The gospel is meant to liberate the poor and the oppressed

There are all sorts of political parties and slogans, that preach to us about uplifting the poor and vulnerable, some sincere, and some not. There are also all sorts of organizations that have been established to lend a helping hand to the poor and vulnerable, some that do a commendable job, and some that do not.  Additionally, there is an awful lot of talk, often from good people at heart, about helping those that are the least amongst us, of which the results thereof, have sometimes been good, and sometimes not.

The thing is that the gospel as propagated by the Christ, is clearly meant to uplift those that have been marginalized by society, and the gospel, properly understood, is always the message that God cares about each and every one of us, no matter what; and because we are surrounded by so many that have been hurt, dismissed, disadvantaged, and cheated, it is vital that these unfortunate people, are provided with the necessary means to improve their lot.

The message of the Christ, is not that the traditional status quo will be turned upside down, so that, the rich and powerful will be vanquished, and thereby the poor will triumph, but rather it has all to do with the fact, that those that are enthralled to this material world, are often those that are the most lost; whereas, those that are powerless and weak, often see through the lies and deceptions of this world, for they know the way that this world is cannot be right, because there is so little justice or love within it. 

We see that those that are weak and defenseless are at the mercy of those that control the show, of which, it would seem that for these poor people, that there isn’t ever going to be an opportunity for these oppressed persons to ever have their day.  However, truth be told, humankind’s perception of what they so see, is blinded by their typical ignorance of their not comprehending what life is all about; for this world is a perpetual proving ground, and those that are the forsaken, the forgotten, the disenfranchised, and the abused, are in their essence made up of the exact same substance as all those that have all the advantages; therefore, signifying that those that are so blind so as to not comprehend that we are all created equally and therefore equally valued by God, are clearly on the wrong path.

It would seem that most everyone that takes on the mantle of Christianity, desires to do so, in a manner in which such conforms to their belief of what Christ so represents.  The thing is though, that Christ in everything that He so did and said, was the defender always of those that were perceived by the establishment as being the misbegotten of life.  Christ came not so much to save the unsaved, though, He did such; but mainly Christ incarnated to defend with dignity those that were left defenseless, powerless, and abandoned by human society.  So then, it is important to know Christ’s message for what it really is, which is that God is ever present to help uplift those that have no champion, and those that preach that not, are the actual ones that are lost.  

The higher retail prices in low-income neighborhoods

There are myriad problems with living in a low-income neighborhood, of which, one of the more salient of those problems is the fact that the choices to buy food and other household goods within that local neighborhood are often rather limited, and of which, despite the fact that the rent has to be a lot cheaper for those businesses in that neighborhood, the pricing and quality of goods so sold, is typically meaningfully higher than it would be in a comparable neighborhood of a higher socio-economic level. 

The first thing to understand from an economic level is that higher prices for goods so being sold in a particular local distressed area, does not necessarily equate to more profit and better gross margins for that company.  For instance, mom and pop stores, don’t have the pricing power that a Walmart or similar has, so that the cost of those goods being bought and transported to them is often going to be appreciably higher, and that higher cost, often logically translates into a higher selling price.  Further to the point, in a neighborhood marketplace in which frequently there is plenty of unused business space in low-income areas, the fact that other companies aren’t coming in to conduct business there, presupposes that even with, in theory, the higher sale prices being asked for goods, this doesn’t necessarily equate to higher profits, or else, those businesses would have already located there.

So then, while on the surface, it might seem pretty common place that there is a perception of price gouging being suffered by the residents of low-income neighborhoods, this typically really comes down to them ignoring the fact that the cost of doing business in those low-income neighborhoods, including security, “shrinkage,” safety, insurance, and so on and so forth, is appreciably higher, most of the time.  This would seem to more than imply, that residents of low-income neighborhoods would typically be far better served by having an anchor store, such as a Walmart, which would bring in not just more competitive prices and a more comprehensive amount of goods, but also would serve to bring in more retail stores, because of the traffic that having a Walmart or similar, generates.

Additionally, from a business perspective, perceptions matter, and when businesses don’t feel all that welcomed, or don’t feel all that comfortable in where they are doing business or proposing to do business, then the best and the brightest of them are going to hesitate to locate there, and instead it’s often going to be a lower echelon of business enterprises that will take a gamble, so to speak, in a low-income neighborhood.  All of this is pretty much saying that those that are residents of lower-income neighborhoods need by their own volition, to basically put forth a better effort to attract businesses to their neighborhood, which typically means doing their part to beautify and to improve their neighborhood, as well as seeking legislative help, tax set asides, obtaining money earmarked for local development and improvement, and so on and so forth.

It is a shame when good people that are seemingly stuck in a decaying and forsaken low-income neighborhood can’t seem to catch a break, not even with a retail store that serves them well; but in a capitalistic society, it’s almost always about the money, and the demographics of doing business in low-income neighborhoods makes for a rather sad tale, and those that have little or nothing, just end up paying what they have to pay, even when it costs them more.

Fair parole boards are a necessary part of justice

Most people that are convicted of a crime, are at some point during their incarceration, eligible for parole.  No doubt, those that are incarcerated, care deeply about how they fare at a parole hearing, as this involves directly their ability to secure some degree of freedom, even if such comes with the confining structure of parole conditions.  One would think then, as part of any individual being incarcerated that there would be at some point, after their conviction, so fully disclosed to them, more than once, what behavior does or what behavior does not help them in regards to having a better opportunity of being successfully paroled; for when an individual has an avenue to future freedom, it is invaluable for them to know the rules of that road; and of which, this is also beneficial to society, in the sense of having more of those previously incarcerated that are thereby better prepared to re-enter society as a good member of it.

Again, parole hearings are very important for not just the person so up for parole, but also for society, because when a given individual is incarcerated, the object of the exercise as prisons were original envisioned, is to try to rehabilitate the prisoner; rather than seeing a prisoner as someone that deserves some sort of perpetual and thorough punishment. This means, that prisoners should not only be provided with the opportunity to learn a given trade, or to attend some sort of educational classes, but that they also need the opportunity to reset their thoughts and thereby their actions so as to be in better conformance to what a responsible citizen so represents.

