  For instance, the United States has believed for decades that soap and water is the most effective means of successfully removing germs from a person's hands, of which, the general rule of thumb is for people to spend twenty seconds of time utilizing soap and water, before drying one's hands with a clean towel or paper towel.  While, no doubt, there is probably study after study demonstrating the good effectiveness of that soap and water, when following these directions to the "T"; what hasn't been looked at nearly enough, is how often in the real world, that people, whether at home or outside such, actually spend the necessary time needed with soap and water to get that effectiveness in reality. 

The fundamental dilemma with soap and water, comes down first to the fact that the water so being utilized itself must be clean water to begin with, the soap must have excellent cleansing agents, followed by the length of time that the soap and water combined is required to successfully perform its objective, and finally there is the necessity of a clean and uncontaminated towel to dry one's hands.  All of these things combined, are necessary to get the proper result, which thereby removes germs, and of which, the average person, probably seldom actually accomplishes each of these necessary things, and therein lays the main problem with our current usage of soap and water.

While it is true, that enough repetition, may in fact, get people to change habits of long standing, as well as to develop good habits in the first place, the reality seems to say, that most people, as much as they might want to, just aren’t ever going to get the soap and water routine, down right.   In addition, clean running water may not always be available, and time constraints to that washing, may never seem to go away, in addition to the fact, that clean towels may not always be available.  Therefore, it would seem that alternatives to soap and water, most definitely have their place, not so much as a replacement to soap and water, but rather to provide to the public another viable choice.

In recent times, the go-to choice to get rid of germs, besides soap and water, is hand sanitizer, of which there are some significant advantages to hand sanitizer, of which one is that having clean running water is not a requirement; in addition, the usage of a dry towel is not necessary, and further the time limit to utilize a hand sanitizer is in effect, less, even when twenty seconds is recommended, because there is no longer a requirement to remain by the sink for twenty seconds or to dry one's hands with a towel, but rather, as long as the hand and fingers are being thoroughly rubbed against each other, until such gets dry, the sanitizer has ably performed its duty.

The bottom line, is that as good as hand sanitizers currently are in regards to the removal of germs, they probably can get even better, and to the degree that the government recognizes that the reality of how people actually go about their hygiene, trumps the effectiveness of soap and water, will probably lead to a better health result, with this or a similar robust alternative.

Profits vs. people

This world is made up of people, of which those people that band together so as to create a particular construct in which they base their business enterprise primarily upon the profit so to be made by their products so to be sold; and thereby they make it their point to take advantage of or to exploit those that labor upon that product, as well as to make a conscious business decision to practice the manipulation of susceptible people to encourage the purchasing of such a product, have quite obviously made the determination that for them, the making of profit, and thereby the benefits of having that profit, outweigh whatever concerns they  might have to the fairness and value of other people's basic human rights.

First, the nature of a given business enterprise doesn't have to be conducted that way.  If more businesses and the people that make up those business enterprises made it their point of principle to pay a fair salary for a fair day's work, and to price their products to sell at a fair price, then this foundation would in concept, provide the necessary means to sustain and to grow those enterprises, day-by-day, along with the fact that those so employed there would at a minimum, be earning a living wage.  A mindset such as that should be the primary objective of every respectable business enterprise, so created, of which, those that lose sight of the humanity that we share in common with one another, to replace such with the exploitation and the greed to thereby take advantage of situations that favor those with money, power, connections, cleverness, and the like, have decisively decided to take the low road at the expense of doing the right thing for those that they work and associate with.

In order to try to make a living, people have to work, and in a world in which a lot of those jobs so being offered, necessitate working for a business enterprise, those that are the common laborers to such, often do not have the skill set or the wherewithal to dictate the terms of that employment.  Rather, in many cases, that of which these subject employees will get paid, is determined by that business enterprise, irrespective of the need of the person so seeking employment, the fairness of it, or even a decent consideration as to whether the salary so being agreed to represents a living wage.

Those that believe that the free enterprise capitalistic system is the best economic system the world has ever seen, are typically those that sit comfortably on the winner's side of such a belief; for in reality,  when it comes to any economic system of which profits, more than anything, rule the roost, one can expect, that the unyielding lust for profits will lead to all sorts of ill consequences, such as lying and deceit of all stripes, pollution, unfairness, exploitation, manipulation, injustice, and a massive disparity between those few that have it all as compared to a significant part of the population which pretty much has nothing.

