Walking it back

There are those people who when caught in an outright lie or in a prejudicial statement or in a disgraceful act, somehow can’t find the courage or honesty to ever own up completely to their mistake, but rather their preference is often to “walk it back” by downplaying what has so occurred, and basically excusing it in one form or another, that seemingly then takes care of the issue at hand, though, in truth, it does not.

In a fair and just world, those who do stupid and regretful things, but then hide behind equivocating words or try to place the blame on someone else or some other entity, and therefore aren’t ever willing to truly face the music, for what they have so done, are dishonest people, that we should be reluctant to trust, because those that will not admit to their faults and errors, especially when caught red-handed, are people that lack integrity.

That is to say, those that walk it back from their ill-advised words or bad behavior as if this somehow rectifies what has been said or done, have got it all wrong.  No doubt, all of us have said and done stupid things, of which, those with integrity then are going to be the very same, who won’t mince words but will own up to what they said or done, and then make it their point to take corrective action in order to help ameliorate such, if that option is still available.

The fact that so many personages of high authority are somehow permitted to walk back that which they have said or done, with this being considered to be acceptable, reflects this country and its moral code as being in a steep decline.  It has to be said, for the most part, walking it back, shouldn’t be permitted, for words once spoken or deeds once done, cannot be undone; therefore, the only just solution to mistakes and errors that have been made is to own up to such, which demonstrates character as well as the determination to do better in the future.

So too, whenever we see people in authority, who are permitted to walk it back without suffering some sort of just punishment, it’s then only fair for those watching such, to determine that they too should be accorded the same sort of option, as well.  Yet, that doesn’t seem to be the way that society works, for those that are the least amongst us, are almost never permitted to walk back anything, and instead must face the full fury of the law, exercised against them for their wrongful behavior.  This thus bespeaks the main problem with walking it back, and the hypocrisy, so of, which is that those of a certain class, or of privilege, or of power, are apparently allowed to say and to do whatever that they desire, often without having to suffer the fair consequence, because they alone are permitted the second chance to amend their error, by simply walking it back, though in actuality, in their persona, they haven’t walked back a thing, and therein lies the rub.

“Promote the general Welfare”

Our preamble to the Constitution states that the governance of this nation was formed so as to promote the general welfare of its people, amongst other important obligations.  This thus signifies that American governance needs to do its level best to do right by those citizens by promoting that general welfare in the activities that it so envisions and accomplishes.  Yet, when we take a good look at America, and see all the misery, poverty, ill-education, incarceration, lack of opportunity, injustice, and hopelessness that a meaningful subsection of Americans duly suffers from, we have to admit that the general welfare of this nation does not appear to be something that has been well distributed to all Americans, but rather seems to be something that has been corrupted in a way that the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer, with the middle class carrying ever more weight, thereby reflecting the unjustness and unfairness of America.

Indeed, part of the reason for America falling well short of promoting the general welfare on behalf of the people is that those who are our legislators don’t seem to recognize that this obligation is one of the cardinal functions of the purpose of their being the people’s representatives.  In other words, our legislators seem to, far too often, turn a blind eye to the people, and spend far more time concentrating on benefiting their own self in conjunction with those special interests that they specifically are trying to please, thereby effectively ignoring their constituency.

America would be a far different country, if those who are our representatives, recognized in their thoughts and in their subsequent actions, that their first responsibility is to the people, and in particular, to see that what was accomplished on behalf of those same people, was that which promoted their general welfare.  The fact that this is the richest nation that the world has ever known, signifies that the reason that the welfare of so many, is not up to par, reflects that the taxation of this nation, the fairness of this nation, and the construct of this nation as exercised, is not in conformity or in harmony with the promotion of that general welfare.

Look, it has to be said, that many a comparable Western nation, has a far more robust social safety net for their people, along with having a universal health care system for them, as well as importantly having far less violent crime, which reflects that America has not done right by its people.  Our Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and when that Constitution is effectively ignored or circumvented, then what we do see, is the general welfare of this nation, not being prioritized and thereby falling short of what it could do for its people.  Indeed, important and great legislation has been passed for the benefit of that general welfare, but any legislated law is only as good as its successful implementation in the real world, and when we look around America, it has to be said, that regarding the general welfare of the people, our governance is doing a lackluster job in reaching those that need such welfare and opportunity, the most.

The cause of human misery

While there are myriad theories of the cause of humankind’s misery, which happens far too often to far too many people, it has to be said that the basic cause of that misery is humankind’s inability to do what they ought to do, and replacing such by doing that which is in disharmony to Nature’s God, and thereby suffering in one way or another, the penalty for that disobedience.  In other words, anytime that we do something morally wrong through the exercise of our free will, we have quite obviously weakened our ties to God, by our own volition, and in order then to strengthen back those ties, we are going to have to work very hard to make sure to do the right thing, instead.

The misery that we suffer from is often not from our misunderstanding of what is right and that which is wrong, but rather it is our stubbornness to insist that our way is the right way, even though intuitively we know that this isn’t right.  In life, there are going to be presented to us, time and time again, decisions that will necessitate us sacrificing something of our ego or of our desires, in order to do the right thing for those that we congregate with, and in many a case, when we fail to do the right thing, it is not because we aren’t capable of doing so, but because we willed to not do so, for whatever dubious reason.

It has to be said, that every step upon the wrong path, must be made up by a step upon the correct path, and the sooner that we recognize that we are continuing to walk down the wrong path, and thereby make then the determination that we will not continue down that path, the sooner that we will begin to mark our return to the right path, by taking action to do that very thing, as opposed to just thinking that we should do so, but never seeming to get around to actually accomplishing such.