Most of those that make up the prison population are not those that come from a privileged place, for those types of individuals are always the exception, and never the rule.  Rather, it is those that have been forsaken, abused, dismissed, and have typically suffered through having lived in an enclave of poverty which has offered them little or no positive role models, as well as a poor educational system that have pre-conditioned a significant number of those people to fail, in addition to having left them with characteristically not having the necessary accouterments that would enable them to achieve orthodox success.

The bottom line is that in America in regards to the percentage and the amount of its own citizens that are incarcerated, it leads the pack by a lengthy margin vis-à-vis other western nations in this dubious category, and of which, it is better late, then never, to help correct that which needs correcting.  The one thing that prison provides for those that are in it, is plenty of time, as well as an organized structure -- that would seem to represent then an appropriate time to help those that have taken a wrong turn, to right themselves.

When the parole boards that provide to those so incarcerated a fair process of what the pathway consists of so as to successfully be paroled and are consistent and just in their judgments, along with those institutions that do the incarcerating actually demonstrating some sort of vested interest in seeing that prisoners are given a fair chance to become rehabilitated, and, in addition the prisoners applying themselves in doing their own part to become something of positive worth to society -- then we so find that when these things are combined, that this in total, is what represents merciful justice.

The United States truly broke the mold for governance

In 1776, the colonists, declared their Declaration of Independence, from Great Britain.  Of course, that mere declaration, wasn’t in and of itself, going to do the job, as to achieve such would still necessitate several years of warring battle against the greatest power in the world at that time; but ultimately, those thirteen colonies were successful in overthrowing that which had precluded them from their legislative representation, fair taxation, and freedom.  Subsequently, the United States would ratify its Constitution, and become through that Constitution, thirteen States united into the United States of America.   The form of that government, so created, would not be a monarchy, nor would it be a dictatorship, but instead it would be a republic; thereupon making the United States the first modern republic of any appreciable size.

The fact that these thirteen States, were subsequently able to somehow come to the accommodations so needed to institute a union of those States, as compared to the European continent, which had separate countries, which were often at war one against the other, is to the lasting credit of the wisdom, and the compromises so made in order to accomplish this necessary step.  That said, it is true, that the United States, did so subsequently suffer a very bloody and tragic Civil war, but the ultimate outcome of that war, led to a stronger and more united country than it had been so before.  After all, it was many decades, after our Constitution, before people would self-identify as first being a United States citizen as contrasted to be a Virginian or similar.

The de facto motto of these United States is considered to be E pluribus Unum, which is, “out of many, one.” This motto is indeed what the United States so became, for to take so many diverse interests, as well as sectional differences,  and therefore the natural conflict of one State to another so as to overcome  each of these obstacles in a manner in which, these so became over a period of time not stumbling stones, but stepping stones, leading therefore to one national currency, along with there being no imposts or duties so imposed for goods being traded from one State to another, or closed borders between one State to another, made thus for a unified nation.

The two other main forms of governance that we see throughout the world, are monarchies and dictatorships, of which, the people within those nations are thereby subject to the whims and dictates of those that are its leaders, which signifies that these governments do not typically offer either the same type of individual liberty so valued by Americans, nor in a lot of cases the true enfranchisement of the democratic vote, or republican representation, so of.  In other words, in America, the people have a voice and the vote, along with each of these being protected by their government as their right, whereas in many other nations, these are hollow promises, and nothing much more. 

Each of us then, should be appreciative that our government as so created and envisioned, is one of, for, and by the people, which makes it ours to own, and thereby ours to do right by.

The importance of integrity and honesty

The true test of any philosophy is how a given person reacts when they are placed between a rock and a hard place.  After all, it’s easy to be honest when being honest has no possible penalty or downside to it.  So too, it’s easy to demonstrate integrity when doing so, involves no possible loss of face or any individual harm.  The true test for anyone, that claims that they are honest as well as being a good person, is that when compelled to exhibit such honesty, of which, this will surely, in this instance, cost them personally, or alternatively this will hurt someone that they deeply care about, is whether they then uphold that honesty or not.

We are instructed at a very young age to tell the whole truth, which makes it rather strange, that so many people when taught to tell the whole truth about something, hesitate, before they respond, as if they are considering their options, which, in many a case, they are.  Once anybody, decides that they want to spin the “truth” in a way in which they exaggerate or leave out or change information in which they believe that by doing so, they have done what they felt they needed to do, then their cause of upholding whole honesty has been absolutely lost.

So too, many people, in order to do what they believe will help their cause, want to purposely distort information in their favor, so that they then come across as the “white hat,” so to speak, and the other side is then invariably painted as the “black hat,” which is made often worse by also distorting what the other side represents, to thereupon make the contrast between the two, much starker, and therefore the decision to be rendered by a neutral party, unquestionably clear.  The thing is that there are few people or institutions that are completely right, all of the time; as well as there being few people or institutions that are completely wrong, all of the time.  The point of the importance of holding every individual accountable to the whole truth, is that in life, there really aren’t any shortcuts, and those that will not willingly own up to complete integrity, are doing so, primarily because they desire to deliberately take what appears to them to be the easy path, instead.

The reason that integrity and honesty are so important is that in essence, by being less than honest, we are being deceitful, and that deceit is often so done for our own benefit, and clearly that benefit comes at the cost of those that are not in on the deceit.  To fool others, is typically not all that difficult, and in many a case, isn’t all that risky, at all; for other people have their own priorities and concerns to deal with, and often don’t have the time or the inclination to check every action or every statement so made by someone else for its veracity.  Nevertheless, though, those that lie and are dishonest, have a strong tendency to perpetually be looking over their shoulder, whereas those that are on the straight and narrow, have not only no need to, but they also are able to keep their eyes focused upon that which is solely worth winning.  There are, all sorts of ways to run the race of life; those that do so with integrity will always get to their destination sooner, for that which is straight is the shortest distance; and that which is crooked as well as often doubling-back, is not.