It isn't that the capitalistic system is wrong; it is just that there needs to be proper governance exerted by a robust government that regulates such in a manner in which primarily people are held at a higher value and thereby of more importance than the mere making of money.

Poverty in the USA

The United States is the richest nation that the world has ever known, but unfortunately, its distribution of wealth is massively skewed in such a way, that a very few have an awful lot, while there are a significant swath that have a fair amount, and then again there are those others that as reported by brookings.edu, fairly reflects that America has a systemic poverty problem, as "38.1 million people, or 11.8 percent of the population" suffer from and live in poverty.  As bad as that may be, other economists believe that this official number is actually too low.  Be that as it may, the fact that such a huge subset of fellow Americans are living in poverty and thereby suffering from all the disadvantages, thereof, is indicative that not all is right within America.

In point of fact, America should be the world's leader in the reduction of poverty rates, utilized as proof positive that its capitalistic system, combined with the social services so provided by its governance is the best mix of private and public enterprise that the world has ever known.  But this isn't the case, at all, in which, again and again, America spends an inordinate amount of time, praising the success of its great corporations, as well as indicating how generous it is with the monies so being spent on social services, without ever admitting that those actions are woefully inadequate in successfully tackling and thereby meaningfully dealing with the actual reduction of its poverty rate.

The bottom line is that there is plenty of food, plenty of shelter, plenty of money, and plenty of good infrastructures that this country should be able to avail itself of so as to effectively reduce its poverty rates appreciably from where they currently sit at.  In order to do exactly that, America needs to wake up from its indifference to its own disadvantaged people, so as to come forth with a comprehensive plan that is indicative of the minimum levels so being met for education, housing, healthcare, food, and employment opportunities for all of America, and to make it their point that they will not let up, until this is met in every community of this great nation.

While, no doubt, we will always have some poor amongst us, for some people and some situations, are intractable; the point is that we could minimize such by putting forth a comprehensive infrastructure plan that would assure each American, of a proper education, food enough to eat, safe shelter, and healthcare that is accommodative for all those without money, if the United States would just set its mind on doing exactly that.  After all, the money is there to accomplish such, of which the United States needs to do so, for often times the price of poverty is the corresponding price of hopelessness, and thereby by providing hope for those that have gone so long without such, we will as a nation, ultimately become stronger and better.

Each American should be fairly entitled to a minimum standard of living, of which, this minimum, would be enough, to assure their safety, their shelter, their education, adequate healthcare, and food for their belly.  The fact that this does not presently exist, is to America's great shame, for if America does not feel an obligation to take care of their weakest and most vulnerable, in a current construct in which they are on top of the world, then this clearly does not bode well for its future.

Income of $50,000 vs. $50,000 earned is not the same thing

The vast majority of working Americans are subject to Federal and State withholding from their paycheck, as well as in some localities also suffering the indignity of having taxes held for city taxes; in addition, employees are required by Federal law to have taken from their paycheck, 6.2% for social security taxes, as well as 1.45% for Medicare.  So then, those that have an income through their labor of $50,000 per annum, do not ever actually receive a net income of also $50,000 but rather are subject to various taxing authorities, in which, some of those taxes are thereupon recovered upon the filing of an Income tax return, depending upon a myriad of conditions.  Nevertheless, what is never recoverable, is those taxes so taken by social security and Medicare, as these are considered to be a given person's contribution to the safety net of retirement and recoverable only when they reach retirement age.

On the other hand, there are plenty of people that earn $50,000 and pay little or no taxes upon this, and further are not subject to the paying of 6.2% for social security or 1.45% for Medicare.  For instance, one of the prevalent ways that people with money, make additional money is through their investment in equities of all types, of which, if that investment in a given equity, is thereby held for one year, it is considered to be a long term investment, and should any portion of that particular equity thereupon be sold, then the taxation of such, would be subject to long term capital gains taxation rules, which varies depending upon the marital status of that taxpayer.  That is to say, for a single taxpayer, with long term capital gains so sold of $50,000, the first $40,000 of that income would be taxed at 0%, and the subsequent $10,000 would be taxed at 15%, for a grand total of $1,500 so due.  If, the taxpayer was a married couple, though, they would not be subject to any taxes whatsoever, for $50,000 worth of capital gains, is taxed for them at an effective rate of 0%.