To somehow believe that the decisions and actions that we make that are wrong, will somehow be okay in the end, is foolishness and is not borne out by the results that we will see in this life or the life beyond.  To be gifted with free choice is to be gifted with the opportunity to make good on such, or to fail to do so.  Those who make poor choices will experience some degree of misery, for they have not done what was meant to be done right, and having failed in that task, will duly have to pay the price for that disobedience.

For all those that expect their judgment to be an easy day, it is almost certain for them, that it will not be, because they are apparently not even cognizant of the mistakes that they have made.  In this world, we will be tested, and those who have the courage to do what needs to be done to pass their tests, are those who will rise above misery into enlightenment; whereas those who have not, will rue their stubbornness and stupidity, for in having been provided with free choice, they have sowed poorly, and will thereby reap the whirlwind.

Freedom of choice, government, and religion

To be free necessitates that we are able to make our own decisions as per our particular individual desires.  The problem with freedom of choice when it comes to societies and the governance that oversees that society, as well as the religious persuasion of the day for that society, of which, throughout history religion has typically had a very strong influence upon the people, is that governments and religions, besides their general perceived benefits for the people, are also in the business of reducing or restricting choice.  That is to say, the reason why governments have so many rules, regulations, and laws is to restrict the people as to what they are permitted to do or not do, and those who do not follow the rules of the road will thus have to pay a penalty for their obstinacy and their apparent inability to follow those rules.  As in regards to religion, we are all familiar with the Ten Commandments so given to us by God, as well as other commandments of that general ilk, which therefore are set before humankind to command them as to what is or is not permitted, and those that do not adhere to those God-given rules will thereby suffer punishment if not in this world, then the world to come.

So then, we live in a society in which our free choice is circumscribed by governance as well as in many a case, by religion, and when it comes to the government, our fear consists of the fact that disobedience to the laws can result in our incarceration, or if not that exactly, then society may impose upon us its disapproval by banishing us from congregating with them as a citizen in equal standing to those that have been accepted as being properly obedient.  As for religion, our free choice is circumscribed by the fact that virtually every religion has specific behaviors that are encouraged, and other behaviors that are discouraged, and those that insist upon behaving in a manner that has been essentially forbidden, will have to, sooner or later, pay the piper.

In short, as much as we might believe that we are completely free agents, free to choose what we so desire to do or not do, in actuality, for all those who live within a given society, this is not true.  Rather, as a member of society, we have essentially voluntarily sacrificed some of our freedom and therefore our free choice, for the advantages that a good society and a good governance provides to us.  So, in essence, we prefer some degree of security and the advantages of working with others in harmony, as compared to doing whatever it is, that we desire, outside of society and its governance, so of.

In theory, to sacrifice some freedom of choice to our governance or to religion is something that we freely do --  so as to live a better life, but when that freedom of choice, is basically taken from us through a government that is oppressive, unfair, and discriminatory, or that freedom of choice is coerced out of us, because of what is in actuality an unreasonable fear of God so propagated to us by religion as a means to control us and not for the betterment of our soul, then we have been cheated out of our freedom, by those that want to rule and to dominate us, primarily for their benefit, and not ours.

Social Security tax for high-income earners

It seems like a contradiction that as of 2024 all yearly earnings above $168,600 are not subject to that earner paying the 6.2% Social Security tax and therefore this is not withheld from their pay, nor is the employer required to pay their portion of that 6.2%, either.  The reason this is such a contradiction is that America’s tax system is progressive in nature, but the Social Security tax as currently structured, belies that for high-income earners.  Not only does this not appear to be fair, but it seems to confirm that the rich get special privileges, and the poor and middle class carry even more of the resulting burden.  Therefore, this nation should consider amending the taxation for high-income earners in the following way:

1.      For income above $168,600 but below $250,00 the Social Security tax shall be reduced to 5.2%

2.      For income above $250,00 but below $330,000 the Social Security tax shall be reduced to 4.2%

3.      For income above $330,000 but below $410,000 the Social Security tax shall be reduced to 3.2%.

4.      For income above $410,000 but below $500,00 the Social Security tax shall be reduced to 2.2%

5.      For income above $500,000 the Social Security tax shall be reduced to 1.45%.

What we find through this modification is that high-earners will still get their Social Security discount, but that discount will be leveled down before it eventually reaches just 1.45%, which matches what is taken out of their paycheck for Medicare.  Not only does this seem to be reasonable in what it is trying to achieve, which is to provide more funding to the Social Security fund, but it also is pretty much in harmony with the current Social Security tax withholding system, by reducing that tax for high-income earners, though it will not eliminate such. 

Look, it has to be said, those that are high-earners are already in the pole position to have a very pleasant life, so that it doesn’t seem necessary or fair for these high-earners to get even more benefits.  Indeed, the amount of money that these high-earners would sacrifice to Social Security under this program would be essentially no real big deal for them, though in aggregate it would be a big deal for the Social Security Administration.  Additionally, those who are fortunate enough or skilled enough to be in the category of the top ten percent of wages so being paid, have got to recognize that this amount of income, in and of itself, should be more than sufficient for them to have no legitimate gripes, about no longer getting a free ride above $168,600 on Social Security withholding.

After all, for all those who complain about the unfairness of this proposal, it’s only fair to ask, as to whether they would prefer to make less money and therefore not have to deal with the fact that the Social Security tax would no longer be phased out for them, or whether they would prefer to take a small hit to their net pay and continue to make wages that places them in the top ten percent of all American wage earners.  The answer to that question is pretty obvious, and therefore appropriate legislation should be proposed to rectify this current unfairness to something more sensible, for the betterment of all.