In the United States a national quarantine is not so easy

Even though, to a very large extent, the hue and cry of “States’ rights” have been soundly defeated by the national government, we find that when it comes to a potential national quarantine that the national government, does not apparently have the power to enforce their will and therefore to circumvent or to trump States’ rights in regards to such.  This doesn’t mean that the national government would not ultimately prevail, what it does mean though is that the national government, does not presently have the capability to simply assert its will in regards to a potential nationwide quarantine; though, of course, under exigent circumstances, or martial law, in all probability a national quarantine could indeed be enforced upon the whole population in short order.

To a very large extent, the fact that fifty different States and the localities within those States, have their own rules and regulations in regards to that which has been identified by the national government as a pandemic, is the sort of thing that is very messy, at best.  After all, the borders from one State to another, typically are completely open and certainly have not been set up to control traffic going to-and-fro; not to mention, that there are all those other means of transportation that can be utilized to travel from one State to another.  So then, in reality, to enforce a nationwide lockdown really would depend upon the general public buying into the emergency, or else in order to bring this into good effect, this would invariably mean a whole lot of conflict, in which undoubtedly some of that conflict would be violent.

Americans have a strong tendency to want to assert their independence and freedom, without seeming to understand that every freedom so claimed as one’s own, necessitates some supporting sort of duty, in turn.  Additionally, there are those contingencies that require a national response and a national consensus within a very short period of time, and when there are fifty different States coming from potentially fifty different directions, then coming to some sort of reasonable resolution within a very short period of time, isn’t necessarily going to happen.

A true national emergency, necessitates a true national response in both a timely and an effective manner.  As it currently stands, when it comes to a national quarantine, the United States is clearly not prepared, and further doesn’t have the infrastructure or the wherewithal, other than through martial law, to assert a national response.  The problem with martial law in a nation of individuals that believe religiously in personal freedom, is that people on both sides of such a dispute are going to get hurt and there will be deaths.

The better way for the United States to deal with a future national quarantine, is to sit down now, with the governor and legislature of each respective State, and then to come to a consensus of what defines the necessity of a national quarantine, and thereby what each State would do in turn to be responsible to that national quarantine.  Those then that will not responsibly prepare for that contingency, will therefore see the same sort of inconsistency and confusion so generated through the governmental response to COVID-19.  That is to say, there has to be some sort of consensus of what an appropriate national response should be, and in order for that nation to actually unite together, then each of fifty States has to be on the very same page, as their national government.

There has not always been inflation in America

We read at globalfinancialdata.com, that “From the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 until the start of World War II in 1914, there was no inflation in most countries.”  This is an American society, which has gotten use to the persistence and the existence of inflation and of which its expressed monetary policy so formulated believes that an inflation rate of 2% is just about right; thereby representing something that is neither too hot, nor too cold, but instead is lukewarm, of which, then, clearly this government somehow believes that the absolute stability of its currency is either an impossible objective to achieve, or that our modern-day monetary system cannot risk even the possibility of deflation or both.

Just because this country, amongst most countries in the world today, suffers from some degree of inflation, does not mean that this is the way that it should be, or even what should be desired by governmental monetary policy.  After all, if, for instance, the United States had no inflation, whatsoever, that would thereby indicate that everything that is measured by the dollar, would remain constant, and thereby knowing that a dollar today would be worth the same as a dollar tomorrow, business decisions, would be far more straightforward, with no real need for currency hedging.  That is to say, a known future, is going to be superior to an unknown and an unknowable future, of which, for instance, the inflation rate may be far higher or far more volatile than expected, which thereby makes it far more difficult for people and businesses to know which side to bet on or even what the best strategy is to protect their assets.

So too, inflation, is in its very nature, is going to have winners and losers.  Those that are always going to be on the losing side, is everyone and everything, that doesn’t properly comprehend that money that sits absolutely idle is going to invariably become worth ever less; which is a way of saying, that those that save money, but have difficulty finding somewhere safe to park that money, are going to see their worth in real terms, decline.  On the other hand, those that are in debt, in which the debt is pegged to a fix rate, of which that rate is lower than the effective inflation rate, are going to find it far easier to pay back that debt than previously, because they are doing so with dollars which are essentially costing them less and less against the debt that they so incurred.

This thus signifies, that governments that have deficits, often find that inflation benefits them in the ease of paying back that debt, and businesses may just find that inflation benefits them too, especially when they are able to increase their price point for products so being sold, without correspondingly increasing per the real inflation rate the labor compensation of their employees.  All of this basically signifies, that in any era of inflation, this typically means that the sophisticated and the connected are going to be in a better economic position as compared to all those that aren’t that sophisticated and are unconnected, because those that have a good read of inflation, are to a large degree, the masters of those that do not.

Should the government be permitted to issue tax-exempt investments?

Those that invest money into equities, bonds, mutual funds, and other investments, recognize that when they make that investment, that they are susceptible to having the profit, so of, subject to taxation, be it local, State, or Federal.  On the other hand, there are governmental entities that issue tax-exempt bonds, mutual funds, and other investments, in which as the name so amply describes, those that invest in these assets, aren’t subject to any tax whatsoever, per the specific exemption status of that investment.  The ostensible reason why these tax-exempt investments are available to the general public, are in theory, because the return so promised to those that invest in such, is lower than the equivalent taxable choices for them, and of which the borrowing cost of the issuance of those bonds to those government authorities, are appreciably less, thereof.  While that certainly makes sense, that’s only one part of the story, for the other part is that those with enough assets and capital, are thereby permitted to make additional passive income, with the foreknowledge that they will not be taxed, whatsoever, which seems on the surface, to be unfair to all those others that are subject to taxation, and thereby permits those with capital, to make additional money without restraint, on end.

