Government-sponsored hacking operations and the defense of such

When Westerners think of the biggest and most sophisticated hacking operations in the world, what typically comes to mind are China, Russia, and North Korea.  No doubt, these countries do have robust hacking operations, but when we think of resources, budgets, and sure tenacity, we have got to believe that the biggest of them all is our own National Security Agency (NSA).

 So then, whenever we hear politicians decrying any of these other countries as interfering in our governmental and private enterprises, we should probably keep in mind, that the NSA is doing the very same thing to them that they are doing to us, of which, because so much of what is occurring is secretive and hidden from the general public, we can only assume that the NSA is more than holding its own.

 The thing about hacking and the knowledge of such is quite obviously there are two distinct areas to concentrate upon, one of which is offense, where we try to get into other countries’ systems and steal vital information or wreak some general havoc upon such; whereas the other is to run a much better and tighter defense so that we aren’t so susceptible to hacking.  In other words, defense most definitely has its place, and to the degree that we are knowledgeable about certain weaknesses and vulnerabilities within our own, it would behoove this nation and the NSA to tighten those areas up, because that which is vital and of national importance deserves no less.

 In a world in which there are never unlimited resources, it certainly makes sense that we ought to devote more time to defense, and less time and money to offense, because in the end it is more important to protect what we have as contrasted to trying to figure out what the other side is doing and thereby counteracting that.  The bottom line is that if America needs to do a complete rethink as to how we deal with data, secrets, and the general protection of governmental as well as private enterprise vital information, then that is surely what must be done, because it is tiresome to hear about these data breaches again and again, with the sure knowledge that there probability is a lot worse stuff going on that we are not privy too, because of secrecy, confidentiality, and embarrassment.

 The amount of money that is devoted to our national defense is a sum so large that it towers over all other nations, and for that amount of money, the citizens of this nation ought to get something tangible in return, which should be that our secrets and most vital information are thoroughly protected from outside foreign agencies, and therefore, we are not susceptible to their untoward interference.  That said, it doesn’t appear that this is true, which signifies that more needs to be done to protect the homeland, and the incentives for those who work in the NSA should reflect that priority first and foremost.

The American empire is now doomed to failure

America was never meant to be an empire, for its objective from the very beginning was quite clear, which was to bring freedom, liberty, life, and the pursuit of happiness to all mankind, with the clear understanding that all humankind are created equally by God and thus are equally deserving of the same unalienable rights, and the primary purpose of good governance is to secure those rights, now and forevermore.

 This then is the promise, but the reality is that as time has gone on, America has transitioned from the necessity to defend itself as well as to unite the States together into one body politic, to building up its military-industrial-technology complex to such a degree that it represents the premier worldwide power that insists upon also being the world’s policeman.  As big as this nation is in terms of territory and population, it is, in the scheme of things, not so big when we look at the world and its population.  Further to the point, monies expended on the military are monies not spent on enhancing American citizens lives and livelihood, so that whatever the tribute that America insists upon collecting from being that empire is not sufficient to cover its expenses, and whenever a significant portion of that tribute essentially goes into private party’s hands, that presents itself to be a real problem, because an empire that does not have its own fiscal house in order and has no intention to correcting such, will inevitably decline and ultimately fall.

 In truth, if America really believes that it has to be an empire, it would behoove America to be far less bellicose with other nations, and instead to make liaisons that are good for trade on both sides.  Instead, America too often insists upon using force as a cudgel and believes somehow that its military force will get nation after nation to submit to its dictates and its exploitation of the same, but recent history shows that America gets that wrong, again and again.  So too, America has zero interest in seeing that democracy, self-determination, and good Constitutional government be spread throughout the world, but actually prefers to work almost exclusively with dictatorial nations, which America believes makes it easier to conduct business, while continually discounting that this also breeds a whole lot of foreign citizen dissatisfaction.

 It is well to remember that it isn’t so much that an American empire couldn’t be successful, because it could be if it was done right, but rather it's because America insists upon getting what it wants through military force, which typically violates international laws and is clearly inhumane via the punishment and death doled out to foreign civilians.  All of this sets the example that America is no paragon of virtue, and what it professes to believe in is an absolute lie, which signifies that America deserves little or no respect, because it does not respect others, and because America has extended itself so far, it is vulnerable to being hurt in so many different ways, so that it is inevitable that there will be an unraveling of America, first slowly, and then suddenly, till the empire is no more.

This is how to make America great again

America is the richest nation in aggregate in the entire world, but the distribution of that money is not fair and clearly, especially in recent times, reflects that the superrich are getting ever richer, the middle class is being squeezed, and the lower class is falling ever further behind with seemingly no real hope that their situation will successfully change. 

 When it comes to the wealth of this nation, those monies are divided between labor, which represents employees' pay for the work that they do, and the balance goes to those who control the capital, such as in the form of profits, interest, and capital retention.  This signifies that the higher the percentage of money that goes to labor, the more of that wealth will be disbursed to the people as a whole, as contrasted to the more wealth that goes into the hands of those who control capital, which will make for an ever-increasing inequality between those who primarily labor, as contrasted to those who own and control capital.

