Mmmm, there's a video going around Facebook, of a bear chasing a bicyclist. What do you think you'd do if a bear, that size, caught up with you?
Now, consider a bear-sized man, refusing to cooperate and it's YOUR JOB to get him under control. What do you think you'd do? Doesn't matter what color you are or what color he is. Let's be real.
People, all over, are doing whatever they damned well please and think there won't be consequences. Friends on Facebook are posting complaints fairly regularly about people who don't use their directional signals. It's irritates me too but that's nothing. People don't pull over when they hear sirens behind them. Apparently, they don't think rules apply to them. I wonder what they'd think if they were in that ambulance or waiting for that firetruck or that police car.
We aren't alone on this planet. In order to live together in any kind of peace, rules and agreements are necessary or we'd all be beating each other up pretty regularly. Just think, when was the last time somebody you don't know infuriated you on the road? Are you going to try to kill them every time it happens?
So, if you want to live in peace; if you want to live in relative safety; if you want to be left alone, keep in mind that everything you do affects everything and everyone else, no matter what your motivation or intention. And, there will ALWAYS be somebody who doesn't like what you're doing. But, as long as you try to follow the rules, behave considerately, and listen to those whose job it is to keep things peaceful, you should be OK.
Otherwise, you may pay consequences far beyond what you anticipate.
Things are rarely fair. Don't expect them to be. What's good for you isn't for someone else and vice versa. Do what you can to live as you want without going too far to take it back.
The deck is stacked for most of us. I don't know anyone that's holding the deck. I've found ways to live as I want without too much trouble. I've also paid the price of trying to exact my own justice and have things my way.
You can be freer if you keep a low profile, move between the cracks, appear to be "normal" and keep your differences to yourself. Do you want to be yourself? Live your own life? Or throw it all in the face of unconscious forces?
And, don't fool yourself into thinking that all those people who appear to be doing things you can't are getting away with it. There are always consequences.
The police have a job to do. We want them to do their job, most of the time. They're just people. If they face someone bigger and stronger than they are, should they just let them go? Do you want that bigger, stronger person to show up at your house, like a bear chasing you on a bicycle? I don't think so.
You don't get respect if you don't behave respectably. You don't get respect by exempting yourself from decent and reasonable behavior. If you don't park where you're supposed to park, signal when you're supposed to signal, pull over when there's a siren behind you, wait in line quietly and patiently, pay your bills, etc., etc. what do you think should happen?
You'll pay the consequences.
Thursday, December 4, 2014
Thursday, November 13, 2014
The Purpose of Education
The purpose of vocation education is to get a good job; the purpose of education is not, although job training may, in some cases, be contained in some aspects of education. As one sets out on one's own life path, attention must be given to both. You can educate yourself by reading extensively, particularly things that you don't agree with or have not experienced. You can educate yourself by listening to educated people, particularly those that you don't agree with or don't understand. You can educate yourself by participating in a variety of activities, particularly activities that you aren't accustomed to.
Education is not just for one's self but for society, to broaden one's perspective, to understand others, to learn to appreciate our world and everything in it. And, more.
If you've always lived in the same place, spend time only with people just like you, go only to the same places you've always gone, do only the things you've always done, you don't know much, and, I'm guessing, you don't like things, people, places, ideas that aren't just like what you're familiar with.
"An investment in knowledge pays the best interest." Benjamin Franklin
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle
"The goal of education is the advancement of knowledge and the dissemination of truth." John F. Kennedy
"Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education." Franklin D. Roosevelt
Beware what you learned, as a child, at home. Outside what you learned to get along socially, behaviorally; the beliefs, assumptions, biases, prejudices and misconceptions you learned, unconsciously, as a child, are best unlearned.
Good education should open your eyes, your ears, your mind, your heart. Not everything you are expected to learn in school will be used by you, personally, at some point in your life, but, if you actually pay attention, it will teach you perspective and will break down your assumptions and beliefs. Life is a great deal more than what personally affects you. If you pay attention to your education, you'll learn that you are far from being the center of the universe.
Your inner development is another matter....Neither training nor education - nor a great deal of religion, for that matter - addresses one's inner development. All three are important, in varying degrees, at various times, particularly your inner development. You're not finished until you draw you last breath.
Just my educated opinion.
All quotes are from BrainyQuote and exact sources are not given.