Nixon’s Family Assistance Plan (FAP)

The United States does not have a Universal Basic Income plan and quite frankly doesn’t appear to be on track to have one, anytime soon.  Yet, incredibly, when we turn back the clock to the Nixon administration of 1969, President Nixon, put forth the Family Assistance Plan, which in its effect, would have served the purpose of a Universal Basic Income, in which families would thereby receive an annual guaranteed minimum income, whether or not they were employed.  Further to the point, those that did work, but made a minimal wage, would still be eligible for that same federal stipend from the FAP, of which, that stipend would be reduced but not eliminated.  In other words, those that worked for low wages would have their wages still augmented by FAP, and those that were not employed, would receive what would represent a Universal Basic Income.  As history tells us, though, this proposed FAP was not approved by the Senate, and therefore was never ratified.

It seems a shame, that despite this nation recognizing how enervating poverty is, and therefore the need for income or welfare at a meaningful level which would thus provide a basic floor for all Americans, we find that this nation still does not have the character to do the right thing by its people.  If one of the complaints about the welfare state is that far too many people are paid to do nothing all day, the Nixon plan would have demonstrated that those so employed, would still have been entitled to receive benefits from the government, thereby providing them with necessary funds to help keep their heads above water.  So too, those who were unemployed would themselves be entitled to have a yearly monetary stipend that would provide them with something of substance to help them to survive.

For all those who believe that it is just fine to have millions of Americans living in substandard and impoverished enclaves of hopelessness and abandonment, it would behoove them to better understand that lending a helping hand to a fellow American is something that this the richest nation that the world has ever known, has as an obligation to provide for those that are the least amongst them.  Indeed, to ignore the poor and disadvantaged people in America, is a disservice to those who have little or nothing, and if the lust for profits in this capitalistic nation, essentially means that there will always be the poor amongst us – then the least that this nation should do is to devote the time, energy, and effort to help those that truly need a helping hand, with the overall objective getting those that currently are unemployed or in dire circumstances, a fair shot at getting a toehold into this nation, for in doing that, not only will this country have more of its citizens, that believe in America, but this would also serve to proclaim that in America, this actually is the land of opportunity, of which, this nation does not ever close the door upon its own, or turn out the light, because in reality, these are our fellow Americans, deserving of their fair chance, as well.

Commuting to work alone

In most cities in America, with a few notable exceptions, such as New York City and Washington, DC, the vast majority of people commuting to work, drive their own car, and drive that car, by themselves.  So then, despite the fact that most every vehicle on the road can easily handle four people in it, we see time and time again, just one person in that vehicle, which is the driver, and no more.  This does seem like not only an environmental waste, because of all the fuel that is being utilized for just one person, but also the incumbent pollution generated from the excess amount of vehicles on the road.

One would think, that America, would want to look at its commuting habits and see what could or could not be done to reduce the amount of solo drivers upon the road, but this doesn’t seem to be any real priority for America, to its lasting disgrace.  One possible solution is for there to be more carpooling, but carpooling doesn’t seem to be something that has ever really caught on in America, though, with proper incentives and encouragement, perhaps this could change for the better.  Another way to reduce not only solo drivers but the driving of vehicles itself would be to have a more robust form of public transportation, which America duly suffers the lack of, not only because so many cities are so spread out, but because our infrastructure for public transportation, in most of our cities, does not hold a candle to European cities, and does not appear to be something that the powers that be, would like to concentrate upon.  Another avenue to pursue would be for this government to place pressure upon corporations, that they must put together action plans that would meet some minimum goals of people commuting to work that would increase carpooling, with incentives put in place to encourage such, and penalties to discourage their lack of follow-through upon this action.

Of course, another way to deal with how many solo drivers that there are, would be to manufacture cars that are lighter and smaller and therefore more efficient in their energy usage, but that doesn’t seem to be in America’s DNA, so that would appear to be a non-starter.  Additionally, we could encourage companies to see that more of their employees be permitted to work from home, and should this be accomplished, this would be a welcomed win-win scenario and thereby should be actively encouraged and incentivized.

The bottom line is that it just seems unfathomable that so many people are far too content to drive their own automobile, and are blithely unconcerned about their individual contribution to pollution or the usage of a form of energy that is non-renewable, but that is indeed the case.  So then, at this point, it seems that the only way to reduce solo driving in America would be for the government to come up with a nationwide plan to address such, which thereupon would take an active role in expending the necessary billions of dollars now, in order to reap the benefits, later.  For as it stands, to believe that society’s laissez-faire attitude will change much of anything when it comes to solo driving, is complete ignorance

Increase your vocabulary

In order to communicate we utilize words to express ourselves in both written as well as in verbal form, and when we don’t have a strong vocabulary it can become rather difficult to understand not only what the words mean that have been spoken or written, but also because we lack that, such is subject to being misunderstood.  So then, it behooves all of us to desire to increase our vocabulary, and one of the best ways to do so is to make it our point, to not only learn the definition of a given word, but to see that same word subsequently used in various sentences, and then to utilize that word in our own sentence, correctly.  None of this is especially easy, but given enough time and with dedicated effort, we will in short order, improve our vocabulary, which will typically mean that we will be able to better communicate with others.

It's important to recognize that the reason that we have so many words in the English language is that it permits us to be more specific about what we are trying to say, rather than leaving it up to the individual to try to decipher what we meant to convey because, despite the context of what has been spoken, we still aren’t sure what has been said.  Indeed, those who have a strong vocabulary are the very same who put themselves in a strong place to have a vibrant and successful life, for those who are able to comprehend and understand the other are in a pole position to communicate with others in a way and manner that is more satisfying, as opposed to someone that simply looks stupefied or has tuned out, because they don’t really understand what has been written or said.

While there are a multitude of ways to increase our vocabulary, from something as simple as looking up words in a dictionary and then trying to memorize such, a far better way though is that whenever we come across an unknown written word, to first try to figure out what that word might possibly mean, by the context of the sentence that it is written in, as well as our experience in deciphering similar words. Next, we should look up the definition of that word to find out if we were right or wrong, and then we need to see that same word utilized in various sentences so that we can understand it better, and finally, the true test of whether we grasp the definition and purpose of a given word, is to create our own sentences that utilize that new word.  Indeed, in order to retain new knowledge, we need to actively communicate utilizing that word, to the best of our ability, so as to retain that memory and appropriate usage of that word.