Of course, the argument made is that tax-exempt securities almost always make less money than alternative choices; but then again, the risk of those securities are often considerably less than other investments, of which, there are plenty of those with a lot of capital that aren’t looking for risk, whatsoever, but rather desire to have that sure and steady return, which bonds, for instance, are very good at providing for them.  So too, most people with a considerable amount of money, aren’t fools, so that if they felt collectively that tax-exempt investments, were overall, a poor choice to make, then they wouldn’t do it, and because they actually do make that investment and continue to do so, then clearly being tax-exempt has its advantages for them, and that is why they make those particular investment choices.

America has a progressive tax system, of which, the purpose of such progression in tax rates is to capture a higher percentage of the income of those of whom make more in income.  So then, when that particular class of people that has plenty of wealth, are permitted to make investments in which they won’t have to pay nary a dime to the tax man, then this seems like a deal which on the surface is unfair to the general public and probably then shouldn’t be permitted.  After all, part of being wealthy is not just desiring to hold on to that wealth, but to augment such, and when therefore there is an avenue that will do both, with little risk, and no taxation attached to it, at all, then for a certainty, there are going to be wealthy people that are going to gravitate to it, and therefore the shortfall in taxation receipts, so of, will have to be made up by somebody else, somewhere else.

The necessary corporate estate tax

Those that are individuals have a finite amount of life on this earth, of which, the fewest of the few, make it to 100 years of age, and thereupon, if their wealth is great enough, are thereby subject to estate taxes by the Federal government, as well as to estate taxes in their State of residence, if so applicable.  The thing about corporations, is that corporations are artificial creations of the law, of which nowadays such corporations are perpetual in form, which presupposes that corporations are therefore logically never subjected to estate taxes, despite the fact that corporate wealth and profits, absolute dominate the richest of the richest individual estates.  Further to the point, because corporations are not subject to any wealth or estate tax, this so indicates, that without the imposition of an estate tax upon corporations, that their corporate power, will, if it doesn’t already represent so in the present day, supersede the impact of individuals in just about every meaningful piece of legislation or endeavor – which obviously does not harmonize well with a country that is supposed to be of, for, and by the people.

A reasonable solution for this government to enact on behalf of the people in order to get back a reasonable amount of wealth from those corporations that have treasure chests of wealth that consists of billions upon billions of dollars, is to make all corporations of a certain size and length of existence, subject to a periodic estate tax.  The first estate tax for corporations should be implemented against all corporations that have been in existence for fifty years or more, and specifically impacting those corporations that have assets beyond $500 million, in which they should then have a practical percentage of that wealth subject to an estate tax.  Additionally, thereafter, every twenty years, corporations should be subject to that same estate tax, as long as their assets are above that same dollar threshold.

When it comes to taxation, besides the incumbent fairness of making such a tax progressive as well as being in sync to the income and wealth, so generated, is the fact that governments are always going to collect more money into their hands when they appropriately tax those entities that have an abundance of money.  America’s corporations have an incredible amount of wealth and power, along with having the best attorneys, the best lobbyists, the best tax accountants, and so on and so forth.  There is no other entity that can possibly stifle the power of these mega-corporations, other than the national government, and if the national government won’t do what they need to do, in order to fairly collect estate taxes from that which is perpetual, then human beings have essentially been superseded in power and in worth by that which is an artificial creation of the state, thereby signifying that which is unnatural to be ruler over that which is natural, which not only doesn’t make any good sense, but clearly is inimical to any democratic society and further will serve to clearly be the means of the destruction of that good governance, replaced by corporations that will effectively rule the roost, in perpetuity.

The same words in a sentence, can often mean different things to different people

There are those times when we are talking with someone in which, they either don’t seem to be hearing what we are saying, because their reaction is diametrically different than what we have so expected, or by their response, it seems like they haven’t comprehended clearly what we have so said, even though our words were pretty darn clear to us   Those types of communication situations are frustrating and can easily become more than frustrating, when things escalate to a place which we never really wanted to go to.  But why is this even possible to have occurred in the first place?

The answer to that above question has a lot to do with the fact that each one of us, comes from different circumstances, with different backgrounds, and different thought patterns.  Especially so this is true, when people come from different social backgrounds, different creeds, and different colors, in which, perhaps, their interaction one with the other, has been minimal to date, of which, they then get together and try to communicate.  In those types of situations, it probably isn’t reasonable to expect that the same words are going to mean the same thing, to each one of them, because these people are often coming from different life experiences, and because of that, their interpretations have a tendency to be different, than what we so expected.

So then, in reality, the same words can easily be interpreted in different ways by different people, and further to the point, those words can also be interpreted differently by the very same person, depending upon how their day has gone, good or bad.  This signifies that when we communicate, we need to make a better effort to actually determine as to whether the words that we have so spoken have been interpreted in the way that we so expected them to be, and in order to know this, we probably need to ask more questions of the other person, to get their honest feedback of what has been communicated.  After all, relationships, even relationships of long standing, can suffer a lot of damage, even permanent damage, from the misconstruing and misinterpretations of what has so been communicated to them in good faith.

It's fantastic that we are able to communicate one to another, relatively easily, through words so spoken and written, but those words and sentences, aren’t necessarily going to be understood the same way by dissimilar people and there isn’t any reasonable expectation that this should actually be the case, because having not lived in another person’s shoes for even a small part of their life, makes it problematic that we really could conceivably comprehend how they are interpreting and processing what has so been said or written.  Especially, we so find, that this becomes much more difficult when people are emotionally upset or stressed, in which, they typically aren’t able to readily process what is being communicated, without their own prejudicial and self-serving spin upon it, thereby creating the construct in which things can go from sort of bad, to something far worse.

In short, we communicate through our words, of which what we are so communicating may indeed be clear and obvious to us, but in reality, if it isn’t perceived that way by the person so receiving that communication, then we need to recognize that we need to do more to make for a better and a more successful communication.

What are we fighting for?