Copyright, Lorraine I. O'Dell, 2014. Please cite the source if you quote anything on this blog. Thank you.
Education is not just for one's self but for society, to broaden one's perspective, to understand others, to learn to appreciate our world and everything in it. And, more.
If you've always lived in the same place, spend time only with people just like you, go only to the same places you've always gone, do only the things you've always done, you don't know much, and, I'm guessing, you don't like things, people, places, ideas that aren't just like what you're familiar with.
"An investment in knowledge pays the best interest." Benjamin Franklin
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle
"The goal of education is the advancement of knowledge and the dissemination of truth." John F. Kennedy
"Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education." Franklin D. Roosevelt
Beware what you learned, as a child, at home. Outside what you learned to get along socially, behaviorally; the beliefs, assumptions, biases, prejudices and misconceptions you learned, unconsciously, as a child, are best unlearned.
Good education should open your eyes, your ears, your mind, your heart. Not everything you are expected to learn in school will be used by you, personally, at some point in your life, but, if you actually pay attention, it will teach you perspective and will break down your assumptions and beliefs. Life is a great deal more than what personally affects you. If you pay attention to your education, you'll learn that you are far from being the center of the universe.
Your inner development is another matter....Neither training nor education - nor a great deal of religion, for that matter - addresses one's inner development. All three are important, in varying degrees, at various times, particularly your inner development. You're not finished until you draw you last breath.
Just my educated opinion.
All quotes are from BrainyQuote and exact sources are not given.
Copyright, Lorraine I. O'Dell, 2014. Please cite the source if you quote anything on this blog. Thank you.
Saturday, September 20, 2014
Fighting Fuzzy Thinking
I just finished watching an excellent 2011 documentary called Pink Ribbons, Inc. about the rah rah phenomenon surrounding breast cancer and breast cancer research that has, at best, become a distraction from the devastation of the disease itself and from finding causes, preventions, treatments and a cure for the disease.
My mother died of breast cancer. There is not much that I can say about that except that some of the avoidance thinking about the disease might have spared her some of the suffering she experienced in the last year of her life.
It's clear that we don't know enough about the disease, about what causes it, about the course of the disease and, apparently, because we don't know that much yet, rather than investing in learning more, we choose to fight something we know little about by spending much effort, time, energy and money in cheer leading those suffering from it. This not only is a waste by accomplishing little but is a monumental waste of resources that could be spent finding out more.
Much of what is said about the pink ribbon movement can be said about other charitable ventures, particularly those involving corporate efforts. Those who become enthusiasts of these activities need to step back and ask themselves what benefit, if any, other than their own deluded sense of well-being, comes of all these efforts. What goals, objectives and outcomes are being measured to determine if these efforts are doing anything positive toward the issue at hand or are they just robbing the energy and attention away from needed efforts to actually address whatever problem is the supposed focus. Look at who's speaking about these charities. Look at how they're dressed. Listen to who they're championing. There's a lot of money in fund raising and in running not-for-profits. Where is the money going; is it going to where it's needed?
Please watch the film: Pink Ribbons, Inc. It's available on streaming video at Netflix.
Watch and learn.
Breast cancer is NOT a pretty pink ribbon. Breast cancer is NOT patting people on the back for getting through it. Breast cancer is NOT cute products colored pink to sell to concerned customers, making profits for corporations who donate pennies for what results? Breast cancer is a nasty, killing disease.
If you want to donate to research on breast cancer, do your homework, find out what research is being done, where, by whom. Find out how they're funded, donate there. If you want to donate to palliative care for breast cancer sufferers, do your homework, find out who's providing such care, find out how they're funded, donate there.
I DO NOT donate to charities through any corporation; I'm perfectly capable of donating directly to any charity of my choosing. I DO NOT purchase any commercially manufactured product that might generate a % of a cent toward any charity. When I am able to donate to a charity of my choosing, I send them a check. I make every effort to research any charity that I'm interested in for how they spend their money, their administrative costs, their executive compensation, what projects they fund, etc. I highly recommend that you do the same.
My mother died of breast cancer. There is not much that I can say about that except that some of the avoidance thinking about the disease might have spared her some of the suffering she experienced in the last year of her life.