There is never a great shame in not knowing what a particular word means, or in our misunderstanding or even in our complete lack of comprehension of a given sentence, because we do not yet know the meaning of too many of those words — but given enough time, and given enough effort, we can make inroads into becoming more proficient with our vocabulary, which will present to us, a greater appreciation of dialog, communication, reading, as well as the understanding of the other

What the United Football League (UFL) should do

In America, football remains its most popular sport, and the Super Bowl is the most-watched sporting event of the year.  While those that have NFL franchises and the fans that watch the sport are seemingly dedicated to the NFL, it is somewhat surprising that each recent attempt by an outside football sports league to make inroads upon the NFL has all gone down relatively easily to defeat, despite in many a case, achieving sports network coverage and the critical revenues that this so brings to that respective upstart league.

Presently, the latest attempt to engage fans into watching football is the United Football League (UFL) which has smartly structured its season to run in the springtime, after the NFL season is over, and pretty much after “March Madness” has ended.  While there are always going to be other sports leagues, such as MLB, NBA, and the NHL to attract viewers, the one thing that the UFL has going for it, is the fact that it clearly does not compete against the NFL through the same seasonal dates, which thus provides those most interested in football, with an alternative league for them to turn their attention to. That said,

it would seem that what the UFL should not do, is attempt to essentially be a “NFL light’, in which the rules of the game are in essence, a copy of the NFL.  Instead, it would behoove the UFL to communicate with their fans to see what they do like and what they do not like when it comes to the NFL, and then to concentrate their attention on trying to provide the changes that would be most pleasing to that audience, in which, the game would be familiar enough to those fans, but also different and innovative enough that changes so made to UFL rules would intrigue and interest those same fans.

The biggest change that the UFL should consider is getting rid of four downs to make ten yards in order to achieve a first down and replacing such with just three downs to make ten yards to achieve a first down.  This, quite obviously, would reduce running plays and would increase passing plays. This would also mean that instead of one team seemingly having the ball for an incredibly long period of time, and thus literally running down the game clock, that the turnover of the ball from one team to the other, because of their failure to get a first down, would make the game not only to be more fast-paced, but advantageous for a team that is behind so that they could conceivably catch up.  The other big change would be to provide more points to a team that scores a touchdown, from more than 25 years away from the goal line, so that in doing so, this would be an eight-point touchdown, instead of just six.  Again, this would change the strategy for those teams trying to catch up, and would therefore make the game more exciting to know that instead of possibly needing two scores to tie or take the lead, that it could conceivably be done with just one score.

Whether or not the UFL cares to carefully curate their rules and amend such is up to the management of the league, but simply trying to be a copycat of the NFL, seems to lack both innovation and imagination, thereby signifying that those that understand that risk has its place, ought to risk more to gain more.

Learn to value virtue

Western societies, seem to have far too often their priorities all wrong, of which, the crux of the problem is how much time, energy, and space is spent appreciating those that are the richest and the most powerful, as opposed to appreciating those that demonstrate good virtue and selflessness.  It would seem that rich or poor, many people gravitate to admiring those who are super successful, in the mistaken belief, oftentimes, that those who are the best entrepreneurs, or athletes, or actors, are somehow the best people, as well, and that we should therefore listen attentively to what they have to say as if these are very wise personages that are worth our time to listen to.

Look, it has to be said, success has its own merits, but to somehow believe that the rich and well-placed deserve our admiration, without any real consideration as to who and what they honestly are, and how they got to the place that they are currently are at, is a mistake.  Those then, that celebrate celebrities of all types, as akin to some sort of hero worship, are worshipping at the wrong temple.  Rather, we would be far better served to concentrate our appreciation and our admiration upon those of great moral value, who provide us with important lessons that we should learn from, and encourage us to become strong moral agents of virtue because it is those who work for the true betterment of society, that are exhibiting high moral virtue for the benefit of that society.

What we do or do not respect, reflects fairly upon our own personality, and all those who respect power mainly because they wish for that sort of power for themselves, are not thinking correctly.  Indeed, our objective in life, should not be to be rich and powerful, so that we can “boss” our way in society, so as to therefore receive accolades from those who need to appreciate us, but rather we need to drop those sorts of fantasies and pretensions and see such as being seriously misguided, in the recognition that what we should concentrate our efforts upon, are in the being of the best person that we can be with the objective of doing our fair part to help make society a better place for our participation in it.

All those who judge a person’s success primarily based upon the accouterments that a given person has are failing to understand that a person’s true success should be measured by how much or how little that they have done for others, along with the wisdom that they have so imparted not only by their deeds but by their words so spoken for the improvement and betterment of others.  When we take an honest look at who and what we truly admire, oftentimes that person is someone very close to us, who has shown and provided to us, unconditional love, which we appreciate, because on our merits, we may not have deserved such, but they have been able to recognize the good and the value that we have within our character, which will, in due time and through our good effort, exhibit itself, through our virtuous deeds

Does right and wrong ever change?

The laws that we are subject to are written down and in theory, enforced upon the people in an equal and fair way.  Yet, the problem with laws, no matter how carefully written, and no matter how brilliant these laws are in conceptualizing all of the possible contingencies, thereof, is that a law that does not or cannot take into fair consideration, all of the situations, intentions, or the general consciousness of those so accused of being on the wrong side of the law, is indicative that the justice that we expect in a court of law, may not be just, at all.