Of course, when wars are fought, all sorts of noble sentiments come to mind and are thereby provided to the people as the justification as well as the compelling reason for such a war, which typically goes along the lines of defending freedom, protecting one’s nation and its values, duty, and because it is the right thing to do.  Those that fight, make it their point, that the reasons for that fighting, which invariably results in the death of soldiers as well as the death of non-combatants, along also with the destruction and damage to infrastructure that comes with any war, is typically justified as not only being necessary, but also as part of the required process of what has to be done, in difficult times, for the greater good.  All of this, might indeed sound good on paper, but the fact is that most wars are seldom really fought for noble or worthwhile objectives, and the death, dying and destruction that war consists of, are typically horrific; and of which, it has to be said, that to actually believe that the only way to reasonably solve conflict is through war, is absolutely unreasonable, and clearly demonstrates in action that humanity has not really learned that it is not might that makes right, but in fact, the only thing that makes for right, is maintaining in principle everything that consists of the attributes of what is right, of which war is seldom in that equation.

To believe that when two countries, vociferously disagree about things, that to therefore to bring about a lasting peace, there has to be a destructive war, of killing, maiming, and destruction is a very sick viewpoint.  Peace does not come from war, and never will peace come from war.  Those that want peace, can only achieve peace, by being just, fair, forgiving, and considerate in all that they do and achieve, and therefore need not and should not have to give up any of those things in order to achieve a lasting peace, for to do so, will substitute real peace, with a false one.

That of which is worthy to make an honorable stand for, which in of itself does not necessarily mean war or fighting, is that which is fair, just, and right.  To stand for principle, and to defend that principle against those that would unjustifiably take such away, is noble.  Regrettably, in this world, those that are the best exemplars of justice and vision, are often targeted themselves to being killed and eliminated, for few that have obtained power are willing to sacrifice any of it, to that which threatens their domain, even when that threat is simply truth, itself.

So then, for all those that fight or are involved in the fight, including peripherally or indirectly, in order to confirm that they are indeed a worthy part of humanity, they ought and need to ask themselves the question as to why they are fighting and therefore what they are fighting for or against.  If in an honest answer to that question, it would seem that the answer is that they don’t really know, or simply because the enemy deserves to be fought because the enemy is wrong, and that they then are by default on the side of right, they need to take into serious consideration as to whether or not they are really right, for to gain something temporal, at the expense of that which is eternal, is a very bad bargain.

The whole truth

There is a very good reason of why we are admonished to testify to the whole truth, and nothing but the truth – because those that live to anything that is less than the whole truth, have therefore tarnished their character to their own lasting harm, of which each of us should of our own volition want to and each of us really needs to represent instead, the liberating power of the whole truth, which frees us from the delusion of untruth and error.

The reason that so many willingly walk away from the whole truth is because they not only do not wish to face such on an individual basis, but that they also do not desire to face others with the exposure of their individual whole truth, because they feel, in many a case, that by doing so, that they will lose face to other people, especially those that they wish to have their respect and approval of; therefore, for a time, such a position serves to avoid bringing inconvenient shame to their own self; yet, this also signifies that because they have no real integrity in owning up to their own errors, that they have replaced the importance of the whole truth with that which is a very poor and unsatisfactory substitute.

So too, all those that will not live to the whole truth, and that will not seek and search diligently for the whole truth, have placed themselves in the unenviable position of being imprisoned by that which is untruth, or not the full truth, which they then pay homage to, as if this is okay, when it surely is not.  Those that purposely know that their life or part of their life is a lie, and refused to correct such, have turned their face from that which enlightens them to that which darkens and besmirches their being.

Each of us needs to respect the whole truth, for ultimately it is truth, and truth unbounded, that is eternal; for that which is wrong, of error, is deceptive, or an untruth, will for a certainty, eventually be fully exposed, and further that which is of error, cannot long survive through the annals of time.  That is to say, God is, by definition, eternally inerrant, of which then, that which is of error, cannot be an eternal part of God; therefore, signifying that all those that are in error, are going to, at some point or another, have to drop the scales from their eyes to see that which must be seen, known, and thereby lived to.

Additionally, it is difficult for many a person to recognize always that which is untruth and deception, if this is not counter-balanced by the knowledge of that which is the truth, and nothing but the truth.  So then, our lack of clarity of what represents the whole truth, precludes us from ever being fully liberated from deception and untruth, which is the very thing that gets us into so much trouble.  This so signifies, then, that it is our sacred duty therefore to do all that we can to know and to recognize the whole truth, and then honor that whole truth, by living it, in all that we say, think, and do.

United States Senate Representation essentially creates minority control

The United States has a bicameral legislature, of which the House of Representatives, is reflective of the population of each State, in which, the more populated States, get more representatives, and of which, each State is entitled to at least one representative, no matter how paltry their resident count may be.  In regards to the other legislature branch, as part of all the compromises so having to be made in order to get a Constitution, passed and ratified, the Senate representation, was created so that each State, big, small, or medium-size would be entitled to two representatives each and therefore exactly two Senators per State.  In theory, this was so done, so that the smaller States would therefore be signatories to the Constitution, with the knowledge, that they would therefore have a meaningful voice in legislative law.

The problem with the way the Senate is currently constructed, is that the biggest States of the Union, which are, California, Texas, Florida and New York, have about 33% of the United States population in their respective States, but just eight Senators in total.  On the other hand, the 35 smallest States represent about 33% of the population, as well, but they have a total of seventy Senators, in total.  This basically signifies that the smallest States of the Union, have at a minimum, the power to stifle just about any legislation that they don’t “cotton to,” and therefore this means on a substantive level, that the smaller States have the power to get what they so desire or to stop such, pretty much at not just the expense of the larger States, but also at the expense of the population, in whole.  This in so many words, indicates that the Senate as currently reflected, demonstrates in action, that fair and equal democratic representation is not really part of its makeup.