Further, to the point, those that have capital gains, are not compelled by any sort of law, to sell any of their capital gains, so that, if they so desire, when they make $50,000 in capital gains or more in a given calendar year, they can simply roll that money so earned over, till next year, or the year after, or as long as they so desire.  In other words, those that are paid a $50,000 salary are compelled to be under the obligation of tax authorities, and will have to pay what they have to pay.  Those, though, that make their money through investments as in equities, will not have to pay a dime, if they do not sell; and if they do so sell, when they are savvy about such, will sell only that which will not trigger any tax liability, or the minimization of such.

It doesn't seem right that one party must labor hard to earn their keep and thereupon has tax obligations that must so be paid; whereas, another party earns the same amount of money, and pays not a dime, in which both of these parties, utilize the same roads, the same infrastructure, and the same governance, but only one of these is compelled by tax law to pay the piper, so of.

It is a crime to be poor

The bottom line is that there are those laws that are primarily created by those that design them in a way in which they may appear to be of good intention, but in reality, are created in a manner in which it thereby becomes a pathway to exert social control over those elements of society, that they so deem to be in need of managing, molding, and perpetual oversight.  So then, rather than being transparent about those laws and the intended purpose of such, those in know deliberately create laws that give the illusion of fairness, but are definitely not fair in their application, so of.

This thus means that we find that, for instance, when all drivers are required to have car insurance, that while on the surface, this appears to be a fair, prudent, and a practical requirement, it really isn't.  For this requirement is far less fair and practical, for those that are already struggling to make and to meet their financial obligations, and thereby simply do not have the funds to pay also for car insurance, which seems to be one of those things, that is an expense, that is best left for another day.  Yet, to be in a car accident, without appropriate car insurance, can be more damaging for that unfortunate driver, than the actual damage of the accident itself; by virtue of that driver, being subject to possible criminal penalties, heavy monetary fines, along with the suspension of that person's driver's license.  So, in short, those that have made a decision based on the lack of ready funds, are thereby burden even more by the penalties for not paying the piper to begin with, without such taking into fair consideration that the funds were never really there to pay the piper for that insurance.

Additionally, it costs a ton of money for people to live in a residence of any sort; in fact, housing is typically the biggest monthly expense for most people, so that, quite obviously, for those that are down on their luck, for whatever reason, they are going to have to cut corners in order to make ends meet when they lack the funds or the stability to live at a particular place.  So then, as a consequence, some people are going to camp where they need to camp, or sleep in their vehicle, or on a park bench, or just about anywhere where they can get some sleep in, and the response by some authorities in certain jurisdictions is to address sleeping in a car or sleeping in a park or sleeping on a park bench, as an actual criminal act, which clearly does nothing about the root cause of such homelessness, but instead stigmatizes those that are struggling, by making criminals out of them. 

So too, as much as parents love their children, there are things and activities that have to be accomplished each and every day, so that, those that have to leave their children alone for some period of time, or in their car for a short duration, are prone to being susceptible to all sorts of well intentioned laws dealing with the good welfare of children, but applied almost exclusively against those lacking in the same accouterments and flexibility that parents with money, pale complexion, stability and position so have; in addition to that law being applied only against those that are pretty much defenseless to fight back.

Even though the mainstream narrative claims that it is no crime to be poor, we see, in fact, that the laws so written and applied, do indeed indicate the very opposite.

Not your grandparent's corporations

Today's corporations are not like they were back in the 1930s, for the mixture of such, and the size of such, and the economic impact of such of those corporations, is far, far different today, then it was back then.  For instance, as pointed out by author Kevin Phillips, "Of the twenty largest US corporations in 1937, eight were railroads and seven were utilities."  This signifies that back in 1937, that 75% of the largest US corporations, were essentially those that provided a needed service to the general public, such as electricity, water, sewage, and the like; as well as our interstate transportation system which was dependent upon railroads to transport needed goods from one area of the country to another in an efficient way, of which, this was accomplished before our present age of an interstate highway system, and thereby those ubiquitous semi-trucks.  So then, back in 1937, the largest companies were to a large extent those corporations that were essential to the everyday life of Americans, as a whole.