That is to say, we tend to want to believe that the best laws are those laws that are unequivocal, but the problem with the belief in that type of law, is that those who are adherents of believing such are the very type that will ignore the spirit of the law, to conform only to the letter of the law, of which, because of that belief, injustice may well occur.  In any judicial decision in which there are two or even more sides to a story, it is vital to get as much of the full story as possible, because only in obtaining that full story, is it truly conceivable that a just decision can be made, for when we do not care or take the time to live in the other person’s shoes, we then do not know the consciousness of that person, and in not knowing that or in not considering that, we cannot then reasonably come up with a fair decision, though via the law as written, we can however simply follow the law.

There are lots of things in life, which depending upon the prism in which such is viewed, can be seen as being justified and subsequently viewed as being legal; whereas, when viewed through a different prism, are considered to be unjustified and therefore illegal.  Indeed, for example, the perception that a given person has pulled the trigger of their gun in self-defense will often render a judgment that is completely the opposite of the pulling of the trigger of a gun which is considered to have been done as an aggressive and unnecessary act.

When we see what we believe to be a crime, but do not know the beginning of what occurred for that crime to have happened, and do not know the intention of the supposed perpetrator or do not care to investigate such, then we haven’t done justice to what has so occurred.  To believe then that right is always right, and wrong is always wrong, is to simplify what happens in life to such a degree that we don’t take into account all of the nuances and other factors that should be considered before a person has been adjudged to be guilty or not.  Those then who believe that justice is always cut and dry, are the very same, that can’t seem to remember all the times in their life, when they felt that their parents or other authority figures misinterpreted their actions and then they duly suffered for that which they considered to be unfair, which is why it is so important that we provide each party to a dispute, the fair opportunity, to state their case in detail, formal or not.

“Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration”

In the reading of the above quotation, most students of history, would quickly discern that this quotation and thus this sentiment so of, must have come from the mind of Karl Marx, but it did not.  In fact, it might seem incredible to Americans, but this quote came forth from the President of the United States in that President’s First Annual Message to Congress.  The name of that President was Abraham Lincoln.

As they say, history is written by the victors, of which, it is fair enough to state that capitalism in America, and therefore capital in America seems to clearly be the superior of labor and not the other way around.  So then, to modern ears, a belief that labor should be the superior of capital, would appear to be a sentiment that would have more in common with someone that is communistic or socialistic in nature and hence is anathema to America, and what it so stands for.  However, in consideration that these words were spoken by the very wise Abraham Lincoln, should give those of an open mind some serious pause.

In fact, that which becomes capital must have, at some point, the need for labor to have created that capital.  In other words, it is the blood, sweat, and tears of those who labor that creates the basis for the goods and capital so subsequently created.  Therefore, labor is indeed prior to capital, and those who labor diligently deserve a fair share of what they so have created through their effort, and thus the value of that labor should not be shunned.  Yet, in the present day, those who are clever, understand well, that to have capital or access to such, permits those who are the capital holders, to extract in many a situation, more than their fair share from those who labor for them, so that those with capital, are thus able to make a profit to their advantage, without having to put forth even close to their fair amount of personal labor to accomplish such.

We live in a day and age in which taxation is commonplace, whether that taxation is attached to our labor, or through an excise tax, or a sales tax, or a property tax, and so on.  This then would reflect that our current governance seems not to comprehend that when it comes to taxation, those who should pay their fair share should primarily be those who are the capital holders, for it is those with capital, that not only have the better capacity to pay taxes but surely are the ones that should pay a higher percentage of their wealth or assets through those taxes, because capital uses the pathway to make money, without necessarily much personal labor.

Indeed, it is the working person, that should be held in the highest esteem, and not the fat cat, that seemingly makes all the profits, for it is because of that labor that things get built and get done, of which, the capital should best be seen then as the tool that helps to accomplish such, but should never to be seen as superior to the hands that have done the actual work.

The 6th Amendment to our Constitution is effectively null and void

Our 6th Amendment states in part: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury….”  Yet, in the United States, it is estimated that more than 95 percent of Federal and State convictions are the result of a plea bargain, of which, those that give up their 6th Amendment rights, whether effectively coerced or not, have done so, without ever having the opportunity, or the fairness, of seeing that their case was actually heard by an impartial jury, in which they had their fair say.

There is, in essence, very little criminal justice before a jury in America, of which it would appear that the only people who are accused of crimes that actually go to a trial, are those who have the assets to engage an attorney of merit to defend them, or are those that simply will not plea bargain, because they don’t think it is right to make a plea without having had their case heard by an impartial jury.  At this point in American jurisprudence, the criminal justice system, could not function without such an exceedingly high percentage of those accused of a crime, plea bargaining to something that would appear to be lesser, because this criminal justice system does not have even close to the capacity to handle an increase of nineteen times more cases, going through the complete process of a jury trial.  So then, in recognition that the prosecuting arm of the state knows that they don’t have the resources to take case after case to trial, and have little interest in seeing that this is accomplished, they deliberately and with foreknowledge have a strong tendency to “trump-up” charges on those so accused of crimes, to thereby make their bargaining position stronger when it comes to plea bargains, so that the bargain, is seldom a fair bargain, for those so accused of criminal activity.

It has to be said, that perhaps every criminal law on the books is a just law, and perhaps every penalty so associated with those criminal laws is fair and well-reasoned, which would thereby signify that if this is true, there shouldn’t be any plea bargaining at all.  Rather, those who commit the crime, should thereby duly face what they have to face as their fate, and if that so means that even more people would be incarcerated for ever lengthier periods of time, so let it be.  The reason that this doesn’t occur, is not only because we do not have the capacity for all these criminals to be incarcerated, but also the perceived injustice of it, would make this supposed land of liberty and justice for all, appear to other nations to be nothing much more than a modern apartheid state, in which the poor, disadvantaged, and ill-educated are thus rounded up and dispose of in prisons throughout the nation.