It's clear that we don't know enough about the disease, about what causes it, about the course of the disease and, apparently, because we don't know that much yet, rather than investing in learning more, we choose to fight something we know little about by spending much effort, time, energy and money in cheer leading those suffering from it. This not only is a waste by accomplishing little but is a monumental waste of resources that could be spent finding out more.
Much of what is said about the pink ribbon movement can be said about other charitable ventures, particularly those involving corporate efforts. Those who become enthusiasts of these activities need to step back and ask themselves what benefit, if any, other than their own deluded sense of well-being, comes of all these efforts. What goals, objectives and outcomes are being measured to determine if these efforts are doing anything positive toward the issue at hand or are they just robbing the energy and attention away from needed efforts to actually address whatever problem is the supposed focus. Look at who's speaking about these charities. Look at how they're dressed. Listen to who they're championing. There's a lot of money in fund raising and in running not-for-profits. Where is the money going; is it going to where it's needed?
Please watch the film: Pink Ribbons, Inc. It's available on streaming video at Netflix.
Watch and learn.
Breast cancer is NOT a pretty pink ribbon. Breast cancer is NOT patting people on the back for getting through it. Breast cancer is NOT cute products colored pink to sell to concerned customers, making profits for corporations who donate pennies for what results? Breast cancer is a nasty, killing disease.
If you want to donate to research on breast cancer, do your homework, find out what research is being done, where, by whom. Find out how they're funded, donate there. If you want to donate to palliative care for breast cancer sufferers, do your homework, find out who's providing such care, find out how they're funded, donate there.
I DO NOT donate to charities through any corporation; I'm perfectly capable of donating directly to any charity of my choosing. I DO NOT purchase any commercially manufactured product that might generate a % of a cent toward any charity. When I am able to donate to a charity of my choosing, I send them a check. I make every effort to research any charity that I'm interested in for how they spend their money, their administrative costs, their executive compensation, what projects they fund, etc. I highly recommend that you do the same.
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
A Reason for Government
A post appeared on Facebook this morning; I re-posted it. It's about registering your pet as an Emotional Support Companion animal so you can get into a housing rental with it.
I try to investigate certain types of Facebook posts before I Share them; like missing person's notifications. I find many to be erroneous. I often Share missing person's reports with a link to updates that show them found, etc.
So, this morning, I did a quick search about companion animals to verify whether or not such a designation as emotional support companion animal actually exists. It does. And, like other companion animals, they can be registered and there are laws about how companion animals and their owners must be treated. For example, I'm a librarian by profession. I've worked mostly in public libraries for most of my career. Pets are NOT allowed in libraries, for what most people would understand is a policy for obvious reasons. In case you don't see the obvious reasons here are a couple: You can't have animals running around pooping and peeing on the floor; you can't have animals running around biting people. That's just a couple of reasons.
If you work in public service and experience hundreds of individuals walking in off the streets daily and their behavior, you'd understand how many more reasons there might be.
Companion animals for the blind and physically disabled are allowed and they are usually easily recognizable from obvious needs of their owners. However, I'm quite sure that, if the owners are unable or unwilling to control their animals, they can be asked to leave. It's important to know laws that might affect you more than occasionally.
So, apparently, there are Emotional Support Companion Animals. The first agency's site I found had substantial information about the criteria for the designation, the registration process, what such animals are exempt from, etc.
I posted the link to that site, then was asked a question by a Facebook friend and did a little more looking and discovered several other "agencies" and their sites. I'm now confused about the "official" capacity of these agencies. I'm not going to bother looking into the all of this; it doesn't directly affect me. What I do know is that laws can be federal or state or a mix. I don't know what laws exist about companion animals; I'm not going to investigate but I am going to contact my state and federal reps and ask them to.
I did just a link that says that Emotional Support Companion Animals are protected by ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) which is a federal law.
One of the functions of government, as I probably learned it and certainly think of it, is to protect and intervene for us and to control flim-flam, sham and dishonest enterprises that misrepresent themselves in order to scam us out of our money. I don't know if the evidence of these multiple "agencies" to certify and register companion animals is about that or just no standards. There are, if you are or aren't aware, multiple companies that can register a domain name (web site address) for you. I initially thought there was one and I see no reason why I need any company to do it for me if I could get through the maze to the "agency" that maintains the database. I digress.