 When it comes to the United States, we find that the labor share of income and wealth is declining, which therefore means that the capital share of income and wealth is increasing.  It doesn’t need to be that way, for if this nation made it a higher priority to tax more heavily capital, including capital gains, and tax less those who labor, and especially reduced all forms of taxation on those that make less than the median wage, while increasing progressive taxation of all forms on those making more than the median wage, would help to therefore redistribute the income.  Further to the point, in recent decades, the labor union force has been decimated, and when labor is unable to collectively join together, it becomes much more problematic for labor to get its fair share.  Finally, this government, which is supposed to be of, for, and by the people, seems to have thrown in its hat entirely to those who control and hold capital, which signifies that rather than our government doing its fair part to help level the playing field, it is doing the very opposite of such.

 Look, it has to be said, the more wealth disparity that we see in America, the more pressure that is exerted against the middle class, and the less secure workers are in the workforce makes for a bad brew, which clearly represent why this nation is heading in the wrong direction, reflecting a nation that clearly divides itself between those that have everything as contrasted to those that are just holding their own, in addition to the underclass that has little or nothing.  This therefore is not the mark of a great country, but rather represents what we would see in nations of old, in which the superrich, elites, and those that serve them lord it over everybody else, and until such a time as the labor share of income and wealth, begins to increase, the terrible troubles that America has will continue, and if things do not improve, they will get even worse, which is extremely disappointing for that country which proclaimed more than 150 years ago that it was the last best hope of Earth.

The country with the largest middle class is not America; it is China

A simple definition of those who represent the middle class is those people who have a steady enough income to be able to handle and to cover the necessities of life, while also having extra money that can be set aside as savings or spent on discretionary items.  We read at https://baike.baidu.com/ that “The National Bureau of Statistics uses an annual income standard of 100,000 to 500,000 yuan for a three-person household, corresponding to about 140 million households,” to be considered middle class in China, which thus indicates that China has a much larger middle class than the United States, which in fairness to the United States, we need to consider that China’s population is far larger.  Nevertheless, for all those who believe wholeheartedly that capitalism and the American way represent the pinnacle of what makes for a great society, they need to be mindful that perhaps this is not true.

 The argument could be made that how big a given country’s middle class is, represents how successful that country is in seeing that there is a fair distribution of income, which makes for a population that is going to be in aggregate, more comfortable in their circumstances, because those countries that have a very small portion of the population which is superrich, and a significant portion of their population that is poor and struggling, should be seen as a failure to the people, because the wealth is overly concentrated into too few hands, which thus typically makes for a government which is oppressive in all of its many forms, in order to keep the general public in its place, while also not taking care of the issue of such great wealth disparity.

 Indeed, the happy equilibrium that governments should try to achieve on behalf of those so governed is to see that as many of the population as possible make a living wage, which would, in and of itself, help to alleviate many of the common problems that trouble countries, such as poverty, crime, civil disobedience, and so on.  After all, people who complain often have an underlying reason for what bothers them, and the best governance is that government which makes it a priority to alleviate what troubles the population, and when successfully accomplished, makes for a happier and healthier society.

 The reality is that China has, in its own way, accomplished something of real significance, because China was a very poor country not so long ago, and yet, within the last few decades, it has achieved incredible gains that have been beneficial to millions of Chinese.    Whether the United States believes that there are any lessons to be learnt from China’s economic success is something that our government needs to consider, and it would behoove that government of, for, and by the people to do so, because to dismiss China as an irrelevancy because their form of government is different is to miss the point, because the point is, that without a strong and vibrant middle class, America has failed its own people, which this, of all countries, should never even be at play, or else it could be said that America is no longer great, and perhaps has already run its race.

“Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.”

The above quotation comes from Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black regarding the New York Times Co. v. United States (the Pentagon Papers case).  These words should be taken to heart by all those who are citizens of these United States, for a free press, free assembly, and freedom of speech are absolutely mandatory and essential for anyone to consider themselves to actually be free.  The reason why the government desires so often to restrain our freedoms and why the citizens of this nation must always fight back is that the government far too often isn’t interested in performing its duties via the consent of the governed but rather prefers that those who are its citizens be obedient to its dictates, and thereby what is unknown to the public should remain unknown, because the government does not desire it to be exposed to the light, because they do not want the truth to be known.

 The very point of freedom is for people to be able to express themselves in a way and manner that permits them to have their say.  Additionally, the best and most informative press, social media, and television is never going to be from those that simply serve as a mouthpiece of the government, but rather from those entities that ask those inconvenient questions and thereby holds that government to account, because that government, of, for, and by the people needs to be responsive to the people, as opposed to desiring their silence in the hope that silence equates to approval.

 Indeed, the more open and transparent a government is, in all that it says and does on behalf of the governed, the better that government is going to be for the people, as opposed to that government behaving in a way in which the most important issues of the day are hidden from the public, or publicize in a way in which such is deceptive or even worse, represent outright lies to the people so as to trick the public as to what is really going on, which is a betrayal of what good governance is supposed to be.

 Any responsible government needs to be held accountable to the people, which therefore necessitates that the people need to have a press that is not beholden to that government or compromised by corporate interests, in which pleasing certain entities, especially for profit, trumps the vital news that is meant for the public to know, but instead is suppressed or distorted. 

 We, as citizens, have a responsibility to see that our government is responsive to our needs and concerns, of which, this necessitates our access to what our government is doing on our behalf, and therefore the more secrets that are held back from the public knowing which should be known, makes for a situation in which the whole truth is not known because it is hidden, which is not what good governance is supposed to be about and should be minimized as much as possible.