However, a look at today's largest corporations, tells us that none of these top twenty corporations are utilities and none of them are railroads, either.  To a certain degree, that isn't surprising, since utilities are typically publically regulated for the public good and hence their profits are controlled by that regulation; and railroads while still vital, have been for over a century regulated by governmental authorities for the fair benefit of that society; along with the fact that these railroads have seen their previous exclusive domain being subject to in subsequent years by the replacement of other means of transportation, such as semi-trucks, airplanes, and large container ships.  The thing is that previously the largest corporations in this country were for the most part, companies that were regulated by governmental authorities for the good of the country, so as to be fair to the public -- therefore because of this the public was not unfairly gouged by pricing and restrictions so imposed by those corporate entities utilizing monopoly type powers without being subject to containment by corresponding governmental restraint, rules and regulations.

This signifies that today's gargantuan corporations have never had it better in the sense of being able to extract as much profit as they so desire, with little or no pushback by governmental authorities or regulations, so of.  It then comes as no real surprise that in industries in which there are no real constraints so imposed, that those corporations are able to become bigger, more powerful, more profitable, and more influential in regards to essentially directing government policy, so that the mantra of said government seems to be what is good for those companies is good for this country; whereas, in truth, what is good for those companies, is primarily good for those that are at the highest echelons of those corporations, as well as the financiers and investors, so of. 

Regrettably, this government has ceded more and more control of the business of America, to that which is unelected, and woefully under-regulated, in some sort of laissez-faire mindset which benefits those corporations enormously at the expense of the general public, at large; for the more profit that these corporations so make, is more that they have successfully extracted from the pockets of everyday Americans, in which, this government has fallen asleep at the helm, without recognizing its fiduciary duty to level the playing field, in fairness to all.

"…avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments…"

The above quotation reads more fully as: "Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty."  This quote comes from an esteemed politician, and seemingly somewhat surprisingly, from a former President of the United States.  Many people might presuppose that it must have come from President Eisenhower's Farewell Address, so done on January 17, 1961, in which the President rails against the "military-industrial complex," but these words are not Eisenhower's words.  So then, one might logically think that this must therefore be words so spoken by a President that has no love for the military and during their Presidency, was considered to be a pacifist in principle, someone such as John Quincy Adams, or Jimmy Carter, but alas these are not their words, either.  In fact, these words were spoken on September 19, 1796, as the Farewell Address, by the Father of our nation, the inestimable, irreplaceable, courageous George Washington, our country's first President.

This thus signifies that when someone that has been at the pinnacle of military power as well as military honor and therefore knows the intimacies of such, thereby recognizes the inherent danger of a military establishment grown too large, then surely these are the very words that any sensible American should subsequently take to heart.  The fact that these words were spoken back when the military of these United States, was modest in size, and equally modest in scope, signifies the prescient of those words so spoken.  The understanding of such therefore should not be prudently ignored, for as a sovereign nation of republican virtue, so governed and thereby divided into three separate powers, we find that none of those powers are specifically designated as a separate branch, exclusively for the military.  Rather, this is supposed to be a nation that adheres to the highest law of its land, which is its Constitution, and of which, those three separate branches are known as the judicial, executive, and legislative. 

Washington was correct in his sagacious concern, that none of those other branches have any real relevancy, if in fact, this country for all intents and purposes, is run by those unelected officials of the military establishment; for because they have the power of the mighty gun, are thereby in a position, should they not be effectively controlled or corralled, of essentially being that "shadow government" that thereby rules the roost, directly or indirectly, through that awesome military might or its threat, thereof.   This is the probable reason in an age in which the United States has no country or series of countries that would even contemplate war upon our nation, that this nation maintains and even augments its insanely high military budget that thereby takes from its citizens, that which is of value, such as social services, healthcare, employment, infrastructure, education, and the like to feed the endless trough of military lust and desires, under the guise that our national security demands that very thing.