Another purpose of government, as I understand and wish it to be true, is setting standards. If there are federal and/or state laws concerning companion animals, there have to be criteria (standards) so designating them. Therefore, there have to be agencies, legally designated agencies to certify companion animals; otherwise everybody could and would just say their pet is a companion animal. By the way, setting standards, at all levels of government, has fallen by the wayside.
The following are links to the "agenies" in the U.S. that I've found, so far, that register/certify companion animals:
Service Dogs of America
NSAR - National Service Animal Registry
I try to investigate certain types of Facebook posts before I Share them; like missing person's notifications. I find many to be erroneous. I often Share missing person's reports with a link to updates that show them found, etc.
So, this morning, I did a quick search about companion animals to verify whether or not such a designation as emotional support companion animal actually exists. It does. And, like other companion animals, they can be registered and there are laws about how companion animals and their owners must be treated. For example, I'm a librarian by profession. I've worked mostly in public libraries for most of my career. Pets are NOT allowed in libraries, for what most people would understand is a policy for obvious reasons. In case you don't see the obvious reasons here are a couple: You can't have animals running around pooping and peeing on the floor; you can't have animals running around biting people. That's just a couple of reasons.
If you work in public service and experience hundreds of individuals walking in off the streets daily and their behavior, you'd understand how many more reasons there might be.
Companion animals for the blind and physically disabled are allowed and they are usually easily recognizable from obvious needs of their owners. However, I'm quite sure that, if the owners are unable or unwilling to control their animals, they can be asked to leave. It's important to know laws that might affect you more than occasionally.
So, apparently, there are Emotional Support Companion Animals. The first agency's site I found had substantial information about the criteria for the designation, the registration process, what such animals are exempt from, etc.
I posted the link to that site, then was asked a question by a Facebook friend and did a little more looking and discovered several other "agencies" and their sites. I'm now confused about the "official" capacity of these agencies. I'm not going to bother looking into the all of this; it doesn't directly affect me. What I do know is that laws can be federal or state or a mix. I don't know what laws exist about companion animals; I'm not going to investigate but I am going to contact my state and federal reps and ask them to.
I did just a link that says that Emotional Support Companion Animals are protected by ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) which is a federal law.
One of the functions of government, as I probably learned it and certainly think of it, is to protect and intervene for us and to control flim-flam, sham and dishonest enterprises that misrepresent themselves in order to scam us out of our money. I don't know if the evidence of these multiple "agencies" to certify and register companion animals is about that or just no standards. There are, if you are or aren't aware, multiple companies that can register a domain name (web site address) for you. I initially thought there was one and I see no reason why I need any company to do it for me if I could get through the maze to the "agency" that maintains the database. I digress.
Another purpose of government, as I understand and wish it to be true, is setting standards. If there are federal and/or state laws concerning companion animals, there have to be criteria (standards) so designating them. Therefore, there have to be agencies, legally designated agencies to certify companion animals; otherwise everybody could and would just say their pet is a companion animal. By the way, setting standards, at all levels of government, has fallen by the wayside.
The following are links to the "agenies" in the U.S. that I've found, so far, that register/certify companion animals:
Service Dogs of America
NSAR - National Service Animal Registry
Thursday, March 13, 2014
Blind, Deaf, Dumb, Ignorant and Stupid
Yesterday, I watched a video recording of the CSpan broadcast of Tuesday's Senate hearing on single-payer healthcare. The purpose of the hearing, apparently, was to listen to reports of single-payer healthcare programs in other countries. Senator Bernie Sanders, (D-VT), was chair and ranking member was, Sen. Richard Burr, (R-NC). I admit, I'm quite ignorant about these protocols and, quite honestly, I'm quite tired and sick of them.
I found the speakers, who were from academia in the U.S. and administrators of programs in Taiwan, Denmark and Canada; two of whom are physicians. I found their presentations interesting and informative, although their written remarks have to be downloaded and read to get the entire information.
What was most telling, appeared when the Q and A began and Sen. Burr and Sen. Enzi, (R-WY) asked their questions and made statements. Neither listened even slightly to the responses they were given. They are, clear from their behavior, so completely embroiled in their beliefs, that they are unable to hear, or see anything that doesn't conform to those beliefs. I'm not sure how one gets past the closed minds of such people but they are not thinking in the least. If such a person believes that a stop sign is round and purple and you tell them it's octagonal and red, you can stand them in front of it forever and they will refuse to see it.