The fact that we have exactly fifty States, does make for a nice symmetry and a fine design on our flag, but isn’t in itself a good or a meaningful reason to preclude the larger States from taking the proactive steps so needed in order to break themselves into smaller States, which not only would provide those States as they currently stand with more representation, but would do a greater service to their constituents; in addition to mitigating the advantages that the smaller States currently wield over the larger.  The fact that this has not happened in recent times, is rather surprising, since the thirteen colonies, and their borders, were for the most part, not stagnant, until they became States, of which, even so, Virginia, itself, broke off into a separate State, known as West Virginia, in 1863.

While the smaller States, do deserve their proper representation, they have, at the present time, far more power than their numbers so warrant, and because their demographics in a lot of instances are significantly different from the United States as a whole, this essentially allows for the historic favored race and those that are its most conservative members of such to have an outsized influence upon national legislation.  What so happens locally within a given State, is the business of that State, but what so happens to America, is the business of all Americans, not just those that are playing the angles in order to benefit a favored subset of Americans, for that isn’t in keeping with the American spirit of fair play for all.

Debt peonage

There all types of debt so incurred by people, such as mortgage debt, student loan debt, credit card debt, vehicle debt, and personal loan debt.  Never has it been easier for people to get into debt -- and for a lot of those people, they actually get into debt, at a very young age, such as eighteen or nineteen, through credit cards, vehicle loans, or student loans.  The thing about debt is that a significant amount of Americans just aren’t competent at basic mathematics, and further to the point, they have difficulty truly understanding the perniciousness of high interest rates as well as comprehending their personal responsibility in regards to the personal cost so of, for failing to properly adhere to the terms of the debt so initiated to them.

While just about everyone likes to get something for nothing, the problem for many of those same people, is that debt so taken on in which it might well appear that a given individual is getting something for nearly nothing, really isn’t that case at all.  In fact, once someone has signed up for a debt, just about everything in regards to the terms and conditions of that loan, are pretty much out of their hands, and of which, this also typically heavily favors the lender and not the loanee.  Further to the point, a significant amount of people getting a loan, really have not taken the time to comprehend how nefarious such a loan might well be for them and their quality of life, especially when their income is relatively light and such has no reasonable means of being invigorated in the future.

All of the above, basically covers what are legal loans, and therefore, these pretty much are representative of the norm in the United States.  There is, though, even in these modern times, the type of loan, not authorized by the government, and therefore not in conformance with appropriate rules and regulations; yet, people in some degree of desperation will turn to these.  A case in point, would be any sort of cash loan, so provided by someone that operates outside the law, of which, these street loans, have their own interest rates, which can even be by the day, of incredibly high vigorish rates, and of which the enforcement of the payment of those loans are typically done through fear, intimidation, and violence, if so warranted. 

Then too, there are those non-citizens that see America as the proverbial land of opportunity, of which, because border security has become far tighter and far more proactive, than in previous decades, this has correspondingly raised the price for those so desiring to get trafficked into America.  Since many of these migrants have little ready cash, they often have to just accept the terms of the deal, of which those terms are typically not fully disclosed in any meaningful way.  Once these migrants reach America, they not only have to pay back the “coyote” they got them across to America, but they also have to deal with the fact that often for the work that they are doing in America, a significant amount of those so employing them, know that they are undocumented, which means that the cost of their room and board, if applicable, along with the wages to be paid, are going to favor heavily the employer, and of which, there often isn’t any good recourse for those so doing the work, if dissatisfied. The upshot of all this is that a lot of these migrants, are having to pay a whole lot of catch-up in regards to the debts that they so owe, of which, progress so being made, or the lack, thereof, keeps them in perpetual debt peonage.

Welfare for the rich

There are plenty of people, that have their criticisms when it comes to welfare for the poor and the disadvantaged, such as governmental expenditures for food stamps, housing vouchers, disability payments, earned income tax credit, and just about anything in which impoverished people, seemingly receive something without having to give up much of anything of corresponding value, in return.  Yet, despite the railings of those that claim that by such payments we are encouraging or validating or enabling those that are perceived as being lazy, slothful, wastrel, and the like, the bottom line is that the vast majority of those so receiving governmental assistance are by receiving that helping hand, typically not doing much more than just surviving, and certainly are not living “high on the hog.”

On the other hand, there is that other sort of individual and corporate welfare, which typically isn’t called out as such, but is really welfare all the same.  For instance, in regards to some of the biggest mega-corporations that the world has ever known, some of these behemoths, despite profits in the billions upon billions of dollars, do not pay any income taxes, whatsoever; or for those corporations that do pay such taxes, they have so many shell games that they play, in which monies are parked in low-taxed or untaxed foreign domiciles, that their overall tax rate is far below what would be anticipated that they would normally pay.  Additionally, mega-corporations are known for often driving a hard bargain with communities in regards to special favoritism in which property taxes are reduced considerably for some considerable period of time – so reasoned, because of the employment that will come into that community, along with often having favorably decisions also so being made in regards to the infrastructure that they so desire.  Then there are those mega-corporations that do an extensive amount of business with the government, in which, the structure of the contracts so being made, are for all practical purposes, essentially sole source, allowing that corporation to not only “win” the contract, but also to make a nice profit, especially so when it comes time for the invariable changes to that contract, spare parts, and the like.

In regards to superrich individuals, their pattern follows in conformance with the mega-corporations, in which, the goal, so of, is to reduce their taxable income as much as possible, and to correspondingly increase their passive income, which typically is not taxed, until a sale has been made, thereby postponing any necessary payment to the tax authorities, for considerable amounts of time.  So too, they are experts at setting up foundations, that allow them to funnel money that would be taxed at a much higher rate into a foundation, which pretty much is in harmony with the entity who created it. Additionally, estate taxes are at historic lows, thereby signifying that the government, even at the time of death, gets a minimal amount; hurt further, by some unfathomable reasoning, that the entity so inheriting, inherits at the “step-up” basis, effectively erasing any capital gains, that have accrued over a long period of time.