 In sum, a free people, in order to be truly free, need openness from their government, so that they can see what is really going on, and from there, have their input, typically enabled by a free press that lays all the cards on the table available for the citizens' conscientious perusal.

The wrong friends make for a disappointing and regretful life

As the saying goes, birds of a feather flock together, which means we can learn a lot about someone simply by studying who they hang around with.  No doubt, some good people do spend significant time with some not-so-good people, for various reasons, sensible or not, who somehow are still able to maintain their good character traits, but we need to see this as the exception and not the rule, for truly, when we see somebody that we know well who is hanging around with people who legitimately have bad reputations, it’s difficult to believe that this hasn’t rubbed off onto them in a bad way, as well.

 That said, because we are free will individuals, and thus have agency as to who we will or will not spend our time with, it signifies that the friends that we make or the people that solicit us to be their friends, are really at our volition as to what occurs or doesn’t occur, of which, those that make the wrong friends, have taken a turn onto a road that is best avoided, because the wrong friends, are going to have a strong tendency to lead us to all sorts of bad events, so that when good potential meets up with the wrong friends, this is in all probability going to lead to a life in which that good potential has been vacated for something that is unbecoming of what that good potential could have become.

 As a parent or as a mentor, we should make it our point to want to know who appears to be friends with those that we are vested in, and when those friends are lacking in good character traits, it’s important to step in as a protective agent.  No doubt, we don’t always read the situation right, which is why snap judgments are often not going to be the best judgments, indicating that we should observe, listen, learn, and interject as need be, so as to ascertain the character of those who would be friends with people that we have a responsibility to.

 Still, at the end of the day, in life, each of us makes choices, for better or for worse, and so we can take well-meaning advice and do something constructive with it, or we can ignore such, because we know better, or perhaps because we don’t care to hear what we do not desire to hear.  Nevertheless, it’s important to comprehend that we ultimately are the captains of our own fate, and those who pick wrong will surely regret that decision, sooner or later, because the wrong friends will take us down paths that we need not have ever entered, yet we did, and the price we pay will be our own to pay.

 All of the above signifies that we ought to be mindful of the friends that we make and that we have, because the right friends have our best interests in mind and prove that to us when it matters most, and the wrong friends won’t have our back, because when the chips are down, they won’t even be there for us.

The not-so-caring United States of America

One would be excused for thinking that families are of real importance in America, but the reality is that when ii comes to the multitude of single-family households America could do far better in contributing to their welfare and somehow doesn’t seem to understand that single-family households that are under constant pressure to meet expenses and to take care well of their children are probably not going to have the best or most desired good outcomes for their children which isn’t good for those children, and sure isn’t good for society at large.

 To believe, somehow, that America simply births more bad people which thereby creates more violent crime, of assault, murder, and rape is not to understand that those that come from dire circumstances in which their infrastructure is inferior to what it should and ought to be, when it comes to civil safety, schooling, opportunity, and valued mentors in their neighborhood are prone to seeing that more of those types of people aren’t going to be in a good place to become good and valued citizens, but rather are going to be susceptible to being troublesome and unhappy, which is one of the salient reasons why we have so much violence and dissatisfied people in America.

 In actuality, in the absence of reducing or somehow turning around the prevalence of single-family households, then America needs to do more to contribute to the well-being of those, especially in single-family households, who need a far more robust safety net, as opposed to taking the attitude that this is what they get for not making responsible decisions. In other words, a laissez-faire attitude to single-family households signifies that America is happy just the way that things currently are, which, if this is true, is incredibly short-sighted because it doesn’t take all that much effort or an incredible amount of money to come up with programs that would help to stabilize and to subsidize single-family households by providing better community amenities to alleviate some of the stress and biggest issues that single-family households have to contend with.

 The bottom line is that children are vulnerable to all sorts of bad things, especially when they don’t have a strong safety net that sees all children as a valuable resource to be nurtured and to be given a fair opportunity to get their hands on the best that America represents.  The least that this nation owes its own children is to create the infrastructure in which truly no child is left behind, because those that help to provide children with the necessary mentorship, ethics, character, and the importance of a good education, are investing into that which will help to make America a better nation, because the youth of this country are the future of this country, thereby signifying that we need to do more to be more inclusive of all of our children, and especially to concentrate our efforts upon those who are most vulnerable, because when we do not, society ultimately suffers from that short-sighted and ungenerous decision.

Defense spending: China vs. USA

No country in the world comes close to expending more money on its Defense spending than the United States of America. In fact, America’s military budget is approximately four times the amount that China spends on its military budget, though, because China’s labor rate is significantly lower, it signifies that China gets more bang for the buck. While it is true that America has the largest economy in the world, it has to be admitted that China’s economy has been relentlessly growing and is getting ever closer to matching America, though to actually get there will take several more years, but this event will surely happen, as China’s population is approximately four times that of the United States, and for a certainty, numbers matters.

 A significant reason why America’s Defense budget dwarfs not just China’s Defense budget, but in actuality measures nearly 40% of all global military expenditures has got to do with America’s intent to be seen as a true global empire, and because the world is so big, and has so many troubling areas and potentially troubling areas, it thus necessitates a huge military budget, year after year.  Yet, within all those monies spent, it doesn’t seem to permanently resolve anything, which has got to be seen as a huge disappointment, because despite America’s massive military power, it doesn’t equate to a world in which all is stable, and everything is quiescent.  In fact, it could be argued that America’s vast Defense expenditures seem to necessitate America getting involved in just about every area that piques its interest, which actually makes for a less stable world, and therefore less peace and quiet.