The very freedoms that this nation was founded upon, the unalienable rights that are ours, so gifted to us by our Creator, have in recent decades, taken the back seat to what that military-industrial-technology complex so desires, which has meant that never have so many domestic citizens been under the surveillance of its own nation's invasive security apparatus, and never have so many guns, been at the ready, so as to keep, if it must be, those citizens in their place, leaving our domestic tranquility, in a constant sea of tempestuous trouble, and our liberty at the mercy of that military establishment.

"We the people"

The preamble of our Constitution begins with these immortal words, "We the people of the United States," signifying that the creation of this country, was based upon the sovereignty of those people, and therefore that the people would not therefore have to pay obeisance to monarchies or dictators, or things of that ilk, but that the people were instead the masters and thereby the co-creators of their own government, and the Constitution so created, was to be their effective ruler, and therefore the highest law of this land.

This signifies, that those that are the least patriotic are all those people and institutions that do not adhere to this Constitutional principle, that this is a government of, for, and by the people; of which the greatest traitors to that principle are all those that aid and abet and/or participate in a "shadow government" that bypasses the people and instead sets itself up under the guise of a Constitutional republic; but is in form, fit and function, a governance that is of, for, and by those of privilege, connections, power, money, and military might.

This means that in order for the people to be masters of their own fate, that they need to diligently hold accountable all areas of that governance which effectively bypasses or ignores the people, by those usurpers, for example, aggrandizing into their own hands, powers not so vested to them by that Constitution.  The fact is that in today's world it seems as if the people have seemingly ceded control of the sovereignty of their own lives, along with apparently giving up their unalienable rights of life, freedom, and self-determination, either wittingly or unwittingly to those that have become their illegitimate replacement masters.   

Regrettably, this is no great surprise, for humankind and its corresponding governance often starts from great principles of egalitarianism and fairness but sadly is prone to becoming devolved into such being controlled by those that have a lust for power and greed; of which the people because they are so engaged in their day-to-day activities of conducting their livelihood, find themselves to a certain degree, quite susceptible to being hoodwinked or propagandized in such a way that what they once had, becomes no more.

Still, the highest law of this land is that Constitution, and as long as we have a Constitutional government, than the people still have a foundation to call and to lean upon; and of which, it is important that they do that very thing, because nothing in life is stagnant, and that which is not utilized and taken to heart as being of the utmost importance, has a strong tendency, especially when there are those corrupt others that are intent upon wresting such away, to weaken almost to irrelevancy.

In this country, we are meant to govern ourselves, and to govern ourselves in a manner in which we benefit one another, not just for this generation, but for generations to come.  The loyalty that we owe one another, is that loyalty that recognizes that we all are equally entitled to the liberty and the freedom that this country represents in principle; of which, those that try to take our sovereignty away from us, overtly or covertly, under the guise of war, or safety, or false improvement, or because they claim to know better, are not our friends, but rather are enemies of the state.

The government of plutocracy

While, we like to believe that the United States government is a government, of, for, and by the people; the fact of the matter is that representation for those of modest means is few in number, and therefore average Americans are underrepresented and therefore lack the power and the necessary influence to effect change.  For instance, a significant amount of Americans are people that make a middle class income, and/or constantly struggle to make ends meet, but through their perseverance and pluck they are able to get by, day-by-day.  These salt-of-the-earth Americans typically suffer from a paucity of numbers at the highest levels of meaningful governance, despite their relevancy and the necessity for their voice to actually be heard for the good of the people, in whole.

Not too surprisingly, those that have money and power, gravitate to positions that will at a minimum allow them to keep those riches secure; if not to outright augment what they already have, so as to lockdown and to secure their dynastic power, even so for generations.  So then, in the arena of politics in which money plays an outsized role in the propositions, legislation, and the representatives, so put into play, those that have that money make sure that such is utilized quite effectively; and those that are in powerful positions, are quite skilled in consolidating and often increasing their power, all the more.

Yet, the sheer number of those that are rich -- pales in comparison to those that are not; so that the ever increasing amount of wealth being held in that small minority of hands, seems to indicate that despite the fact that each citizen is equally enfranchised for the vote; that somehow the laws, the legislation, the taxation, and the like are sickly skewed to favor those that already have everything that they could ever conceivably need in order to live a very good and superior life, leaving those without, with even less -- in this the land of egalitarianism, and the supposed enemy of nobility and titles or its equivalency.