In point of fact, those who are the biggest proponents of the necessity of plea bargaining, are the very same, who have little or no interest in justice being served, but rather they just want to take off of the streets, those that annoy them, or are perceived as being an inconvenience, as if these unfortunates are the wretched refuse, which have invaded our pristine shores.  To those then who think and act this way, they represent thus the mantle of injustice and falsehood, to their lasting shame

ATM fees should be lower and progressive

The fact that there are so many Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) would seem to indicate that the general public has a need to extract cash from time to time and desires to be able to do so without having to interact with a physical teller.  This would appear to be a win-win, because consumers that do not take up the labor of a human being is in the scheme of things, more cost effective than those customers that have to go into the banking facility or engage in such through the drive-through window. This signifies that banking institutions could see ATMs as just being the cost of doing business, but it has to be said, that the structure of fees associated with ATMs would strongly imply that ATM fees are, in fact, predatory in nature.  For instance, while many a banking customer understands that when they utilize their own banks’ ATM or a bank that is within their network, or have a relationship with their bank that permits them to be reimbursed for any ATM fees, means that for them, they will not be charged an ATM fee – which for these particular banking customers reflects that their ATM banking experience has all the advantages of being able to conveniently extract cash, without having to pay a noxious fee.  On the other hand, there are plenty of other folks, who typically aren’t as savvy or as knowledgeable, who often are not as organized, and further to the point, typically are far less cash-rich, and also they don’t seem to understand the fee structure of a given ATM, except to understand that they will be charged for the usage of an out-of-network ATM, as well as often being charged by their own bank, for having used an out-of-network ATM, signifying that for them to take out as little as $40 or $60 could be costing them $6 or $7 or possibly more in fees.

When it comes to fees, penalties, and other financial charges, banks seem to well understand that for their customers who have financial assets, that the banks aren’t fixated on “nickel and diming” them because they hope that when these same customers desire to get a home mortgage or a car loan, that the opportunity to make some money will be there for them.  Those though who lack monetary assets and aren’t the type of credit risk that banks care for are seen then as an entity to exploit, which is why the ATM fee structure is the way that it is so that the poor and unenlightened subsidize those that have money and are knowledgeable.

It would seem that a far better way for ATM fees to be structured would be to be fairer to those who utilize such, in which, the best method of being fair, would be to have a progressive ATM fee structure, in which, quite simply, the more that a person withdraws from the ATM, the higher the overall fee, though the percentage of that fee, would still be considerably lower than someone withdrawing just $40.  That way, the person who needs to get a little bit of cash for a planned transaction isn’t charged a fee which amounts to something like 20%, but would instead pay no more than 5%; whereas somebody taking out a larger sum, such as $300 would pay a much larger monetary fee, though the percentage would only amount to something like 1.5%, which seems not only to be fair to all parties, but would still permit the banking institution to get fees from that ATM, but at a far more reasonable level

War profiteering

The art of war is typically a very dirty and very nasty business, but in consideration that warfare has been with us, since time immemorial, it’s fair to say that it isn’t going to all of a sudden, just disappear.  It is one thing when soldiers, conscripted or not, voluntarily or not, fight against the other, in which, they risk both life and limb; whereas, it’s an entirely different thing when those well removed from the dangers of such fighting, see wars as an opportunity to exploit inefficiencies in the logistics of such so as to indulge in their own corrupt minds to extract unmerited profit from that war, often at the expense of not just the nation, but not infrequently, endangering their own soldiers, through shoddy gear, misfiring weapons, inaccurate and unsafe instruments, and spoiled foodstuffs.

Indeed, in any nation in which profit is the main thing, those that are involved in warfare, from the perspective of engaging in contracts, or the fulfilling of those contracts, or in the implementation, so of, have a ripe opportunity to become war profiteers, often because the urgency of situations, makes for excellent opportunities to exploit such, to the advantage of those opportunists.

When we consider who in reality is a traitor to their own nation, one might consider that anybody who changes sides in a war would be marked as a traitor, or those who go about their business in a half-ass way might be considered to have traitorous characteristics.  However, a broader definition of a traitor has got to include those that knowingly pass off bad goods as actually being good, and of which when those very goods are armaments that do not function even close to the reliability or the accuracy of what those weapons are supposed to do, thus endangering our soldiers -- this must therefore be seen as to what it actually is, which is profiteering, by the passing on of those fraudulent goods as being the real deal.

The temptation to war profiteer, is too great for certain people and the entities that support such, because they aren’t satisfied with just making a reasonable profit, but recognize that they can make a whole lot more money by deception, in which, the fog of war, often makes it difficult to know as to not only who the guilty party is, but whether there is even a guilty party to begin with. Indeed, the chain of command typically doesn’t know and often doesn’t have the capacity to know what has fully occurred, along with the salient fact that the chain of command just has to basically deal with the situation as it is, and therefore concentrate upon the business of warfare, above all.

Whether or not a war profiteer can be caught is one thing, but for a certainty, those who are caught, should be severely punished, for anything that puts our soldiers in danger because the weapons or the logistics of what is supposed to happen have been compromised by somebody else who has knowingly provided shoddy goods and materials, is somebody that has sold their soul for profiteering, done so at the expense of their nation, and those that nobly fight for such.

Out-of-wedlock birth rate for Japan, South Korea, and the United States

While in the present day, most people are quite aware that the out-of-wedlock birth rate in the United States, is quite high, of which, in fact, it is estimated to be as of 2021, around 41%, they would also be quite surprised to know how much higher this out-of-wedlock rate is as compared to Japan and South Korea.  In fact, both Japan and South Korea's out-of-wedlock birth rates are extraordinarily low, of which, these reside at around 2%, which is a staggering difference between the United States as compared to these two Asian Nations. in other words, the difference between the United States and South Korea in out-of-wedlock birth rates is really the difference between something that is common in the United States as compared to something that is quite uncommon in South Korea and Japan.