 When it comes to Defense spending, China prefers to keep it pretty basic, which is to focus on taking care of protecting and augmenting their regional power, and to not waste much time or energy trying to become a worldwide military powerhouse, which China believes does them no good.  Rather, China likes to make investments in other nations and to trade with other nations, while also making it its point to not be bellicose in its attitude or in its actions with other nations.  Perhaps, China, is trying to fool America, and in actuality is just biding its time before wreaking its own havoc, or perhaps it could be said, that’s the sensible way it desires to go about its business, because excessive military expenditures, not only takes away from where those monies could be better allocated, but also seems to encourage those that receive those military funds to look for trouble to thereby have to deal with such, to thus justify that military expenditure.

 The bottom line really comes down to the fact that nations need to make a conscious choice of where they are going to invest and to expend their money, for no nation can do everything, but rather choices need to be made, and for the United States the choice clearly has been, that being the biggest and baddest military power in the world, second to none, makes sense for America, but it needs to be taken into full account, that if those calculations have been wrong, it has in its own way, weakened America, not strengthened her, and therein lies the rub.

Everybody for themselves makes for an unequal and alienated society

Look, it has to be said, while selfishness has its place, quite obviously, if everybody were primarily selfish, this would make for a very troubling society, because a healthy society is built around the need for trust, cooperation, and also a willingness to lend a helping hand to one another, because in the end, we are all in this together, so we all ought to work together so as to achieve worthwhile things.  Indeed, as much as some people want to believe that everything that they achieved came from their own individual effort, and thus they are deserving of everything that comes their way, they really need to be mindful that along that journey, connections and friends have been made which have contributed to that success and to ignore that fact, belittles those contributions and is inconsiderate to those that were part and parcel to a given person’s success.

 So too, to live in any society in which it essentially comes down to a dog-eats-dog type of mindset, is going to be very bad for that society, because relentless competition and selfishness in everything makes for a society that has no inherent cohesion and, further to the point, makes for a society that is not capable of building real trust one with another.  A better society is a society that recognizes not only the worth of the other, but actively wants to cooperate and to work with the other, especially considering that each of us has capabilities as well as limitations, and thus finding those that are good with that which represents a weakness for us, and vice versa, makes for a more successful and more balanced society.

 In this world, we will be challenged, but there isn’t any reason when a challenge comes our way, that we can’t lean upon those that are quite capable of helping us in vanquishing and thus overcoming that challenge, which is one of the salient reasons why we ought to be less self-centered and more of a mind that others not only bring talent to the table of life, but are oftentimes quite willing to lend us a hand, for the overall satisfaction in seeing that they helped to make us a better person for having seen us accomplished something of merit.

 Indeed, it could be said that in as many instances as reasonably possible, society would be appreciably better off by structuring more of the things that we interact with that necessitate cooperation between people, as opposed to structuring activities in a manner in which we have to compete against one another.  While competition has its place, it has to be acknowledged that societies that are overly fixated upon competition are the same that lend themselves to exploitation, uncaring, greed, selfishness, entitlement, and so on, which are the type of characteristics that a prudent society would desire to see reduced.  So then, we as a people aren’t really a people if we see one another as something to fear or conquer from a competitive standpoint, as opposed to a desire to bond with one another, so as to collectively strengthen ourselves.

A suggested revamping of the Electoral College vote

Presently, there are two States, Nebraska and Maine, that do not have a winner-take-all Electoral College structure when it comes to Presidential elections, but rather have structured their respective States under the congressional district method so that the winner of the popular vote gets two electoral votes, and the winner of each individual congressional district gets one electoral vote. This thus signifies that in these States, typically one’s individual vote matters more than it would in a winner-take-all State.  Further to the point, if all States adopted the congressional district method, we wouldn’t have Presidential candidates exclusively spending all their time and money on so-called battleground States, but rather they would have to devote more of their time to States, previously taken for granted, because States would no longer be structured as winner-take-all.

 The fly though in the ointment is the fact that many States have their congressional districts gerrymandered, so that the people’s vote is not really equal at all, because congressional districts are deliberately structured to favor one particular party over the other.  However, there is a sensible workaround to this, which isn’t so much to eliminate gerrymandering and to provide fair congressional districts, not because that is a bad idea, but mainly because it just isn’t going to be enacted, because the powers that be aren’t going to allow it.  Instead, each of the two major parties would have their fair say, by a meeting in which, for example, if there are six congressional districts, a coin is flipped and whichever party wins that flip thus creates the first congressional district subject to some sensible rules and conditions in that structuring of that district, which is thus followed by the other political party structuring the second and third congressional districts within that State, then the party that went first, would structured the fourth and fifth congressional districts, and finally the other party would simply have the sixth district.  No doubt, these would still be gerrymandered congressional districts, but because each party has had its say, it would signify that the representation of those districts as a whole would more closely approximate the population makeup and desires of the main political parties of that State.

 All of the above would make for a far more interesting election, because, as opposed to winner-take-all, there would be much more at risk, for in this structure, just about every State would basically be in play.  Further to the point, this revamping of the Electoral College would more closely adhere to being in conformance with the popular vote, which makes sense, because it does seem weird and unfair that there are those occasions in which the winner of the popular vote is not elected President because they have lost the Electoral College vote.  Thus, the implementation of this revised Electoral College vote system would make it so that more of the people and their respective votes would effectively have their say, which is good in a democratic voting system and a necessary improvement over what we have today.