What I doubt that the general public understands, is how statistics are used by a variety of people to make a point. I know many people believe they are being lied to and stop listening which is a mistake. Having worked for a significant manufacturer at one point in my career; and having assisted in producing presentation materials for the shareholders of that corporation, I can tell you that the statistics chosen, for any presentation are those that support the point of view of the speaker and they are only a tiny piece of the picture. They are most often completely accurate but they are selected to create an impression that is often false in the omission of the rest of the facts. They are not lies, except in those omissions. Both sides of the argument in the hearing presented statistics that supported their stance; neither side listened to the other.
Another interesting aspect of the hearing was the presence of the speaker, Sally Pipes, who has written a number of books against single-payer healthcare. You will find little about her qualifications to address the topic. I have not yet found anything about her education. She has headed a variety of organizations and, apparently can write (I have read nothing that she's written and have no interest in doing so) and has gained the attention of people in power who have used her organizational and spokesperson skills. She has suffered a family medical tragedy that is clearly the impetus and basis for her activities and opinions. I found her to be an unconscious zealot with little background on which to base informed opinions. Her opinions have, in my mind, no validity or importance whatsoever.
I stopped watching the recording of the broadcast after about 10 minutes of the Q and A which made it obvious that our government is mostly disinterested in facts and problem-solving and is mostly interested in promoting entrenched beliefs and in denying We The People solutions that will enhance and improve our daily lives.
I am truly disgusted and divorce myself from considering anyone in D.C. to be working for my best interests. I wish almost everyone there would just go home and shut up.
I found the speakers, who were from academia in the U.S. and administrators of programs in Taiwan, Denmark and Canada; two of whom are physicians. I found their presentations interesting and informative, although their written remarks have to be downloaded and read to get the entire information.
What was most telling, appeared when the Q and A began and Sen. Burr and Sen. Enzi, (R-WY) asked their questions and made statements. Neither listened even slightly to the responses they were given. They are, clear from their behavior, so completely embroiled in their beliefs, that they are unable to hear, or see anything that doesn't conform to those beliefs. I'm not sure how one gets past the closed minds of such people but they are not thinking in the least. If such a person believes that a stop sign is round and purple and you tell them it's octagonal and red, you can stand them in front of it forever and they will refuse to see it.
What I doubt that the general public understands, is how statistics are used by a variety of people to make a point. I know many people believe they are being lied to and stop listening which is a mistake. Having worked for a significant manufacturer at one point in my career; and having assisted in producing presentation materials for the shareholders of that corporation, I can tell you that the statistics chosen, for any presentation are those that support the point of view of the speaker and they are only a tiny piece of the picture. They are most often completely accurate but they are selected to create an impression that is often false in the omission of the rest of the facts. They are not lies, except in those omissions. Both sides of the argument in the hearing presented statistics that supported their stance; neither side listened to the other.
Another interesting aspect of the hearing was the presence of the speaker, Sally Pipes, who has written a number of books against single-payer healthcare. You will find little about her qualifications to address the topic. I have not yet found anything about her education. She has headed a variety of organizations and, apparently can write (I have read nothing that she's written and have no interest in doing so) and has gained the attention of people in power who have used her organizational and spokesperson skills. She has suffered a family medical tragedy that is clearly the impetus and basis for her activities and opinions. I found her to be an unconscious zealot with little background on which to base informed opinions. Her opinions have, in my mind, no validity or importance whatsoever.
I stopped watching the recording of the broadcast after about 10 minutes of the Q and A which made it obvious that our government is mostly disinterested in facts and problem-solving and is mostly interested in promoting entrenched beliefs and in denying We The People solutions that will enhance and improve our daily lives.
I am truly disgusted and divorce myself from considering anyone in D.C. to be working for my best interests. I wish almost everyone there would just go home and shut up.
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Wealth Redistribution
I'm getting things ready to send to my accountant to have my taxes done.
Unhappily, I lost my house last year, opted for deed in lieu of foreclosure at the advise of my lawyers and my accountant though they both told me I would pay a tax penalty because my loss is considered a capital gain by the IRS.
The bank received my deed and full payment of the balance of my mortgage because I had paid PMI (personal mortgage insurance) as required by my state. In effect, I paid to insure the bank against the possibility that I might default on my payments; they get paid. Why they aren't responsible for their own insurance -- well, think about it....