This signifies that in America, that for all intents and purposes, this land and thereby its governance is run almost exclusively by those that have the power and the money, of which we see the aftereffects of this by the high degree of poverty of our own citizens in this the richest nation the world has ever known, as well as so shown by the multitude of additional Americans that are constantly vulnerable to financial catastrophe should they be laid off, or suffer ill health, or be hit with some other unexpected negative event.

It would be one thing, if the superrich simply just enjoyed their wealth; but perhaps there is something more sinister that is happening, for there seems to be a correlation between those that are massively wealthy and the corresponding poverty and underclass which subsists and exists in America, of which, the only fair conclusion to reach is that far too many of those that are rich and powerful, get what they claim is theirs, by their outright exploitation of their fellow countrymen.  So, the rich oppress the poor, for the benefit of the rich; and the only conceivable institution that can stand up to the superrich, is this government, of, by and for the people, which does next to nothing to fundamentally change what needs to be changed so as to ameliorate the poverty and the lack of fair opportunity for its people, because that government is clearly under the aegis of the rich and powerful.

Property tax unfairness

While there are probably few people that are actually happy to pay taxes, in point of fact, most people will admit that the payment of taxes are a necessary and a needed function for those that are part and parcel of their communities; in order to demonstrate in principle that they are good contributors to their community, if by nothing else, at least by their tax paying contribution. This thus signifies that what is really most meaningful for taxpayers is that the system as constructed is both uniform and fair.  When it comes to property taxes this is surely not the case, and in fact, hasn't been the case, and probably won't be the case anytime soon.

For instance, certain properties are exempt from property taxes, such as universities, churches, governmental facilities, public school facilities, non-profit hospitals, and many general non-profits, as well as various exemptions are typically made available for senior citizens, veterans, and even corporate businesses that have negotiated a special deal with the appropriate governance of a particular city, county, or local authority.  So that, as reported by lohud.com, it is estimated that "The state of New York is home to 5.7 million parcels of property worth an estimated $2.8 trillion But when property-tax bills go out each year, nearly a third of that value — about $866 billion — never gets billed."  Obviously, those properties that are thereby totally exempt, or have their taxes reduced for whatever reason, necessitates that those that are not exempt, must therefore carry significantly more of the tax load, in order to provide necessary monies for the infrastructure of their government to successfully perform and to provide their community services.

When it comes to those property taxes, the payment of such has nothing to do with discretionary spending, such as what a sales tax so represents, for goods so purchased; but reflects instead the ownership of real estate property that one either conducts their business from, and/or resides within, and since everyone needs a place of residence, and those of working age, typically require a separate place where they work, the taxes so assessed are relevant.  Because, whether or not, a given person owns the business, or owns their dwelling, property taxes will be paid either directly, because of that ownership, or indirectly -- for instance, when they are just an employee or just a renter; but paid they are going to be, in one form or another, by, for example, higher rents to reflect those taxes, or lower wages or lower job opportunities, or some sort of combination, thereof.

One way for the common property taxpayer to begin to fight back against this unfairness, is for a public list of all exempt businesses, schools, churches, non-profits, and the like, thereby becoming available in an easily accessible public database, and further to the point, leading to some sort of pushback by the general taxpayer against the fact that total property tax exemptions, should really be few and infrequent, of which, the reasoning of those exemptions being provided in the first place, should be foundationally re-examined.  This is not to say that universities, for instance, don't provide a public benefit; but why should that benefit, include a total exemption of property taxes, as if every square inch of that university is all for the benefit of the public, when, in fact, only a small percentage of the residents of a community typically ever set foot even upon the campus.

The bottom line is that property taxes are not cheap, and for those that are compelled to pay, annually, they never actually go away.  So it would be fairer, if all the members of the community in whole did their fair share in their contribution to the payment of such, rather than their outright avoidance.

Inflation is in the stock market

The United States has gone through periods of time of double-digit inflation, but this has not occurred since 1980, and apparently despite everything that the Federal Reserve has tried in recent years, to get inflation up to their desired target rate of 2%, inflation has remained quiescent, and apparently typically under that target.  Yet, this seems rather strange in consideration that the Federal Reserve has been increasing the M1 money supply (which is essentially money in circulation plus checkable deposits in banks) at an unprecedented rate, ostensibly because of COVID-19 and to preclude a recession. 