More tax audits should be implemented on high-net-worth individuals and high-grossing corporations

Each year, the federal government creates a budget, and as it is presently, we find that governmental expenditures don’t come close to covering what the government receives in taxation, which doesn’t even make sense considering that America is the richest nation in the world.  This would presuppose that those who have money simply aren’t being taxed enough, and further to the point, that the tax laws aren’t robust enough in the collection of those taxes. 

 The best way to amend how our tax system works is to see that high-net-worth individuals are audited at a much higher rate than they are presently, along with corporations that have assets of $500 million or above, should by law, be annually audited, and those that are public corporations should have their tax return made fully public, so that the citizens of this nation can ascertain as to whether or nor huge megacorporation’s such as Microsoft, Exxon, Amazon, Apple, and so on, are paying even close to the current corporate flat tax rate of 21% and if not, what can be done to see that these megacorporation’s who could easily afford to pay what they ought to pay, do their duty in paying their fair share of taxes as opposed to making self-serving comments that they pay “all the taxes that they legally owe,” which basically means that they have sophisticated workarounds that reduces their taxes almost to an irrelevancy.

 If this nation truly believes that one of the purposes of taxation is a redistribution of those monies collected for the greater good of the population, then it ought to make it its point to see that those who can readily afford to pay more in taxes pay their fair share, rather than them hiding behind the most sophisticated tax dodges ever created by humankind, which should be seen as something unbecoming of a patriotic citizen or a patriotic megacorporation.  Indeed, those who don’t pay their fair share of taxes should be outed and shamed because they are failing to contribute their fair share to reducing the federal deficit that this nation urgently needs to turn around, and they are basically enriching themselves at the expense of the most vulnerable among us.

 For a certainty, many of these high-net-worth individuals and high-grossing corporations are not paying their fair share in taxes, and the best way to make this more visible to the public at large is to make these tax returns more accessible to the general public so that they can see for themselves that those that are the richest, and the most elite, are in many a case, paying less in taxes, than those that are of the middle class, which is not how this progressive tax system is supposed to work, and quite obviously not how taxation should work if one of the prime purposes of such is the redistribution of wealth, because as it is, the rich have never been richer, which has just about everything to do with the fact that they don’t truly pay their appropriate share in taxes and readily get away with it, without suffering opprobrium, which they rightly should.

Capitalism thrives on cheap labor, which is why our jobs are outsourced

While it has to be admitted that the players in capitalism are not all the same in the sense of how they treat labor, it has also got to be admitted that some of the largest capitalistic companies and also some of the most profitable corporations are those that use an unseemly amount of cheap overseas labor which they willingly exploit to improve not just their bottom line, corporate bonuses, and stockholder return, but essentially to eviscerate those domestic corporations that do not use cheap foreign labor, thus making it their point, that profits above all, trump just about everything else.

 No doubt, labor is a huge cost component when it comes to most corporations, so it sort of makes sense that corporations would want to see if there was a way to reduce such an expense, or to get more out of that labor, of which, quite obviously once a given company looks outside their own borders, there is that sure recognition that there are plenty of developing countries that have a multitude of cheap labor which is available, and since these developing countries desire to have their people employed, it would seem to be a win-win scenario; but forgotten in the noise is the basic fact that domestic corporations have a responsibility to do right by their domestic population, and the outsourcing of jobs seems to be one of those things that not only hurts domestic employment, as well as serving to undermine labor unions, but it sure doesn’t seem very patriotic to that nation which permitted these artificial creations of the state to be created as corporations to begin with, that they deliberately outsource so much labor.

 While it could be argued that those that would limit corporations to just having a provincial viewpoint is way too limiting, as well as being destructive or detrimental to what capitalism is meant to be, it needs to be recognized that the outsourcing of labor, should in all fairness to those of our domestic labor force, necessitate some basic sort of accommodation, or else, what will happen, is that the middle class will be hollowed out, and thereby what will subsequently occur will be an upper elite of the privileged few, and more and more those that have little or nothing, which lends itself to unease of all sorts and varieties, which isn’t becoming of any nation that purports to have a desire to be great.

 Indeed, to find cheap labor isn’t a daunting task, because almost everyone desires to make a living, and when the choices are limited for whatever reason, laborers will take what comes their way, because those who control the capital and are backed by the government in their relentless pursuit of profit are in the pole position to reduce their labor costs through that cheap labor which is great for that corporation. Still, it does come at a cost, with winners and losers, and the result is the imbalance we see throughout societies, which doesn’t bode well for peace, justice, or well-being.

What makes for the best government

The very first thing we need to do when we think about the type of governance that would be most beneficial for the people as a whole is to recognize that we are entitled to think these things through so as to come up with an ideal government, as opposed to simply believing that whatever our government is at present is the way it is going to be now and in the future.  Indeed, when we look around the world, we find many Constitutions and governmental structures that use the noblest-sounding words and seem to be on the right track, but the follow-through in virtually all instances falls well short of where that governance is supposed to be.