So, I'm feeling very nervous and vulnerable since I'm guessing that I can't pay the capital gains. I'm also feeling very angry and hateful toward the banks and impotent to do anything about it. Thinking about how the owners, stockholders, executives of financials institutions have most of the rest of us by the balls, so to speak, I decided to do a little calculating of revenge. Here's my thinking:
Total U.S. wealth, as of 2009, was 55,000 billion dollars. Think about that.
$55,000,000,000,000,000 -- I think
The top 1% owns about 34.5% of that wealth, or -- $18,700,000,000,000 -- $18,700 billion
The population of the U.S., as of 2010 was about 318,000,000. 315,000,000 less the top 1%.
What would it be like if, in the interest of moving the economy and narrowing the gap between the top 1% and the rest of the population, we executed a wealth redistribution program. We certainly wouldn't take the entirety of the 1%'s wealth away from them. That would hardly be decent. What if we took just 10% of their wealth away from them and redistributed it equally among the rest of the population. What would that look like?
10% of 18,700,000,000,000 is 1,870,000,000,000. A pittance.
Distribute that among the 315,000,000, the rest of the population, minus the 1% and each person would get, roughly, $5,937. A down payment of a new car; a vacation, whatever.
Just another indication of how enormous the gap is between the top 1% and the rest of us.
Unhappily, I lost my house last year, opted for deed in lieu of foreclosure at the advise of my lawyers and my accountant though they both told me I would pay a tax penalty because my loss is considered a capital gain by the IRS.
The bank received my deed and full payment of the balance of my mortgage because I had paid PMI (personal mortgage insurance) as required by my state. In effect, I paid to insure the bank against the possibility that I might default on my payments; they get paid. Why they aren't responsible for their own insurance -- well, think about it....
So, I'm feeling very nervous and vulnerable since I'm guessing that I can't pay the capital gains. I'm also feeling very angry and hateful toward the banks and impotent to do anything about it. Thinking about how the owners, stockholders, executives of financials institutions have most of the rest of us by the balls, so to speak, I decided to do a little calculating of revenge. Here's my thinking:
Total U.S. wealth, as of 2009, was 55,000 billion dollars. Think about that.
$55,000,000,000,000,000 -- I think
The top 1% owns about 34.5% of that wealth, or -- $18,700,000,000,000 -- $18,700 billion
The population of the U.S., as of 2010 was about 318,000,000. 315,000,000 less the top 1%.
What would it be like if, in the interest of moving the economy and narrowing the gap between the top 1% and the rest of the population, we executed a wealth redistribution program. We certainly wouldn't take the entirety of the 1%'s wealth away from them. That would hardly be decent. What if we took just 10% of their wealth away from them and redistributed it equally among the rest of the population. What would that look like?
10% of 18,700,000,000,000 is 1,870,000,000,000. A pittance.
Distribute that among the 315,000,000, the rest of the population, minus the 1% and each person would get, roughly, $5,937. A down payment of a new car; a vacation, whatever.
Just another indication of how enormous the gap is between the top 1% and the rest of us.
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Workin' For A Livin'
It's just my opinion but I really don't believe that anyone can become a billionaire except through inheritance, accident or deceit.
Think about it, if you go to work for somebody every day, put away 10-25% of what you make, invest which is really just gambling that you pick a winner, you will not, even at the end of your life have even one million, let alone a billion dollars.
Now think about advertising. The key word in business, industry and advertising is spin. I've known and worked for a few spin doctors. They think nothing about what spin actually is. Spin is just lying.
A man has a house to sell. Buyers come by to see it. They ask questions:
"Is the foundation sound?"
He doesn't know but he says, "Yes, I just had it inspected." (a lie)
"Is the plumbing up to date?"
He replaced visible iron pipes with copper but not those hidden in the walls and he's put temporary sealant on a couple of valve leaks, "yes", he says and shows them the receipts for the copper pipes.
"Is the well water good?"
"Yes", he says but he just the day before 'shocked' the well by pouring a gallon of bleach in because the water has been iffy since he owned the house.
Do you think he's justified in lying about these things because it would cost him too much to fix them and few people would buy the house if he was honest about them? Do you think he's in a fix and the only way out is to lie?
Then, you can expect just about anyone else to do the same to you.