The classic definition of inflation, is too much money chasing too few goods; so if we take the government at its word, that inflation is not really occurring within the economy, despite the money supply having increased at a very explosive rate, then a good detective would want to investigate other areas of the economy and those industries in which ready money plays an integral part.  One of those areas that would fit the bill would have to be the stock market, in which, the United States, a country that hasn't produced an impressive growth rate in regards to its GDP in years, has seen, nevertheless, most of its stock indexes hit new records.

Quite clearly, when institutions and people that already have more money than they know what to do with, get even more capital in their hands, they very well might have a strong inclination not to risk their money in that which doesn't really need their investment, especially when such also requires time, concentration and monitoring, but might well prefer to speculate instead in something passive, such as equities, in which, the commitment of funds to equities, is one of those activities, that requires little personal involvement of time or energy, while also being quite liquid, and to its credit has historically provided good returns; so that with the cost of money so being invested being at historic lows, provides to those having that money and thereby looking for a safe home, a place that appears to be conducive to making that easy money.

So then, the reality is that the printing of massive amounts of money that goes into the hands of those that have more than enough of it, is quite logically simply going to be funneled into stock markets, thereby signifying that the inflation that this government can't seem to find, is because they aren't looking in the right places; and the proof of this theory will occur, when that accelerated money supply growth terminates, thereby ending the euphoria of that stock market, for when it comes time to pay the piper, those that have speculated in the same sphere, will all strongly desire to cash out at the very same time.

While there are all sorts of theories about how much a given stock is worth, the real worth of any stock, comes down to the give and take of those that speculate within that market; and when the easy money is flowing, stocks are going to inevitably rise; whereas when the tide does turn, and the spigot has been turned off, then stocks are subsequently going to run very, very dry.

The right to strike

The National Labor Relations Act permits employees to strike, subject to certain conditions, as well as subject to certain employment situations, such as those that are employed as police officers, or, in many cases, those that teach at public schools.  The fact that employees can strike, subject to certain conditions, such as an unlawful purpose, or in violation of the terms of a labor contract, as well as similar restrictions, gives those that are employees the potential wherewithal to have some semblance of power when it comes to the negotiation with those that are their employer of record.

The main purpose of any strike is to change the current conditions, in regards to wages, work environment, safety, hours and the like to take into fair account the needs of those that are employed, and typically those that resort to a strike, are doing so, because their voices have effectively been ignored or silenced, and therefore for those that will not listen, an actual strike is initiated to get their attention.

Not too surprisingly, management is often times, though not always, aware that there may indeed be a strike in the works, and therefore because of that awareness, they are better setup in their response to such and will have taken into careful consideration what their countermoves will consist of.  This signifies, that those so preparing to strike typically want to catch the management off guard, so that the management will not have had the time or the necessary resources, to build up an inventory, to engage with "scabs" to break the strike, or any of a multitude of management responses that will mitigate the damages to their bottom line and to their business, at large.

Further, some managements actually try to provoke their employees into striking, especially when their business outlook looks rather bleak, in the hopes of reducing their labor costs, by functionally shutting down their business for a period of time, with the master plan being to thereby come to the negotiating table of which by taking into account the now current business conditions, and in consideration of those that had been currently employed, but are now on strike, that those striking employees will actually have to give back hours, or benefits, or some percentage of jobs, or even wages, in order for that business to promise to continue as a going concern.  Additionally, some companies have no interest in negotiating much of anything, but hope that employees will strike, of which, they will therefore subsequently change their infrastructure in a manner in which more machines and more automation, will thereby come into play; or they may even make a conscious decision to move to an entirely different location in a different city, which will functionally close that division down at that locale.

So though employees have a right to strike, employers often have a multitude of responses to this, and because of their power, wealth, and foresight are typically meaningfully prepared for a strike.  In other words, strikes by employees are contemplated and enacted in the hopes that the issues in play are fairly resolved; whereas, management in many a case, rather than directly dealing with such, and ameliorating such through a fair negotiation, are all too often going to play exclusive homage to their bottom line, to thereby send the message that those that exercise their right to strike, have in effect, opened up Pandora's box.