 Logically, it makes sense that the prime purpose of government is to help to create the structure that will be of most benefit to the people, so that those necessary things such as reliable electricity, clean water, sewage, good roads, environmental controls, employment, taxation, safety, and so on are all vital areas that our governance should be concerned with, and to the degree it can make these things to be better and more efficient, it should do its part to make this so.  So too, for this to be readily accomplished,  would seem therefore to require a buy-in from the general public so that they therefore do their good part to contribute to these very things being accomplished and implemented at a competent and meaningful level, because the bottom line is that unproductive citizens, who are not engaged, or prefer to simply live off the government’s dole, are a burden upon the state, and though a caring state should lend a helping hand to those truly in need, we have to consider that in fairness to others, those that can contribute something of substance should be encouraged, or more than encouraged, to do so.

 Indeed, how good the governance of a given country is has a lot to do with not just who the representatives are of the people, but also the people themselves, for we do find that the more educated and engaged the people are, the better the result will be.  Additionally, those who labor hard should be entitled to receive fair pay for that labor, which will permit them thereby to live a decent life, for the more people that have a stake in their community, the healthier that community will be.  This thus signifies that it isn’t so much what our country can do for us, or even what we can do for our country, but rather it has everything to do with government working hand-in-glove with the people, for the expressed purpose that all are fairly entitled to have the accouterments that make for a happy and satisfying life, which consist of, but isn’t limited to, freedom of mind and body, fair opportunity, competent educational facilities, public safety, unalienable human rights, equal justice under the law, and a government that administers itself under the consent of the governed.

Escaping a situation is not the same thing as overcoming it

In life, we will be challenged.  For if not, how would it be determined that we have learnt our lessons well and, in that learning, have properly applied that knowledge?  This is why we will be tested, time and time again, and those who rise up and pass their tests are the very ones who advance to the only destination worth reaching, whereas those who do not will be subject to more trials and tribulations until they overcome them.

 That said, there are plenty of people who are quite adept at escaping a rather troublesome situation and, in that escape, somehow believe that they have overcome it.  instead, what has truly occurred is that they have delayed the day of reckoning, but that reckoning will still need to be faced, and while it could be said that there are those times when escape has its place, in the end, though, we are meant to face up to what we have to attend to, and as much as we might desire that this should not occur, it will occur, until we face what needs to be faced, and have overcome it.

 Each of us will face challenges, like it or not, and those challenges are meant to make us a better and thereby a more complete person, for they are not structured to defeat us or to set us back, because their purpose is to improve our character.  So then, those that will not face their challenges, or at a minimum are preparing themselves for those challenges, are the very same that are not growing, and because they are not bettering themselves, they are closing the door on getting to where they need to get to, which is why it is important to see challenges as not just the opportunity to prove our mettle, but also as the very purpose of living this life, for it is what we become through our actions, that defines who and what we really are.

 All those who just desire to live an easy life will recognize, sooner or later, that laziness does not benefit a person.  So too, those who make it their point to escape their responsibilities are the same who are just delaying that which will have to be faced, and the longer the delay, the harder it will be to overcome, because to believe that avoidance is somehow an attribute that is becoming, is to misconstrue the obvious.

 Those then that we should admire are those who have prepared themselves well to accomplish what needs to be accomplished, and thereby who do not give up when they meet resistance or suffer disappointment, but rather dust themselves off and try and try again, until they achieve through their merit and grit what they were meant to achieve.  Not only should we admire them for doing so, but we should ourselves endeavor to be that type of person, because in the end, that is what is required of all of us, without exception.

Ben and Jerry’s CEO 5 to 1 salary ratio to that of the lowest-paid employee

It seems like eons ago that Ben and Jerry’s structured their company so that the highest-paid employee would make no more than 5 times the salary of the lowest-paid employee.  Regrettably, Ben and Jerry’s was eventually bought out by Unilever, and though that ratio had changed in the ensuing years to something much higher, it is no longer part of the Ben and Jerry’s corporate mindset.  While there isn’t any good reason why other corporations could not follow this same sort of ratio formula, we find that while there are a few that do have a reasonable ratio between CEO pay and the lowest-paid employee, this, though, is the exception and seldom the rule.  Instead, we have a situation in which there are CEOs who, with their stock options in conjunction with other parts of their compensation package, are making more than $100 million annually, which is a true reflection that this nation is separating itself, in which the very few have everything and then some, whereas more and more Americans struggle paycheck to paycheck.

 It is hard to justify that any CEO should get 1000x or even more than what the lowest-paid employee receives, and further that this is somehow the way that capitalism should work, of which that belief seems to be that this is beneficial for the country as a whole, because it is part and parcel of the free enterprise system, but the reality is that it just reflects pure greed.  No doubt, CEOs deserve to make a decent amount of money, especially when it can be proven that it is they, and they alone, which has produced all that extra income and profit for the corporation, but in actuality, it’s hard to believe that just one person, no matter how skilled and astute that they are is truly worth more than 1000 times the lowest-paid employee, but rather there should be some sort of reasonable cap on how much a given CEO should make as their full compensation package which takes into account, that corporations consist of a body of employees, working together, to be of benefit to that corporation and hopefully, as well, to the marketplace that they sell their products or provide a service to.

 A world in which there is a better and a fairer distribution of the profits so made via a corporation is going to make for a healthier society than a society in which so many still do not make a living wage and therefore struggle paycheck to paycheck, making for a rather unsatisfactory life for them, and a more troubling society for most everyone.  Indeed, a responsible corporation is that corporation which believes that part of its mission is to pay a fair wage for a fair day’s work, and further to the point, makes sure that the profits that the corporation makes are fairly distributed to those who make up that corporation.  To follow this sort of structure is to be a responsible corporate citizen, who thus does their fair part to help make society better through their good contribution to it. 