One of the pet peeves of many of those that have lots of money and influence, of which, perhaps they have worked hard to get to where they are at, is that welfare for the poor, not only subsidizes those that will not apply themselves, but encourages them in their indolence.  What they never seem to address, though, is that virtually all those that inherit money, and specifically those that inherit lots and lots of money, haven’t earned it, and therefore this easily encourages those rich heirs in their indolence, with the difference between the rich and the poor, being that the rich can easily afford to be indolent and still live a wonderful life, whereas, the poor, really can’t.

The lower and middle class miscast votes

The United States is a Constitutional Republic.  However, ballot propositions in regards to new laws and appeals of old laws, amendments, sales taxes, user taxes, and many other things of interest to the general public are typically voted upon, in which in many cases, a simple democratic majority, effects such into law.  So too, most of our representatives, whether they be local, county, State, or Federal, are democratically elected by the constituents of that germane area.  In addition, even some judges, and some law enforcement officials, such as sheriffs, are democratically elected.  In short, the ballot box, provides a means for all citizens that are eligible to vote, and have thereby exercised that enfranchisement, to make it so known, by their vote, what they do or do not support.

The strange thing is, that many things, that clearly are supportive, almost exclusively, of the very rich, or the well positioned, somehow are able to consistently get passed, even though the majority of American citizens consist of the lower and of the middle class, of which, those propositions so passed or representatives so being elected, would appear to be on a fairness and economical level, inimical to the lower and middle classes of America.  One could argue, that it is the amount of money so being spent, the advertisements and propaganda so being created, that induces the lower and middle classes to consistently vote for what would appear to be against their own interest, time and time again, but it appears to be more than just that. 

In truth, a significant amount of the lower and of the middle class do consistently vote their own interests; however, there is also a fairly meaningful percentage of those that seem not to, primarily because they buy into some segment of a proposition or of a representative that serves to take precedence over pure economic interests, quality of life, and fairness.  For instance, some citizens have a very strong view upon the sanctity of human life, of which, their belief is that this begins at conception, so that because this is so important to them, they put that first, in regards to a particular candidate or proposition, and pretty much dismiss everything else.  This same type of thinking is similar, in regards to candidates or propositions that involve God, usually consisting of an incumbent strong belief in Christianity and Christian values, including traditional marriage.  Additionally, there are many people that hear the siren call that no expense should be spared for the defense of this nation, domestically or abroad, and whichever proposition or candidate fits that bill the best, gets their vote.

There are then many that vote in a manner in which they don’t consider their vote to be miscast, even though in many cases their economic interests and overall quality of life will be damaged; of which, this occurs primarily because these particular people are unable to readily comprehend the full picture of what is being evaluated, or they are somewhat deluded in their reasoning.   What the lower and middle classes need to spend more time contemplating and considering, thereof, no matter which way they vote, is whether or not, the result of their voting is providing them with a better life, and if not, they should probably consider changing their voting pattern, because those votes are certainty helping somebody and something.  

“We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience.”

The above quotation comes from the incomparable, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, and each of us would do well to remember this wise sentiment so succinctly expressed.  But instead, what we so often find and especially so in these western nations, that frequently have the audacity to believe that they are so civilized, so smart, and so above it all, is that humankind seems to feel in so many ways and in so many respects, not to have a need of acknowledging its spiritual identity, and therefore it has little or no interest in what they consider to be the mythology of God.

Whether or not a given person or civilization, does or does not believe in God, or whether they believe that they are spiritual beings or not, does not change the fundamental fact that each one of us is a spiritual being; so then, those that will not consciously admit to such, or even try to suppress such, for their own reason, good or bad, are the ones thereby to suffer for dismissing that which is true for that which is false.

It would behoove each of us, to understand that first of all, we are eternal, and we are eternal because we are spiritual, and that which is spiritual, cannot be destroyed or eradicated, ever.  Our experience in this worldly realm should best be seen as the ultimate proving ground -- of being challenged to prove that when provided with the liberty and the freedom to make a given choice, without any limitations imposed against us, other than the limitations that being in a human body with a mind restricts us to, that what we so do, is in keeping with that which is consistent with justice, fairness, and agape love.

The most important number in life is one.  There is just one God, one truth, one whole spirit, and therefore we are all ultimately one.  This so signifies that our objective should always be in this human experience to see our commonality one with another, as opposed to contributing to that which serves to divide us.  This does not signify or necessitate that somehow that each of us must or should be a cookie cutter cutout of the other; but rather that we are each in our own way, different from one another, but in our substance and in our creation, we are exactly the same.

Another way at looking at our human experience, is seeing this experience as something akin to somebody that has to deal with the world, while lacking the necessary eyesight so needed to actually visualize all of that which is going on around them.  This thereby means that they have to somehow overcome that particular limitation, yet, many a person without eyesight, have subsequently been able to do such, with aplomb.  So too, our physical raiment for many a person can seemingly “blind” us from seeing that we aren’t at our core, physical at all, but spiritual.  Those that are therefore able to take off their self-imposed blinder to visualize that they are in actuality, spiritual, are the very ones that are best suited to help guide those that are lost, to that which will open their eyes.

“…. deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

Our Declaration of Independence carries a lot of importance as well as gravity, as this was the seminal document, that fifty-six delegates not only so signed, but pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to.  So too, this was the raison d’être for those colonists to go to war against the premier power in the world, at that time.   This thus signifies that these above words aren’t just words written on a piece of parchment, but that they have an absolute and perpetual significance, and therefore they are part and parcel of what that government, of, for, and by the people, so owes and needs to honor in perpetuity for its citizens.

The basic principle of good governance, is for the people to congregate together, understanding that in order to secure those rights necessary for their continual freedom, good life, and the pursuit of one’s happiness, necessitates in return not only the sacrifice of some of their individual liberty so such is thereby responsibly subsumed into their government, but also that each citizen in order to secure those rights, have incumbent duties that need to be performed on behalf of those rights, collectively and individually. 