Undoubtedly, there are certainly going to be plenty of people who from a religious angle will decry all of the childbirths occurring in the United States that are out-of-wedlock, though the downside of all of these out-of-wedlock births is of far more concern than just some sort of religious complaint and perspective.  Indeed, from just about any metric, those children who are South Korean or Japanese, are going to live in a society, that is far less violent, far better educated, and far more conducive to a healthy society than what we do see in the dysfunctional United States.

In point of fact, those children that are born out-of-wedlock, vary from circumstances in which they grow up essentially in a single-parent family, or in contrast, in a family of two parents, that have chosen to not be married.  The difference between single-parent families and those that live with both parents is often a very stark contrast between those children that live far more often in impoverished and diminished circumstances, which isn’t good for the proper and wholesome development of those children, and further will be reflected in their eventual success or lack thereof as compared to the far better circumstances and incumbent better results represented by two-parent households.  That is to say, out-of-wedlock births often are a handicap to those children that are born especially within those single-parent conditions, and therefore logic would tell us that this government of, for, and by the people, would want to encourage those of childbearing age, that being married or its equivalency in a stable and healthy relationship, is going to best represent the healthiest environment to produce offspring.

Look, while plenty of people can decry how times have changed, it has to be noted that fellow OECD countries such as South Korea and Japan, have somehow been able to successfully accomplish an impressively high birthrate of children born from married parents, which has been beneficial for those societies.  This would seem to indicate that the United States should reevaluate its priorities and look within its collective character, to determine as to whether or not, it has veered off course from representing a nation that ought to stand for fairness, equality of opportunity, and the pursuit of happiness -- for as it stands right now, those in the United States that are born out of wedlock, are often starting their innocent lives at a severed handicap to those who are born within a married household.

Emancipation: Myth or reality

In today’s world, we take for granted our modern communication modes, which permit us to receive news of interest almost instantaneously.  However, back in the time of the Civil War, communication came primarily through the means of community centers, pamphlets, and newspapers of all sorts, of which, the fastest way to communicate from one area of the nation to the other, was done through the amazing telegraph.  That said, those who could most appreciate these ways of communicating recent news, were those that typically lived in communities of some size, so as to take the best advantage of telegraphs and the like.  However, it has to be remembered that the South had seceded from the Union of States, and had previously put into place restrictions as to what news was permitted or not permitted to be disseminated to those rebellious States. Further to the point, the telegraph was thereby controlled by Southern interests and the Southern point of view, thereby essentially indicating that the news as distributed to Southerners was typically heavily biased to the viewpoint of those that were its leaders and its censors.  This thus indicated, that despite Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation of January 1, 1863, the news that all “slaves, are and henceforward shall be free,” was the exact type of news that slaveowners would have a very strong vested interest in not seeing being known or distributed to those that were their slaves.  In short, despite being freed back on January 1, 1863, that news, would have to be spread primarily through the slave grapevine and whether or not believed, was left to those that were enslaved, for those that were in slavery, knew for a certainty, the penalty for abandonment of their job duties, or in being a runaway.

So too, it’s important to understand, that not only were the vast majority of slaves, illiterate, but also that plantations were in many a case, large in size, so that, slaves from one plantation to another, did not often have the opportunity to communicate with one another in a meaningful way, or even to have the chance to contemplate important breaking news, when so heard.  Still, many a slave, did get the news of their emancipation, and believed such, and thereby looked upon the armies of the North as being their destination of choice, so as to be not only protected by those armies and their armaments, but also to be fed and to have shelter, and thereby also to distance themselves day by day, ever further from their previous condition of servitude.

Yet, it has to be said, though slaves were emancipated in 1863, it was found that even at the conclusion of the Civil War in 1865, a sizeable number of those in slavery did not honestly know that they were free or did not have the capacity to express that freedom, because they lack agency or the protection of the Union to do so.  Further to the point, when Lincoln was assassinated in April of 1865, the belief of being freed was severely discounted when it was rumored that because of Lincoln’s assassination, their emancipation had now been voided.  So then, the reality of emancipation, for many that were enslaved was not effectively January 1, 1863, but rather was considerably later for many so enslaved, because they were rightfully fearful that to believe in a myth or a rumor, could make them to suffer the reality of the lash, even to the point of death.

Our dangerous and toxic forever chemicals

Not everything that scientists work on is going to be beneficial for society and its people.  When it comes to chemicals, that which has been created for a particular purpose such as for cosmetics, paint, fabrics, clothing, firefighting, and a host of other things, we find that while these forever chemicals often perform their duty admirably, they also though present a real problem, because these forever chemicals as currently constituted, typically won’t breakdown to oil, water, or to heat—which indicates the rather unfortunate fact that these forever chemicals that are toxic in the construct are inherently quite dangerous -- for nothing then will stop these toxic chemicals from leaking into and thus becoming part and parcel of our planet, which thereby becomes a real issue to address, for this represents a pollutant that we don’t have a good solution on how to successfully ameliorate.

The main problem with toxic chemicals that will not break down is the very fact that it is its toxicity that is a menace to the human body.  This would clearly indicate that despite the potential commercial benefits of these forever chemicals which might even be great, as well as the given tasks that these chemicals are designed for which are often purposeful and of aid to their designed purpose, is that within the design of these forever toxic chemicals, society has not seen properly put into place what should and needs to be done to protect the human body, first and foremost, from that toxicity.

Indeed, not everything that a given chemist creates is going to be good for the environment or for humanity, despite what good could conceivably come from the usage of that chemical concoction.  This thus signifies that just as manufactured drugs have to go through a process of being regulated through the Food and Drug Administration on behalf of the people, the same sort of governmental oversight needs to be in effect, for toxic forever chemicals, because not only do these forever chemicals not breakdown in our environment, but also because of their toxicity to the human body they present a clear danger that must be either successfully counteracted, somehow, or else be banned.