Obedience and protest

A close-minded government is a government which doesn’t really see its citizens as having agency and basically prefers to see them as just being subjects, under their control and command, of which those subjects should simply be obedient to those that are its leaders; whereas an open-minded government recognizes that its legitimacy comes from the consent of those so governed, and that the purpose of good governance is to be of beneficence to the people.

 We find in today’s world that oftentimes the government has significant control of not just the policing arm of the state but also the judicial arm as well, signifying that the government has the sheer ability to intimidate the people, rightly or wrongly, when it feels the need to do so, and hence when it comes to protest of all types, those that are its citizens, have a reason to be concerned and worried, because when the people are not readily permitted to vocalize or to demonstrate that they are unhappy or dissatisfied about certain policies, then the people are not free, and as a people they do not have liberty, because they are effectively subject to the whims and dictates of the day, without having recourse to see that these things are at a minimum, questioned and examined.

 In life, from a very young age, we are instructed by our parents to be obedient to their demands, and when that obedience is structured for our own good, because our parents have a better perspective, more life experience, and typically know better, it certainly makes sense.  Nevertheless, there comes that time when we are no longer children and therefore have not only the right to think for ourselves, but also the right to question what authority figures are instructing us to do, especially when we feel that obedience to what they are insisting upon appears to be wrong or imprudent.

 As citizens in what is supposed to be a responsible and citizen-represented government, we have the right to call that government to account, for that government is supposed to be under our consent, and whenever there is a difference of opinion, we have the right to project and to protest our complaints, of which, the purpose of doing so, is to effect change, or at a minimum, to bring to attention those necessary things that should be subject to a discussion or debate and whenever the people’s voice is silenced, through intimidation or other unfair actions, without having had their fair say, then the people have been dismissed as something akin to what occurs to a hard-headed child by their dominating parents, which is not how this is suppose to play out, for either we have agency and therefore the right to express our viewpoint, through protests of all sorts, or else we aren’t really citizens, at all, but instead are under the thumb of a government, that is behaving in a manner that is destructive of our unalienable rights, and therefore deserves not our unquestioned obedience.

The other genocides

When people are questioned as to their knowledge about genocides, the most common answer to a known genocide is typically going to be the Holocaust genocide perpetrated by the Nazis, primarily against Jews, but also including the killing of the disabled, the feeble-minded, and gypsies.  If this were truly the only genocide in all of history, it would be well worth remembering as an object lesson of mankind’s inhumanity to its own. However, unfortunately, genocides have been a rather common occurrence throughout modern history as the strong and well-positioned have, time and time again, systematically killed those whom they considered to be an annoyance to them.

 That is to say, in the 20th century, we had, for example, the Armenian genocide, the Cambodian genocide, the Rwandan genocide, the Herero and Namaqua genocide, along with many others in which those who were the oppressed and distinctly targeted were purged from various regimes, in which these tragedies, though not forgotten, have clearly left an endless trail of tears that is demonstrative proof that the killing powers of governments, or of paramilitary forces are absolutely cruel and they seemingly have little or no remorse for the taking away of people’s lives, who they don’t value and thereby desire to silence, so as to take over property, assets, and territory, all typically done to augment one’s own and also to assert control over the population for the expressed benefit of those in power.

 The main reason why in this so-called enlightened age we see genocide still occurring again and again, isn’t so much that mankind has become even more evil and greedy, because in all probability mankind hasn’t changed all that much over the ensuing years, but has more to do with the fact that mankind has developed incredibly sophisticated weapons, logistics, and skillsets, previously unknown, that are extremely good in accomplishing the mass killing of those that get in their way, and once the killing starts, it has a tendency to snowball into more and more killing, mainly because the weapons so being used are far less personal, then something like hand-to-hand combat, and thus means those with the right armaments, who also lack a good conscience, can get done what they desire to get done, because the armaments do all of the heavy lifting.

 So then, despite our knowledge of what is right and what is wrong, people’s unalienable rights are still violated all of the time, and when a particular unfavored group of people with similar characteristics, such as of color, or of religion, or of territory occupied, is deliberately targeted and then killed, in one form or another, this is genocide.  The decision that needs to be made for all the nations that make up this world is what is the purpose of the United Nations, or any group of nations similar to this, if it will make not just a principled stand against what is quite obviously genocide, but actually to do something to stop or stymie such, as opposed to acknowledging that it is genocide, or appears to be genocide, but cares not a whit to do anything constructive, other than to label that which labels itself.

Scamming the baby boom generation

As it has been said by Willie Sutton when asked about why he robbed banks, he responded: “Because that's where the money is.”  The bottom line then when it comes to all the multitude of scams that prey on the baby boom generation, is that it really comes down to the fact that the baby boom generation, in aggregate, has a tremendous amount of assets, whereas all those desiring such riches, domestic as well as those outside this country that don’t have much, and thereby desire to have something but lack a moral compass, are going to be highly motivated to get that money and therefore will concentrate their efforts the most upon those that not only have the money but seem highly susceptible to getting that money from.

 For an absolute certainty this country should do a whole heck of a lot more to protect the elderly and to protect all of its citizens from scams that wrongly take from the affluent and well off, in what amounts to a form of robbery, in which, those that are the perpetrators are either not even being caught, or when caught, aren’t paying a high enough price for the crime that they have committed, perhaps because it is classified as a “white collar” crime.