Corporations spend millions of dollars learning the weaknesses of consumers in order to make claims, design products and create dependencies so they can continue to sell products that nobody needs.
Now they have gained the power to influence OUR government over the interests of all of the rest of us.
That's the reason regulations are needed. If you believe that businessmen are honest as saints and will do right by their customers, you are a fool. If you believe that people who are taken advantage of by the deceit of others deserve what they get, then you will be sure to be screwed by somebody because deceit means that you don't know that you're being screwed.
Dhu!
Think about it, if you go to work for somebody every day, put away 10-25% of what you make, invest which is really just gambling that you pick a winner, you will not, even at the end of your life have even one million, let alone a billion dollars.
Now think about advertising. The key word in business, industry and advertising is spin. I've known and worked for a few spin doctors. They think nothing about what spin actually is. Spin is just lying.
A man has a house to sell. Buyers come by to see it. They ask questions:
"Is the foundation sound?"
He doesn't know but he says, "Yes, I just had it inspected." (a lie)
"Is the plumbing up to date?"
He replaced visible iron pipes with copper but not those hidden in the walls and he's put temporary sealant on a couple of valve leaks, "yes", he says and shows them the receipts for the copper pipes.
"Is the well water good?"
"Yes", he says but he just the day before 'shocked' the well by pouring a gallon of bleach in because the water has been iffy since he owned the house.
Do you think he's justified in lying about these things because it would cost him too much to fix them and few people would buy the house if he was honest about them? Do you think he's in a fix and the only way out is to lie?
Then, you can expect just about anyone else to do the same to you.
Corporations spend millions of dollars learning the weaknesses of consumers in order to make claims, design products and create dependencies so they can continue to sell products that nobody needs.
Now they have gained the power to influence OUR government over the interests of all of the rest of us.
That's the reason regulations are needed. If you believe that businessmen are honest as saints and will do right by their customers, you are a fool. If you believe that people who are taken advantage of by the deceit of others deserve what they get, then you will be sure to be screwed by somebody because deceit means that you don't know that you're being screwed.
Dhu!
Wednesday, January 29, 2014
State of the Union 2014
Did you watch?
Are you happy with the way the country is being run? If you didn't watch, if you don't respond to what you liked and didn't like, then, in my opinion, your opinion about what was said doesn't count for much.
I've felt, for a long time, that what's mostly wrong with our country is us, the citizenry. On the one hand, we want to hand over responsibility for running things to complete strangers; we want to trust in a mythological "daddy" out there who will look out for our best interests. We've been thinking and acting this way for a very long time. On the other hand, we're really, really unhappy with the way things are being run.
I ask you, what's wrong with this picture? How long do you continue to behave in the same way and expect things to be different?
It's time to rethink, reassess and take hold of the reins. You voted for somebody. How often to do tell that "representative" what you think, what you want? I'm guessing not very often.
How often do you actually sit down and mentally layout, for yourself, what you think about all the issues: national security, foreign policy, commerce, education, the economy...?
This is our country.
Back to the State of the Union Address --
It's required, loosely, by the Constitution: "He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient:..." It's supposed to be a REPORT to Congress about - guess what - the state of the union - what's wrong, what's right - and proposals for the future. And, in my assessment, that's exactly what last night's speech was. The President reviewed what had been done by his administration and what he intends and wants to do in the future. In a vacuum, the speech, on its own, was fine; not too much pomp and circumstance; not too much bullshit. However, there were several things that I noticed that I think are problematic:
The energy policy is too much same old, same old. I was absolutely not happy that production is up; that the President is standing behind natural gas which means - FRACKING. This is a disaster. Almost immediately after making those statements, he mentioned something about the preservation of federal lands. So here's my assessment of that. He's OK, Washington is OK with poisoning our communities by fracking for natural gas but federal lands will be protected so we can escape from our polluted neighborhoods by visiting national forests and parks. REALLY!? Remember this is a president who believed in CLEAN coal. So, F for energy policy. He did mention other energy sources but mostly in passing.
Next, I noticed policies of partnering with major corporations - the usual players - for various programs. This is same old, same old. Our economy is a disaster because of big business, Wall Street, the entire financial industry. If we don't divorce ourselves from these 'partnerships', that serve them more than they serve us, we will eventually be doomed to slavery to them, which, BTW, we nearly are already.