To believe that somehow manufacturing “superman” chemicals, that aren’t even susceptible to that which represents the equivalency of kryptonite, is going to be safe for the general public is to make a very grave mistake.  Indeed, humankind knows the toxicity of chemicals, which is why at the conclusion of World War I, chemical warfare was banned, because its usage created indiscriminate pain and suffering for all those exposed to such.

The problem with today’s toxic forever chemicals is the dual issue of their toxicity to human beings as well as that chemical concoction not being able to be broken down into safe elements or disposed of in a way and manner that would serve to protect humanity from that toxicity.  Look, it has to be said, that not everything discovered is going to be good for humankind, though it may have some good and valuable features to it; so then, when something has been created in which there isn’t a way to safely deal with that substance or the bad consequences, so of, it needs to be banned, posthaste, for the good of humanity.

FDR’s Forgotten Second Bill of Rights

On January 11, 1944, President Roosevelt gave his eleventh State of the Union Address, in which, as part of that address, he indicated that this republic needed to secure a second Bill of Rights, to assure its citizens a fair opportunity for happiness, economic security, and true independence.  The President then proceeded to list what he considered to be those rights which thus included: the right to a good job that would provide adequate compensation, the right to a decent home, the right to adequate healthcare, the right to adequate Social Security, and the right to a good education.

Here we are, eighty years later, and when we look at FDR’s Second Bill of Rights, the only reasonable conclusion that we can come to is essentially that none of these rights have ever been fully secured for the people, and there appears to be no realistic agenda or pathway that these rights will ever come into effect, in this the richest nation that the world has ever known, which is to America’s great and lasting shame.

While it has to be said, that governmental monies have been periodically devoted to these rights, the wherewithal though to secure these rights, has been sorely lacking.  For instance, despite the fact that America spends an inordinate amount of money on education, our children in the aggregate, are in far too many cases, very poorly educated, and in many a case, functionally illiterate, which is indicative of an educational system that has not served the general public and its children, well or adequately.  Additionally, we find at present, that the monies so needed to secure a decent house in a decent neighborhood, is something that is nothing but a pipedream for millions of Americans.  Also, the Federal minimum wage has not changed since 2009, and is neither indexed to inflation nor is the minimum wage attached to a wage that would represent a “living wage,” and as a further disgrace, there are also still exceptions for certain employees, such as tipped employees, to make even less than that inadequate minimum wage.  So too, despite the billions upon billions of dollars spent on healthcare, we do so find that for the most part, those who are ineligible for Medicare, are often basically responsible for their own healthcare, or receive such through their employment, but of which, at the end of the day, without Universal healthcare, it is the responsibility of the individual to secure such, no matter the affordability of that healthcare, for them.  Finally, while the United States has done a fairly decent job with Social Security for those of retirement age, there are still flaws within that system, of which the main flaw is that there should be for those who are retired, some minimum amount of stipend that all are entitled to, no matter the amount of their lifetime wages.

It seems incredible that back in 1944, there seemed to be a more conscious recognition, that any nation that considered itself to be the greatest nation in the world, would first of all, prove such to its citizens, by demonstrating that its safety net would be inclusive and adequate for those same citizens so that they would be in prime position to live a good and fruitful life.  When we look around at America, today, and see all these enclaves of poverty, of ill-education, of crime, and of general hopelessness, we have to admit that America has failed in its mission to be that beacon of light, and of hope, for those who represent the huddled masses of this nation, for what has occurred is essentially the turning out of that light upon them.

The full price of slavery

In life, there are those that are willing to pay the full measure for that which they have done or participated in that has been wrong, and there are many more who aren’t willing to pay that full measure.  Yet, for justice to be served, those who have done wrong, need to make good on what has occurred, or else this becomes a wound that will never properly heal but will remain an open sore, festering, and oozing pus.

The United States of America had its great civil war, of which, it is estimated that 620,000 men died from that war, with many thousands of more of those men being severely wounded in both mind and in body.  The vast majority of those who died and were wounded were white men, in which, the ultimate resolution of that war, was for the country to become re-united as the United States of America and for slavery as an institution, to be eradicated from this land.

Indeed, the price for freedom and of justice is oftentimes paid in the blood of those who thus have sacrificed their lives in that fight, of which, it was only fitting and proper that those of the white race that were slave-owning or beneficiaries in some respect of that slavery therefore paid in blood with their lives, as a justified form of compensation for those that had been enslaved, which thereby duly occurred.  After all, the inhumanity of slavery, which unjustly took the freedom, the labor, and the humanity from the other, necessitated that those who stole such had then to face the fair hand of justice to thereby right those scales.

For a certainty, those governments, made up of the governed, must answer for that which their governance supports through its institutions, and when such is wrong, that wrong must be corrected with far more than just some sort of abject apology.  In fact, every drop of blood from the lash must be fully paid for in a way and manner that corrects that which is wrong, which is why there never is an easy resolution for that which has been committed as a most serious offense.

While there may not ever be a good time when anyone really wishes to face the music for their bad actions, we do so find, that sooner or later it will have to be faced; and the longer that this is postponed the greater the punishment will subsequently be.  Indeed, all those who try to paper over mistakes, wrongs, and things of that ilk, in the mistaken belief that justice will never be served, have got it all wrong.  There will be justice, and the price of that justice will come at a fair and also a truly terrible cost, but once such is fully paid, this permits then from the ashes of that destruction, hatred, and violence for a new birth of freedom and liberty to occur.  So then, the full price of slavery and the wrongs therein could only be paid when the white man suffered their own considerable heartfelt losses, so meant to enlighten them, that God who has created each of us equally, shall not be mocked.