 The important point is that this country runs on money, and those that have money that they have fairly earned over their lifetime, are thereby scammed so badly that their assets have been devastated because they have been fooled, bamboozled, or just plain taken advantage of, thus represents a great disservice to those of the baby boom generation, and there ought to be more done from a governmental and law enforcement perspective to protect these baby boomers from being so easily scammed in any of its myriad forms.

 Perhaps one of the ways to reduce such monetary robbery of the baby boom generation is to make the general public more aware of all the types of common scams that are prevalent through providing timely and informative public announcements of all sorts, done through the television, media, and the like, while also providing these same people with the resources to address their concerns and complaints to an agency that has the resources to do something constructive to help and to protect them.  So too, it needs to be more readily recognized that financial institutions that the baby boomers utilized on a common basis probably need to have more robust guardrails in place so as to better protect baby boomers from being taken advantage of.

 Finally, it has to be said that as people age, they typically become more vulnerable not only from a cognitive standpoint but also from an emotional one, as well, which is why those who prey upon baby boomers should be viewed as a predatory clear and present danger, that should not only be publicly shamed for their ill behavior, but ought to suffer a more appropriate punishment for the harm that they are doing and have done to those that did them no wrong.

The petulant leader

Great countries are led by great leaders, and a great leader is someone who is wise, mature, well-educated, calm, considerate, thoughtful, a collaborator, and also takes into account that the prime purpose of good government is to benefit the people as a whole.  That said, regrettably, a lot of countries aren’t led by great leaders, but rather there is a strong tendency for the leader to be someone who is beholden not to the people but rather to the elites, powerful business leaders, insiders of all types, and their own outsized ego.  Still, as bad as that is, it becomes even worse whenever we have a leader who is so insecure that anything other than total obedience to their dictates is considered to be a form of dissent, which they will not long tolerate.

 The problem with an egotistical leader is because they believe that they have to have their way, and because they are very powerful, they therefore don’t believe that there is a need to make a case to the people even when the Constitution stipulates that the leader is supposed to serve the people, but instead the decisions that are going to be made are going to be made strictly from the perspective of what the leader wants, and all those that do not do the leader’s bidding will be summarily dealt with in a way that is unfair, undemocratic, and unbecoming of a representative government.

 The problem, especially with a petulant leader, is that the leader just wants to have their way, come what may, and cares not a whit what has to be done behind the scenes, or right out in front of their eyes, as long as they get their way, because that is all that matters to them.  Basically, a petulant leader doesn’t see anyone other than their inner circle as having true agency, and because the people don’t have that agency, the leader believes that he has the right to have his way, and those who get in the way of his commands are those who will suffer an undesirable fate.

 When the leader is petulant, this means that the world revolves around the leader, and within that world there isn’t any nuance, nor is there any real reason for a discussion or a debate, for pretty much, the people are looked upon as pawns that the leader has total control of, and with the help of a robust policing arm and a justice department that does the leader’s bidding, this is how things get done and stay done.  The upshot, though, of the people having to deal with an petulant leader, is that there is a constant and sustained undercurrent of dissent that will not go away, and will not relent, until the people get satisfaction, because the unalienable nature of the people’s being is to be free, to make their own choices, and to pursue that which brings happiness to them, all of which signifies that petulant leaders, will in one way or another, when they meet their end, consequently bring a renewed period of hope of meaningful change for the betterment of the people.

Those who see criticism as a form of disloyalty

While it has to be said that many a person doesn’t really care for criticism of their self, whether constructive or not, it has to be admitted that criticism is going to pretty much come our way, at least from time-to-time and those that are most secure in their person, are going to be able to handle criticism a heck of a lot of better than those that are insecure, and somehow are of the belief that anything said about them which is negative is considered to be a form of disloyalty, and even to be a betrayal of their person.

 Each of us does need criticism, at least occasionally, but such criticism is best issued when it comes from someone who really knows us and respects us, so done in a way in which the point of such criticism is to provide us a “wake-up” call, which serves to help us to get back on track to where we ought to be.  There are, though, many forms of criticism, and the very worst are those remarks that are purposely hurtful and deliberately made, which serve no good purpose and do not do anybody any favors.  On the other hand, those who keep their mouths shut, because they don’t want to say that which is critical, when bad actions warrant such criticism being said, aren’t standing up when they should stand up.

 How secure a given person is really comes down to their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their life as it is.  Those who are satisfied are always going to be in a better position and often are more willing to hear criticism, because they are secure in their persona.  On the other hand, those that are dissatisfied with who and what they are at present, aren’t the type that will take criticism well, because they are already down on their selves, which is why those that are making critical remarks, need to keep in mind, as to the point of what they are saying, before they say it, because it isn’t going to be helpful, then it won’t be of help.

 Finally, there is that particular category of people who have the highest opinion of themselves, which typically isn’t warranted, and simply won’t suffer to be criticized by anyone, and when criticized, will strike back with tremendous venom because they see those expressing that criticism as those who are not just disloyal, but have also betrayed them, because they are not true believers.  This unreasonable attitude typically can’t be overcome, and when dealing with someone with a mindset like that, the best thing to do is to simply walk away because this isn’t going to get any better, which is why when we are dealing with those who strike out at us with unrestrained rage whenever we say something that they take offense to, we need to comprehend that behind all their bluster, is probably a very insecure person who has lost their way, and doesn’t care to find it.