Regrettably, over an extended period of time, it seems quite clear that government has not only relentlessly whittled away at individual rights, often in the name of security or for the defense of the state, but that the government has more and more become opaque and basically inaccessible and well-nigh unassailable to the average citizen.  So that, today’s government, in many respects, is not interested in being as transparent as possible, or even being welcoming to a thorough examination of its day-to-day operations, but wishes instead for the public to just accept that the government has their best interests in mind, and that therefore all that this government does on behalf of its citizenry, is just, fair and equitable.

So then, it is up to the general public, or it could be said its representatives, that the government in its actions and reactions, is always held accountable to being in conformance with the Constitution, but also that what is so being done under the name of the people, is done with that people’s consent.  Yet, how many citizens, truly believe that the government, cares for what they have to say or what they think, and further how many of those citizens believe that what the government is so doing is actually really by their consent, directly or indirectly?

It would seem that today’s government, is a force unto itself, and therefore that government sees itself as something separate from the people, with its own peculiar power structure, its own institutions, its own rules, and its own designs; and of which, all that government really asks or wants of its people, is acceptance that this is the way that it ought and should be.  If this be true, then what we so have is not the consent of the governed, but rather a construct in which the people are seen as a utility to be exploited, manipulated, and controlled by that government, for the expressed benefit of those that are its actuators.

The upside of gentrification

Many people are use to a certain routine and when there is change, especially when that change is unexpected along with it also making them feel that they are helpless or voiceless or both to that change, this thus can easily create stress and unease for them.   The thing about gentrification in those neighborhoods that have lacked for an extended period of time new or even sustainable investments of capital, is that, without having that upkeep and improvement, there is often the perception of that neighborhood that its best days are well behind it; so then, within such a construct as that, this typically demands some sort of new infusion of blood to help revivify that neighborhood. 

The upside of gentrification in a given neighborhood is the investment capital that so comes into that neighborhood, along with the corresponding belief that the neighborhood is worthy and of more value, then has been recently perceived by its denizens.  In other words, by virtue of that money being invested, properties being bought, and improvements being made, this signifies that the “new blood” believes in the neighborhood.  Further to the point, the infrastructure of that neighborhood is almost for a certainty going to improve, so that areas of the neighborhood that have been neglected, will typically see a marked improvement, involving not only clean up, but also new businesses coming to the general area, as well as public schools markedly doing a better job of educating.

One of the things that hurts communities more than anything, is losing the tax base of businesses, along with the fact that when property values are stagnant or even trending down, that there then just isn’t enough monies being collected to sustain even the semblance of a good and nice neighborhood.  On the other hand, when property values are going up, businesses are being added, and those that are becoming new residents of that neighborhood bring with them, vital connections to city councils and the like, then governmental services that been neglected or ignored, will become rejuvenated.

Another valid attribute of gentrification, is that improvement to neighborhoods, typically also improves the outlook of the residents that are in that neighborhood, thereby bringing back belief, when there was formerly a lack of belief.  After all, even if the motivation of those so buying into a neighborhood has a lot in common with greed so disguised as opportunity, these new buyers and their vote of confidence, makes those that are its residents, believe that where they so live must be of value.

Of course, not everything that changes because of gentrification is going to be good, of which, for those so buying in, somebody else must be selling and then moving out.  Additionally, when property values go up, and when a neighborhood thereby becomes more valuable, then correspondingly rents are also invariably going to go up.  But then again, people pay what something is worth, and that which has become worth more, demands more in payment.  So too, having a mix of residents of different backgrounds, of different income, of different colors, and so on and so forth, makes for a more integrated and vibrant society, and thereupon provides the opportunity for those that are part of that neighborhood to see the commonality that we have one to another.

Health insurance has not always existed

While in many respects, health insurance is considered to be almost mandatory for everybody in today’s world, the concept of health insurance for all has not always existed, and therefore is a relatively recent concept, that did not begin to come into fruition until 1929, or thereabouts, through the inception of Blue Cross, as envisioned by Dr. Justin Ford Kimball.  At that time, the concept was pretty straightforward, which was to offer to teachers access to health insurance for a small monthly fee, which thereupon effectively became the first successful health co-opt. 

The genius of initial health care as done through Blue Cross, was to make it dependent, upon a fairly large group of people, such as teachers, each therefore paying a monthly fee, so that through the sheer size of those numbers, the invariable ups and downs of sickness and hospital care, was mitigated by the collective amount of money received through each of those members, healthy or not, contributing their monthly financial share.  This plan, worked quite well, and was far more stable, than health insurance so provided on just an individual basis, of which, bad luck for the insurance company, in providing health insurance to someone that suffered poor health, made such insurance such as that, prone to corporate insolvency.

The advantage of health insurance for many members, benefited each side, of which, for the individual the advantage was a known monthly payment that covered their hospital stay, should such be necessary, and the treatment of their illness; whereas, for the hospital such health insurance provided a known steady stream of income and because the health insurance was subject to being periodically renewed, that premium could subsequently be adjusted upwards, if so warranted.

The impetus for that health insurance, as originally constructed, was to provide for a low cost, the security for those that fell ill, that they would not have to suffer lasting financial harm, in addition to the debilitating effect of the illness or injury that they were suffering from.  In today’s world, health insurance, in many respects, is something that is often covered through employment or through school or even through individual coverage in which, somewhere along the line, what has been sorely neglected, is that such insurance besides often being complicated, confusing, filled with red tape and bureaucracy, is that it is in many a case, also quite expensive, as well as not always meeting fairly every needful contingency.  That is to say, health insurance has its place, but rather than such being set always at a reasonable cost, that most families can meet, one way or another, it has, for a significant swath of Americans, become so expensive, or covers so little, that the availability of health insurance, is of no real assistance to those that are in the most vulnerable of positions. 

This is why it is imperative that this government come up with some sort of viable universal health insurance plan that truly is able to address the health needs of those that have effectively been left behind to suffer the indignity of health insurance that is inadequate, of little or no use, or places too much of a financial burden upon a family that cannot afford to pay the freight for good healthcare.