Education, some OK thoughts but defining education as training for a job is just another step in the United States of American Business. I didn't go to college to get a job. I went to college to be educated, to explore things I'm interested in, to expand my knowledge and outlook, and, in the process, decide what kind of work I wanted to do. We do need updated vocational education; everybody knows that. But, because we've turned our "think tanks" over to corporate bean counters and accountants, we've ignored the real geniuses that have come from our educational system, from scientists and economists and, yes, philosophers, social scientists, engineers, psychologists, thinkers, who have more constructive and positive solutions to our economic and social problems than whorish businessmen whose sole aim in life is to find more and more ways to make money. So, D for education policy.
Finally, many of the assumptions on which most policies in Washington are based on are outdated and erroneous. Everyone in Washington keeps going to the usual players for answers; the usual players are ALL self-serving and will, in my opinion, NEVER do what right unless it means a profit for them, and it usually doesn't. There's a John Bunyan quote (I just discovered the source) that occasionally goes around Facebook, that Washington should recite every morning, as a mantra:
“You have not lived today until you have done something for someone who can never repay you.”
My Fellow Americans, have a good day.
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Getting Rid of Citizens United - Being a Citizen
It is the 4th anniversary of Citizens United when the Supreme Court granted citizenship to corporations, allowing them to inordinately influence decisions affecting the lives of each and every one of us.
Yes, corporations are a collection of people but by granting corporations personhood and citizenship, each and every member of the corporate board and each and every voting shareholder, is, thereby, granted double personhood and citizenship, on their own, as citizens, and through their corporate influence. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?!
This legal action has doomed the rest of us to always be outvoted and out-influenced by corporate interests. And, if you think that national and multinational corporations have your best interests, our country's best interests, our planet's best interests at heart, I'm afraid I think you're a fool.
Watch this video and educate yourself.
Legalize Democracy
It is extremely important that we overturn each and every one of these decisions and that a constitutional amendment be enacted to define, once and for all that a citizen is a single, individual homo sapien and that the laws of the country apply only to so defined citizens.
Be a Citizen - (American Heritage Dictionary)
"1. A person owing loyalty to and entitled by birth or naturalization to the protection of a state or nation."
Even that definition (matched by Webster's), is outdated and, in a democracy, insufficient. Remember, in our democracy, as defined by our Constitution, We The People, the citizenry, ARE the government.
Much of what's wrong with our government today, is a result of our throwing away our rights as citizens and by being lax in our responsibilities as citizens.
We are, in fact "governed" by layers of governments; from our local municipal, county and state governments to the federal government. Are you informed about each and every one of those governments? Do you know your state Constitution? Do you know the ordinances of your town? How many city council meetings have you attended?
Think about your answers to these questions, because if you are not acting and functioning and taking responsibility as a Citizen, what do you think will be the result; government functioning without you. Complaining about decisions that are made, laws that are enacted, after the fact, is pointless. You and I must, pro actively, become citizens who include our citizenship in our daily thinking and activities.
Go to your town's web site. Who's who? Can you find local ordinances there? If not, call the Town Clerk and ask how to find your local ordinances. You public library often has a copy of the Ordinances. Also ask for the schedule of Council meetings and how to get a copy of the agenda. You may have to pay for a photocopy (saving the taxpayers money, of course). DO NOT let anyone intimidate you. I have had town clerks ask me who I am and what I need the information for, in an authoritarian tone. I simply give them my name and tell them I'm a resident, home owner and voter and I need the information I'm asking for. They don't need to know why.
Some towns, that have the correct attitude, that information about their operations is open to The Public, will have that information on their web site, posted in the municipal offices and/or available at the local library. You have a right to this information. Don't let anyone tell you differently. In some cases, they have so seldom been asked that they have acquired wrong thinking and bad attitudes about the loftiness and privilege of their activities and become secretive. We are responsible for that as well.
I'm a librarian. I have been a public employee (differing from a public servant in many ways), serving the public in public libraries in many municipalities in 4 states. I have attended many public meetings in my capacity and a librarian and a citizen. Over time, when very few people show interest in what you're doing and how you're doing it, you just stop thinking about how what you do affects them. So, as citizens, we have to be ever vigilant about how our various levels of government function and continually communicating our wishes to our public servants (our elected representatives). How else can they represent us?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)